How Aristotle saw things lead him to believe in one level of reality. He believed that there was only one inescapable world and that forms existed within distinct things. Aristotle held that form had no separate existence and only existed in matter. Unlike Aristotle, Plato rationalization of his thoughts tended to believe in two levels of reality. Plato believed that metaphysics is dualistic: his thinking behind it was that there are two different kinds of things, physical and mental.
He defines “form” as the pure thing, the universal essence that every object has it inside. As it is stated in the article “Plato, Aristotle an Mimesis”(1996) since the world of features met though the senses and therefore does not hide the actuality, the form of a thing is more real and more considerable than it’s physical element. However, every mirror-image is the similar of their “definite existing objects” and a pure replicas of them, not all imitations in an artistic medium is like this ( Carroll, n.d). Because the thing which is imitated is an image or appearance that is in the “second form” , imitation is the “third form”. Plato exhibits that though the imitation is just in contact a little piece of each thing and a piece that itself is an appereance, it is far moved away from the truth (Repuclic X).
Plato and Aristotle both have great philosophical views on the theories of matter and forms and dualism. Plato’s Theory of Forms state that forms are universal factors or ideas in which the world becomes intelligent as a result. However, the intelligence must gain the knowledge about certain aspects in a non-physical way (If knowledge is pursued then it will be found within ones self). Plato believes that there is a distinction between the mind and body. Plato recognizes matter and form as being separate entities.
Aristotle has a monist approach to the soul, unlike Plato he says that the soul cannot exist without the body. The soul is not a body but something that belongs in a body, comparable to the brain; it is necessary and is within all humans and it gives us reason, intellect and an innate sense of justice. This therefore can make his theory more convincing than Plato’s as the soul isn’t ‘immortal’ and dies along with the body, thereby eliminating the theory of reincarnation which is hard for anyone who isn’t Hindu to believe as it is contradictory to their religious views. Aristotle states that all reason is associated with the pure thought of the Prime Mover and the soul is what gives the body its shape and form; he argued that the soul is not a substance but the reason and shape behind the matter. Best described by using the example of a marble statue, as the marble stature is essentially a block of marble but it has a shape and form and like the body the soul, the shape and form cannot be removed from what the statue is, in the same way the body cannot be separated from the soul.
To say that a child cannot have reason but state that what separates man from animal is reason is contradictory. Aristotle's characterization of the human good and happiness and the flaws within it are written as follows: Aristotle argues that there is some ultimate good that is both complete and self-sufficient, and defines this good as happiness. He claims every human action aims at some good, and the good that is chosen for its own sake rather than as means to an end is the highest good. However, he does state that we do choose some goods for something else,
In this essay I want to prove that for achieving eudamonia one must not only look toward our natural end by which life is directed but we have to live with the eleven virtues. Conformably I advance on this essay I will better explain what I mean with this, by making clear some points and defining some terms, but first I will have to explain what is happiness and virtues for Aristotle. We will first try to focus on what Aristotle thought of when referring to good and happiness. He says that there is an ultimate good, or also called the chief good or absolute good, toward which we all aspire; this is happiness or eudamonia, which must be complete, self-sufficient, final and continuous. As Aristotle said: “If, then, there is some end of the things we do, which we desire for its own sake, and if we do not choose everything for the sake of something else clearly this must be the good and the chief good” (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book 1, 2).
Socrates and Aristotle's doctrines contrast in the concepts of reality, knowledge at birth, and the mechanism to find the truth. First, Socrates' concept of reality contrasts with Aristotle's concept. Socrates' theory of ideal forms claims that a perfect world exists beyond the world around us. Our world contains forms imperfectly copied from the ideal forms in the world beyond. In contrast, Aristotle's theory of the natural world states that our world is reality.
| We all have innate knowledge of justice e.g everyone seems to have an idea of justice inside them, even if it is not exactly the same for everyone, but this shows it must have come from somewhere plato says with his forms and how our souls remember roughly what the forms are like. | A problem is one of limits. Of how many particular things in the world can it be said that there’s a form? | Also because we always seem to strive for perfection, we are always trying to make things better, which shows as if there is an idea of perfection from somewhere that we are striving to copy (as if we have a rough knowledge of the perfect form of each form) | Plato assumes that if we know the truth we will want to live by it but looking at it, many people know it is wrong to murder, yet they do it; and also to say that some people prefer ignorance; ignorance is bliss. |
For example, the term “human” names the eternal existing Form of the human. Plato’s first argument for the Forms can be considered an epistemological argument. Plato claims that: knowledge is enduring, and a true rational belief based on instruction. He says we do have knowledge, but that it cannot be about the world of the senses (because the senses can deceive); therefore it must be about an eternal world. This enduring world is the world of the Forms.
Plato vs. Aristotle In this essay I will discuss what are the forms from both Plato and Aristotle, how these ideas relate to physical objects and are ideas real. Plato and Aristotle are very different but at the same time they also have some things in common. Plato’s metaphysics is also known as the theory of forms, and is even sometimes referred to as Plato’s dialogues. According to him, his theory of forms is what is truly real and is not the objects we encounter in sensory experience but, rather, forms, and these can only be grasped intellectually. Plato’s theories of forms are: allegory of the cave, divided line, platonic form, platonic realism, division of the soul, philosopher king and memories of the soul.