Stumpf's Interpretation Of Plato's Theory Of Forms example essay topic

One of the questions that has faced and continues to face some of the philosophers of the world is 'What is reality?' Plato addresses this question in his doctrine, the Theory of Forms. In an attempt to answer this question, he explains what the Forms are and how they affect the way the world is observed. These so-called Forms are the basis of the reality we perceive. The question one must ask him or her self is what are these forms, where do they come from, and how do they affect us as a society. ' A Platonic Form (Idea) is not a thought in someone's mind but something that exists per se as an immutable part of the structure of reality. ' (Luce, 99) This statement is the foundation of Plato's philosophy.

What he is saying is that these forms are behind the way we see the world. In other words, they control the images and ideas that are presented to us. Two examples of such forms are ideal beauty and absolute goodness. When a person makes a comment like ' That is a beautiful home.

' What is the difference between a beautiful home and a home that is not beautiful? This illustrates the point that Plato is attempting to make about the Forms functioning as a standard by which we compare the world to. In essence, these Forms serve as a measuring stick by which we make our judgement's. In regards to the Form of absolute goodness, Plato describes this one as the all- powerful form. Here Plato suggests that the other Forms derive their meaning from the Form of absolute goodness.

Some of the other Forms include Equality, circularity, Health and Justice. These forms cannot be seen nor can they be felt; however, they can be apprehended by the mind after suitable preparation and training (Luce, 100). These forms exist in everything we see, in all the decisions we make and it is these Forms that we perceive when we describe something as beautiful or right or even wrong. The Theory of Forms also has two significant underlying doctrines within its contents. The first one is the distinction between opinion and knowledge. One word that Plato uses to describe opinion is flawed.

He explains that opinions are always changing due to anything from outside forces or simply just one's perception. For example, the people around can alter a person's opinion or even the type of room someone is in. External pressures are the cause of the variation in opinions and that is why they are not always correct. Even under the circumstances that the opinion is an accurate one, it can only be reinforced but never proven to be true. On the contrary, knowledge is attained through a long drawn out process of reasoning.

Therefore, knowledge is a direct reflection of the Forms and furthermore must be true. In other words there is no such thing as 'false knowledge' (Luce, 100). The second underlying doctrine in Plato's Theory of Forms is the idea that there are different degrees of reality. What he says is that the Forms are more real than any copy of them that we see in the visible world.

If one takes a circle for example, the perfect circle is less real than the form of Circularity. (Luce, 100) Another example is a building's shadow. The shadow is less real than the building itself. One can also say the reflection of a mountain in a lake is less real than the mountain itself. This goes back to the idea that the Forms are a standard by which society compares the visible world to. If these forms do exist, where can one find them?

This would mean that they have a specific location in the world they created. If this were true, then it would be contradictory in nature. The way Plato addresses this dilemma is by saying they have an 'independent existence' (Stumpf, 60). Another way he explains this is that the soul, prior to its unification to the body, it was somehow acquainted with the Forms. He goes on to say that God is the one who created the forms and used them to carve out the world, similar to using a cookie cutter to make cookies. Even though the molds are the same, the cookies never come out identical.

This provides the variation and uniqueness of derived products of the Forms. The Forms serve as a mold for the creation of everything we know and many things that we don't. In summary, Plato said that the existence of the Forms is in God's mind possibly, but they do control the way the world is perceived and controlled (Stumpf, 61). Another important is how do they affect society as we know it. According to Samuel Stumpf's interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms, there are three ways in which the Forms are related to things or objects.

The first way in which a form affects an object is that it is the underlying cause of the way the object is seen. Secondly, the thing can be present in the Form itself. Lastly, but probably the most common, is the fact that the things are mere copies of the Forms (61). It may be assumed that the Forms and things are intertwined and inseparable. According to Plato, this is true.

Now that one can see how the forms interact with things, one must see the relationship within the Forms. It was touched upon earlier that the Form of Absolute Goodness, was The One Form from which all others stemmed. The next thing one must understand is how do they interact with each other. Do the Forms follow a pattern in which their interaction is similar to the hierarchy of the United States government in reference to the chain of succession if the President of the United States becomes injured? Do the Forms interact in a way more similar to the hierarchy of a corporation, with a more branched organization pattern? Plato prefers the latter to the former.

One example that Samuel Stumpf uses is the one in reference to the animal kingdom. What he says is that there is a Form for animal but at the same time there is a Form for horse. In other words, the Forms exist in a pattern in which some of the lesser Forms are a mere reflection of one of the more important Forms. A way to differentiate between a lower Form and a higher Form is to compare the clarity in their visibility to us.

In other words, the more abstract the Form appears to be the higher it is. The best way to explain this is to look at an example such as a German Shepherd. The first Form could be the Form of German Shepherd. On a larger scale, the Form can be the Form of dog. One can then continue on looking at the Forms of mammals, then to animals and so on. In this example the forms are intertwined in a hierarchy ascending from the Form of German Shepherd to that of animal.

Therefore, the Form of Animal is more abstract and subsequently the higher one of the two. The final question that one can ask ones self is ' How do I know the Forms exist?' Plato offers three different solutions to this question. The first possibility goes back to the idea that the soul existed prior to being united with the body. In this time period the soul was acquainted with the Forms. Therefore, the time after the unification is a time of 'recollection'. Things in world cause one to recollect what the soul knew in the preexisting state.

Plato's second explanation is through a process called dialectic. This process is one in which the essence of an object can be sought by the mind. The final possibility is accomplished through the power of desire. This desire guides one through the step-by-step process to attain the essence of the Form. The example Stumpf uses is the Form of ideal beauty. One can describe a rose as beautiful and from that point can use the word beautiful to describe a thought.

From that point the person can find his or her way to the essence of beauty itself (Stump, 62). In the Theory of Forms, Plato provides us with a possible answer to some of the questions that continually plague most people. The answer to the question 'What is real' may never have a definitive answer. All one can do is to use the abilities given to him and try to arrive to their own conclusion based on what he or she knows.

Whether the reality most of us perceive is true or not is difficult to determine. The Theory of Forms gives us a way of analyzing reality, but like all other doctrines it stops short of precisely defining reality. This inability to conclude the argument is the very same reason why this debate will continue on for as long as we live and probably our children and their children and so on. The pursuit of truth will continue to be the driving force behind the search for the answer to the question that can explain the significance of our existence.

Myl a ModertPlato 11/6/00

Bibliography

Stumpf, Samuel Enoch. Socrates to Sartre: A History of Philosophy. 1988, McGraw Hill Publishing New York City.
PP 58-62. Luce, J.V. An Introduction to Greek Philosophy. 1992, Thames an Hudson Ltd.