© Michael Lacewing Plato on knowledge and experience Michael Lacewing

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How do we know what exists?
Advertisements

© Michael Lacewing Religious point of view as seeing-as Michael Lacewing
Free will and determinism
Michael Lacewing Religious belief Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
© Michael Lacewing Empiricism on the origin of ideas Michael Lacewing
The Ontological Argument
Michael Lacewing The value of art Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Rationalism and empiricism
Michael Lacewing Idealism Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Knowledge & Truth Book V
Starter Heraclitus (c.500B.C.) What does this mean? Do you agree?
© Michael Lacewing Environmental Ethics Michael Lacewing
Plato, knowledge and virtue
© Michael Lacewing A priori knowledge Michael Lacewing
Empiricism on a priori knowledge
Omniscience and immutability Michael Lacewing
The argument from design: God
© Michael Lacewing Scepticism Michael Lacewing
The ontological argument
Plato and Aristotle MUST – Explain Plato’s Cave allegory and Theory of Forms. SHOULD – Evaluate Plato using Aristotle. COULD – Defend and challenge Aristotle’s.
Descartes’ cosmological argument
Descartes’ trademark argument Michael Lacewing
B. C..  Born in Athens in 428 B. C.  Born into a wealthy family  Considered a career in politics but rejected it ◦ Annoyed by Athenian society,
RATIONALISM AND EMPIRICISM: KNOWLEDGE EMPIRICISM Epistemology.
Plato and the Forms According to Plato, common sense is wrong. We do not sense the world as it really is. The senses present the world in a confused way.
Malcolm’s ontological argument Michael Lacewing
Descartes on Certainty (and Doubt)
Descartes on scepticism
The Euthyphro dilemma Michael Lacewing
Cosmological arguments from contingency Michael Lacewing
© Michael Lacewing Plato and Hume on Human Understanding Michael Lacewing
Divine attributes Michael Lacewing
© Michael Lacewing Representation Michael Lacewing
Socrates ( BCE) and Plato ( BCE). The Philosophy of Socrates “ The unexamined life is not worth living. ” Wisdom: knowing that you know.
Socrates (d. 399 BCE) Plato ( BCE)
Rationalism and empiricism: Concept innatism
Plato, knowledge and virtue
Socrates and Plato Socrates (d. 399 BCE) Plato ( BCE)
Immortality Plato and Penelhum. Plato and Immortality  Socrates was convicted by the Athenians of impiety and the corruption of youth  Plato’s Phaedo.
© Michael Lacewing Doubt in Descartes’ Meditations Michael Lacewing
Berkeley’s idealism (long) Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
© Michael Lacewing Hume and Kant Michael Lacewing co.uk.
Substance dualism Michael Lacewing co.uk.
© Michael Lacewing Conceptual schemes Michael Lacewing.
Universals: conceptualism Michael Lacewing
Plato’s Theory of Forms, and the Sun, Line and Cave A falasafaz! presentation 1.
Greek Classical Philosophy “Western philosophy is just a series of footnotes to Plato.”
Structure of the Phaedo Part I: Prologue 57a-69e Part II Logos 70a-107b First arguments and myth 70a- 84c Challenge and response to Simmias 84c-91c Final.
Aristotle is sometimes said to have brought philosophy down to earth, because he combined the study of humanity and nature. He stands alone as an archetype.
Lauren Dobbs “Cogito ergo sum”. Bio  Descartes was a French born philosopher from the 1600’s.  He’s most famous for his “Meditations on First Philosophy”
Michael Lacewing Sense data Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Michael Lacewing Direct realism Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Cosmological arguments from contingency
Walt: explore Plato’s ‘Analogy of the Cave’
The Ontological Argument
Plato on Being Plato believed that ________________________________________________________________________________ All particular things that _________.
Concept Innatism.
Descartes’ trademark argument
Michael Lacewing Berkeley’s idealism Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
The zombie argument: responses
Michael Lacewing Hume and Kant Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Forms and the Good.
Remember these terms? Analytic/ synthetic A priori/ a posteriori
Kant’s objection to ontological arguments
Plato and Hume on Human Understanding
The Theory of Forms or The Theory of Ideas
Problems with IDR Before the holidays we discussed two problems with the indirect realist view. If we can’t perceive the external world directly (because.
Theory of Solipsism Ioanna Panourgia.
Epistemology “Episteme” = knowledge “Logos” = words / study of
Descartes and Hume on knowledge of the external world
Presentation transcript:

© Michael Lacewing Plato on knowledge and experience Michael Lacewing

The Forms Good thing Form of the Good

The Forms Good things are not the same as goodness (Form of the Good). –If all good things were destroyed, this wouldnt destroy goodness itself. Forms dont exist in any particular place or time. Forms dont change. Forms are perfect examples (nothing is more good than goodness itself).

Sense experience All objects of experience are particular things. All particular things are both one thing, e.g. large, beautiful, good, and the opposite. If something is both X and not-X, then we cant know that it is X.

Knowing the Forms The Form of beauty is beautiful under all conditions, to all observers, at all times. The Form of beauty is pure beauty; it (alone) is not both beautiful and not beautiful. Therefore, we can have knowledge of the Forms, though not through our senses.

Levels of understanding Each level of understanding has corresponding level of reality in its object: –What does not exist is related to ignorance. –Absolute unchanging reality, the Forms, can be known. –Belief relates to what is between what is (X) and what is not (X), i.e. the changing particulars of the world around us.

Objection There is no need for a match between an epistemic state (belief, knowledge) and its object. Even if knowledge cannot change, that doesnt mean the object of knowledge cant change: –I can know the size of this handout now, even if the handout changes later.

The Forms and Reality Plato thinks the Forms are more real than particular things. One way to understand this is to ask how it is that particulars share or participate in the Forms, as Plato argues. One suggestion is that the properties particulars have are copies of the Forms. The beauty of this rose is a copy of the Form of Beauty. Unlike the Forms, a particular can lose its properties (e.g. its beauty) and even cease to exist as that particular (a rose can become ash).

The Forms and Reality A particular is what it is in virtue of the properties it has (e.g. a rose, beautiful, etc.). But its properties are how it participates in the Forms. So a particular only exists by participating in the Forms. So the Forms are more real than particulars.