Plato’s Theory of Forms Essay Example

To come near to reality, one must move out of the chains of material objects. However, becoming acquainted with the Forms is not an easy task and requires rational thinking. A philosopher would be in a better position to understand them. Plato notes that getting acquainted with the Forms is like adjusting to the outside world after being in the cave – it takes time and not everyone is capable of doing it.In his third image of the divided line, the philosopher depicts a separation between the intelligible and visible realms. At the bottom of the line within the visible realm are mere shadows and images, representing opinion. Physical objects come next, followed by simple mathematical entities as we move towards the intelligible realm. At the highest level of the intelligible realm, we gain knowledge of more significant forms such as good, truth, and beauty.

According to Plato's third image, the true knowledge of an object or concept can be found in its highest level, which is the form or idea of that object. The physical chair that we see is merely a result of this form or idea. This illustrates the difference between opinion and knowledge, and how forms are the cause of all objects. All things in the world exist due to their participation in forms, such as beauty. Therefore, the beauty of something only exists to the extent that it participates in the form of beauty.

Plato's forms are expertly conveyed through three accompanying images, effectively illustrating his belief that individuals living in this world are confined to the realm of shadows and images. Plato uses similes to demonstrate that these shadows represent the

first step towards reaching the truth and reality, as his images progress from ignorance to knowledge. His famous allegories, such as the cave, symbolize the move from darkness to light, while the divided line represents movement from a visible to an intelligible realm. His approach provides an explanation for the problem of permanence versus change, as well as the problem of being and becoming, long debated by Greek philosophers. Ultimately, Plato's divided line offers a compelling solution to these philosophical issues.

The text emphasizes the combination of being and becoming, indicating that we must move from becoming to real being. Our perception of the world changes through our mind and senses. While the material world is observed through the senses and is constantly changing, the "realm of forms" is viewed through the mind and is permanent.

The world of change is an imperfect image of the more real world. Forms are abstract properties or qualities that can be separated from objects and analyzed individually. While we commonly refer to objects such as triangles, which have three sides that sum to 180 degrees, as being perfect, in reality, what we see are only close approximations of ideal forms. These concepts are explored in Plato's Parmenides, where Parmenides criticizes the theory of forms while a young Socrates attempts to defend it but ultimately fails.

In my paper, I have attempted to examine criticisms of Plato's Forms through my own understanding. Parmenides presented the first argument to "young Socrates" stating that if individual things take part in the Form of Beauty or Largeness, they become beautiful or large. Therefore, each particular thing must receive either the entire Form or

a portion of it. This causes the Form to become many and no longer remain as one. However, Plato believed that Forms do not have properties and instead express possessionlessness. Parmenides assumes Forms to be distinct from themselves by possessing certain properties.

Parmenides assumes that forms can have qualities or properties, which is an erroneous assumption. In actuality, form is the quality of an object that partakes in it. Despite claiming that everything partakes in form, it does not seem to imply that forms themselves become many. Plato refers to form as the shared quality among a specific group of physical objects.

According to Parmenides, if a form of a sun with many rays exists, it cannot be said that each ray contains the sun within it because this would divide the sun into many. Instead, each ray possesses the quality of sunness, which is a characteristic of the sun itself. Therefore, there is only one singular form and not many. Parmenides argues that there must be another great thing to make all great things, just as Socrates believes in a single Form. Plato's idea of forms suggests that they are the source of truth and knowledge, including the ultimate good. The forms exist in reality while particulars only exist through their participation in their respective forms.

The concept of Forms is the ultimate reality, and there is no possibility of it being a form of another form. Socrates suggests that each Form is a thought, which maintains the unity of the Form. Parmenides counters that everything that partakes in the ideas is made of thoughts, but may or may not think. Plato refers to thoughts that

possess potentiality to think but are not yet thinking. Consequently, physical objects that consist of such thoughts and do not think, possess the potentiality to think. This explains why they are called "not thinking thoughts." An important point to note is that forms exist separately in their own world, and not in our physical world.

According to Parmenides, the things in our world have no connection to Forms, meaning that our knowledge only pertains to our world and not to the world of the Forms. Ideal knowledge is knowledge of the world of Forms, which suggests that we can never truly know the Forms. However, Plato resolves this issue by dividing his two realms and encouraging us to release the visible realm and grasp the permanent realm of knowledge. In other words, he explains that we in the visible world are descended from the world of knowledge, so we still possess that same knowledge although it may be diminished. Therefore, the ultimate reality must also have knowledge of us. The key is for us to use our thoughts to merge with the ultimate being or Forms, but this requires effort on our part.

In his Parmenides section, Plato challenges our understanding of his forms by critiquing them. Parmenides refers to Socrates as "young" indicating the need for further training to comprehend the forms, just as we all require training to understand them. Through the use of similes such as the cave, line, and sun, Plato suggests that shadows and images have the potential to reach the highest level of forms, demonstrating how failure can pave the way for success. Ultimately, Plato's theory of forms offers

a significant contribution to philosophy by explaining how one can discern truth and systematically distinguishing between the world of becoming and the world of being.

According to Plato's theory of Forms, our perception of a particular object through our senses is not comprehensive, and the absence of our ability to perceive something does not negate its existence. The true world is unchanging, providing us with the authentic knowledge, whereas the physical world of objects is transient and subject to flux, incapable of serving as a foundation for discovering the truth. Therefore, to have an understanding of reality, we must surpass the continual alteration of the physical world and obtain mastery of a permanent rational structure present in the realm of Forms or Ideas.