Introduction
Notably, the old Greek terms episteme, which signifies “knowledge,” and logos, which represents “account,” are the wellspring of “epistemology.” The area of reasoning known as epistemology is centered around grasping information. Aristotle was a devotee of Plato; at this point, he saw the world another way. To exhibit the suitability of one of the strategies and understand the subject of the information, I will look at the two hypotheses in the following paper and give examples of my beliefs.
Plato’s Epistemology
Through his prestigious exchanges, Plato originally presented epistemological issues to an Athenian crowd in the 4th century BC, denoting the introduction of precise Western epistemology. One of the vitally epistemological issues in today’s way of thinking is noting Plato’s questions concerning information. In Platonic Discoursed, different philosophers were now and again the essential players (Hogenson, P. 685). Socrates, for instance, was depicted as the middle person between our ongoing comprehension and our previous existences. Plato’s epistemological thinking is recognized by its metaphysical character and the specific powerful ends the philosopher came to.
Furthermore, one of the most notable and quarrelsome Platonic ideas is a Form predicated on the blend of epistemology and metaphysics (Hogenson, P. 685). However, forms are widespread and conceptual characteristics that exist everywhere and nowhere, as per Plato. Thus, we live in a temporary world that is an unfortunate duplicate of the persistent universe of the Forms; however, there is a comparing Form or a Thought for each justifiable thing or property. Allow us to give an instance from the real world to explain the thought. Let’s consider a tall person who resides in a real crimson house. Hence, both the occupant and home are comprised of distinct entities included in individual characteristics, for instance, the height of the individual’s height and the house’s color. However, the core concept and form of the primary concept of a person and the house always align in location and time, even though numerous people are inhibiting distinct houses worldwide. Since a solitary form can place itself out in plural objects, one thing overall (a home) can be a few things specifically (a green house or a red house).
Moreover, Plato explains the connection between people and the domain of the Forms in the Allegory of the Cave, which is likewise worth discussing. Plato outlines the distinction between the world that changes continually and the world that stays steady, where the Forms exist, in the Republic by utilizing the case of individuals residing in the cave (Tsike-Sossah, p. 462). The main things that the cavern occupants can see are the shadows projected on the walls and actual things, which are just shadows in contrast with the fact of the Forms. As per Plato, the main individuals who ought to be responsible for the state can recollect the genuine reality — that is, the Forms — or rise out of the cavern and see the daylight.
Aristotle’s Epistemology
Aristotle made huge commitments to epistemology with his disclosures and examinations of the complexities of the material and conceptual worlds. The philosopher looked to understand both the material world and, all the more critically, the most common way of grasping it, continuing in the strides of his educator. In contrast to Plato, Aristotle searched for clarifications in the substantial world instead of engaging in dynamic Forms. As per Hetherington (12), that’s what he recognized: “While there can be knowledge that something is so, beyond that, there might also be knowledge of why it is so.” Aristotle progressed the field of logical science by utilizing observation as a strong epistemic instrument.
Nonetheless, Aristotle argues in Metaphysics that form turns substance into a solitary item. The expression “hylomorphism” alludes to this strategy, which came from the Greek words “form” and “matter,” hule and morphe, separately. Aristotle recognized two classifications of changes in the universe: unexpected adjustments and substances that lose or acquire properties (Hetherington P. 14). Acquiring a couple of pounds following a feast experience may be viewed as an unexpected modification; however, accepting 200 pounds would be considered a substance. The matter of importance perseveres through the change, for example, the blocks that go from not being a building to having the qualities of a finished structure.
Following Aristotle, we gather and store information using our senses to collect new data. People get information about the pith of things, like food, plants, and creatures, by cooperating with them. Per Ainsworth, embodiment is a form that portrays an item and makes sense of being that object. It is workable for people to contact a dog and feel the silkiness of its jacket, smell a flower, or taste a spicy pepper. As well as having the memorable option of certain attributes of substances, individuals can also join memories to make encounters.
Contrasting the Theories of Plato and Aristotle
Comprehending the observable world was a distraction both Aristotle and Plato shared, even though their methods had major differences. Platonic epistemology is predicated on the possibility that theoretical Forms manifest themselves in diverse explicit objects, but Aristotle maintained that matter and form are one in numerous substances. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave affirms that information is just from past lives, though Aristotle argued that people utilize their senses to assemble data about their environmental factors.
Socrates started the Third Man argument, which later appeared in Plato’s Parmenides and procured its name in Aristotle’s Metaphysics. The background of Plato’s thinking is the possibility of “one over many,” which expresses that each form (F, for instance) has a solitary record making sense of why the F object is F. Subsequently, an ideal type of a man has the F-ness of any man (Fine 239). Reasonable must be recognized as equivalent by individuals who are now acquainted with the Form of Equality. Plato’s thinking was dismissed by Aristotle because “there will be more than one Thought of communication assuming that the Equality is equivalent to another Equivalent.” (Gerson 230). Subsequently, while Aristotle scrutinized the Forms’ presence, Plato thought they existed alone.
Conversely, I reflect on my point of view; the commitment to excellence is more in line with Plato’s philosophy of information. Forms’ progressive design, accentuation on logic, and the quest for standards follow the significance of completing tasks “right” with an uplifting perspective. Even though Aristotle’s experimental technique is significant in numerous life features, Plato’s accentuation of reason and the mission of flawlessness follows individual philosophy.
In summation, just like his mentor Plato, Aristotle impacted epistemology specifically as well as philosophy overall. I believe Aristotle’s technique seems fine since everybody can become taught since, as different substances, people can get information. In light of everything, Plato’s logic and Aristotle’s scientific methodology can be utilized today to acquire a more profound perception of the data and world around us.
Work Cited
Fine, Gail, editor. The Oxford Handbook of Plato. 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2019.
Gerson, Lloyd P. Aristotle, and other Platonists. Cornell University Press, 2017.
Hetherington, S. (Ed.). (2019). Epistemology: The key thinkers. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Hogenson, George B. “The controversy around the concept of archetypes.” Journal of Analytical Psychology 64.5 (2019): 682-700. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5922.12541
Tsike-Sossah, S. E. (2023). The Allegory of the Cave, Youth-ness, Producing, Projecting and Creation: A Walk with Plato. African Multidisciplinary Journal of Research, 453-470. https://journals.spu.ac.ke/index.php/amjr/article/view/214.
write