Plato and Aristotle on Knowledge Essay

The purpose of this paper is to explore Plato and Aristotles conceptions on distinguishledge, their dread of the physical universe, and the suggestions that these beliefs conclusively made to the natural sciences. I sh all(prenominal) do this by explaining Platos analysis of the constitution of fellowship, and the role his proposed hypothesis of forms plays in it. I will and so go on to describe how this analysis applies to, and provides suggestions for, the methodological analysis of science.This essay will then switch its focus to Aristotle, explore his views on motion, and describe how these represent a departure from Platos analyses. It will then conclude with the exploration of his pinch of motion, paying special attention to how it contributes to his understanding of the physical universe as a whole. First, I will process Platos interpretation of fellowship. Plato believed that dead on target knowledge could solo originate from crusade, and that reason could only b e derived from that which is unchanging.However, he noned that the sense experiences which our world provides us with go through with(predicate) constant dislodges, and therefore cannot be relied upon as sources of reason. He states in his novel Timaeus, that these types of things argon opined by opining accompanied by false sensation (Plato, and Kalkavage 58). Plato argues that the only elan to evaluate sensory information to commence true knowledge is through the application and analysis of certain principles that atomic number 18 unchanging. These principles are what Plato refers to as forms.Because of their unchanging nature, Plato regarded these forms as being able to be grasped by intellection accompanied by a rational cipher (Plato, and Kalkavage 58), and therefore undoubtedly true He concluded that believing to know something from only sensory information is not equivalent to having true knowledge of that thing. However, if forms cannot be understood from sensory inf ormation, one may wonder how a person can begin to comprehend these forms if it is not through perceptions and experiences. To plow this puzzle, Plato suggests that before we were innate(p) in the physical world, we existed in the realm of the type forms.It is there where our mind gained true knowledge. Therefore since the soul is immortal and has been born many times (Plato, Anastaplo, and Berns 17), true knowledge always lies inwardly the soul and learning is simply a matter of recollecting what our souls learned before. Platos beliefs introduced a radical new way of thinking to natural scientists, specifically astronomers. His hypothesis served as a warning to scientists that information derived from visual experience is not equivalent to having true knowledge of that thing.This is a revolutionary suggestion for the dependability of previous data collection methods, especially in the case of the customary idea held in astronomy that knowledge could be derived from an exper tise in visual observation of celestial motion. Plato gives two possible outcomes for scientists to consider when confronted with empiric data. The send-off is to discern some unchanging, and therefore rational, mathematical structure within the data in order to obtain a true knowledge of what is seen. The second is to understand where irregularities in this data are too grand to be able to discern any such(prenominal) mathematical structure.In this case Aristotle suggests that the data can only be thought of as simply a subject of reality, therefore unable to provide true knowledge. Next, I will explain Aristotles views of the nature of wobble, and how they represent a departure from the methodology of Plato. Unlike Platos theory of forms, in which forms are unchanging and absolute, Aristotle believed that most substances undergo change in some way. Also, when describing change, Plato only recognizes change in a pair of opposites, but Aristotle elaborates on this idea, and desc ribes volt required components for change.In Book V of Aristotles novel Physics, he explains that there is something which initiates the change, and something which is changing, and again something in which the change takes place (the time) and apart from these, something from which and something to which (62). In simpler terms, Aristotle believed that every change has the following a cause, some starting point, something which the change acts on, some ending point, and some time in which it pop offred. Aristotle also carve up the different types of change he believed to occur into four different categories.The first being change in substance. This type of change encompasses transitions from existence to nonexistence, such as when something is born and when it dies. The second type of change that can occur is a change in quality, also known as an alteration. heated up food becoming cool or the change in people of colour of fruit would be an example of this type. The third type of change is that of quantity. This practically refers to the growth or diminishment of a certain object. For example, a toddler goes through a quantitative change during a growth spurt when he grows taller.Finally, the fourth type of change that Aristotle acknowledged is change of place, otherwise referred to as motion. Motion specifically played a large role in developing Aristotles overall understanding of the global features of the physical universe. Aristotle believed that knowledge came from understanding and being able to explain the causes which originated motion, or more more often than not change in itself. This presents the fact that Aristotle believed a physical explanation was necessary to obtain true knowledge, whereas Plato believed that true knowledge was not reliant on physical evidence.This led to Aristotles expansion of Platos geocentric copy of the universe. Unlike Plato, who thought of it in geometric terms, Aristotle thought of this model as physically real and gave a physical explanation for it. According to Aristotle, all of the motion in this system originates in the outermost sphere. This motion is the final cause of all motion in the universe. For this reason he calls the outermost sphere the prime mover. To conclude, in this paper we explored Platos analysis of the nature of knowledge, specifically recognizing the integral role his proposed theories of forms played in it.This provided us with the posterior to understand Platos views on the unreliability of the information we perceive in physical world. We then examined how this analysis provided a radical new way of thinking about the reliability of information obtained by sensory observation. Next, we examined Aristotles views on the nature of change, emphasizing how his understanding represents a departure from Platos ideas. We then looked more specifically at one of his four proposed types of change motion.We examined the role it played in not only in his theory that all m otion originates from the outer sphere of the universe, but also in his overall understanding of the physical universe. Works Cited Aristotle, Philip H. Wicksteed, and Francis Macdonald Cornford. The Physics. Cambridge, MA Harvard UP, 1980. Print. Plato, and Peter Kalkavage. Platos Timaeus Translation, Glossary, Appendices and Introductory Essay. Newburyport, MA Focus Pub. /R. Pullins, 2001. Print. Plato, George Anastaplo, and Laurence Berns. Platos Meno. Newburyport, MA Focus Pub. /R. Pullins, 2004. Print.