Up@dawn 2.0

Friday, April 13, 2018

In the seventh chapter of Plato: A Very Short Introduction, titled "The Nature of Things," author Julia Annas, starts the chapter by telling us the natural world, despite its disruptions, displays a striking degree of order and regularity. In Plato’s Timaeus, this was best described as if the world was a product made by a divine craftsman. The materials to make this world would be made up of unruly materials but through the expertise of this craftsman and the use of systematic, rational principles contained in the materials, a model of order that is understood to be the work of Reason was created. As we learned in the last chapter Reason is defined as what’s good for me over the long term.
Because the materials put a constraint on reason they make failure possible – something Plato calls Necessity, it’s the way things have to be whether or not there’s a good reason for it.
Annas asks questions of Plato’s views on metaphysics – If this divine Craftsman creates a good world; why does he do so? Why does mathematics play an essential role in the Timaeus view of the world structure? What role doe this play in Plato’s view of the world and of the kind of knowledge achieved of it? In Timaeus one of Plato's famous ideas is made – The world is not what we sense it to be, but rather what we think in through when exercising philosophical reason; this is what Plato calls Forms.
            To answer why does the divine Craftsman create a good world. This question is answered in Timaeus by saying the Craftsman created a good world because he is good. This view may seem reasonable by today's standards, but in ancient Greece it was radical. In that polytheistic culture, gods were sometimes bad and extremely jealous of humans; Plato’s view angered most people even though he never rejected the favored religion of the day. In the dialogue Laws, although public religion remains there are steps taken to limit the popular religion. Private worship is discouraged with public worship the only rite in which they could partake. Those that didn't abide had to be re-educated and if this was unsuccessful, executed. It was important for everyone to have to correct beliefs about God, namely that he was good and that he was responsible for good and not evil.
            In the dialogue Timaeus, the role of mathematics places a high emphasis on calculating the motion of heavenly bodies and is the key to the world’s order. Mathematics was important in understanding knowledge. As discussed in previous chapters, one who has knowledge can explain and justify what they know and cannot be persuaded as a person who does not have an understanding. Mathematics allows for structured knowledge by using an organized system of fundamental truths. He saw this system as well as the objects of mathematics as the building blocks for geometry, a branch of mathematics which explained the differences in the four basic elements in the world - air, fire, water, and earth.
            The term Forms is what Plato describes as a thought or idea of something. In Timaeus, Forms are the patterns that the Craftsman uses to make our world. Aristotle criticized Plato for these Forms as ideas that ‘never came to be' and he felt Forms should be real and something that should ‘come to be.' I’m not sure Plato didn’t address this ‘come to be’ issue as the Participants. The Forms are the idea of the Participants with the latter being the actual item. In Phaedo, Republic, and Hippias Major, the phrase ‘argument from opposites’ is discussed. For example, a stick can be equal in length, but unequal in width or no two items are exactly alike. What may be true from one perspective would be false from its opposite. What’s being said here is items of our understanding (Forms) are not the items we experience in the real world (Participants). Plato makes the comparison of being and coming to be the same as the difference between knowledge and belief. Arras tells us in the dialogue Parmenides it shows us the idea of forms is a good one but needs further work to be viable.

Questions:
Plato’s view of a monotheist angered most people even though he never rejected the favored religion of the day. If he didn't dismiss the popular religion of the day, why were people who didn't participate in public only worship reeducated or even condemned?


Aristotle criticized Plato for Forms as not being a viable explanation on how things come to be. Does Plato address this with the concept of change to Participants?

1 comment:

  1. To your second question: he addresses it, but extremely vaguely. What can it mean for a finite being to "participate" in something transcendent, invisible ("intelligible"), and eternal? That's the big nut to crack, of course, and the prize inside is big enough to make Platonists dream of Forms. Aristotelians of course collect (don't merely "dream" of) forms (lower case) - i.e., they gather facts in the visible world. Is the world big enough for both? I think so.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.