Q&A on Plato

Do you agree with Plato`s account of reality as composed of the visible and intellectual world (idealistic dualism) why/why not?

Yes I believe in Plato’s account of reality as composed of the visible and intellectual world (idealistic dualism).

In the “divided line”, “allegory of the cave” and the “image of the sun”, Plato discusses the metaphysics that divides the world into two separate aspects: the intellectual world of "forms", and the visible or perceptual world we see around us. The visible world comprises of imperfect copies of the intellectual world of forms or ideas. These forms are unalterable and perfect. These can only be understood by the use of the intellect or understanding such as using that part of the mind that does not include sense-perception or imagination.

Plato’s account of reality affirms the need to recognize the fact that reality is not what we see alone. Reality is much more than that. Reason, imagination and spiritual values form another part of reality that is as real and undeniable as those we see or perceive through our senses.

At the top this intellectual world is the Good, which shines down on all. Next is the form, the perfect versions of earthly objects which we remember when we see the objects. The forms provide us with our understanding, knowledge, and intelligence. We understand or know a horse because of the memory of the form horse. Next lowest is reason or thought based on axioms.

Then we cross the divider in the line, the visible things to which the other side of the line is applied. At the top of this lower section is belief, or perception based ideation. Next is the imagination.

Is Plato correct in his belief that the general and abstract is more real than the particular and concrete?

I believe Plato is correct. This is so because the particular and the concrete are not the ultimate real forms in Plato’s intellectual world which is represented by the general and the abstract. The particular and the concrete then are just mere representations of the general and the abstract. They bore only a striking resemblance of the ultimate reality found in the intellectual world.

The metaphor for particular and the concrete is shadows of cut-out shapes found on the walls of the cave which are mere symbols of the truth outside the cave lighted up by the sun.

What is the reality statis of mathematical entities for Plato?

One of the aspects in the intellectual world is reason. At the top of the ladder is the Good, followed by Form then Reason. The reason or thought is based on axioms. The reality statis of mathematical entities for Plato is that mathematical principles fall under Reason because they are too perfect to be considered part of the visible world.

Take for instance the mathematical advances of the Pythagoreans. Mathematics has a definitiveness that goes beyond the finest knowledge derived from experience. The construction of the Pythagorean Theorem, for example, cannot be found in the crude dimensions of space and time alone. At the same time it exhibits an amazing insight and certainty.

The Pythagorean Theorem can only be explained by assuming that it is a concept formed brought about by the impact of a perfect world of geometrical forms. It is the association of our soul to some extent in that world of Forms that explains the fact that we are capable of grasping something that is exact and amazing even though we cannot realize the construction except by the use of crude methods in the sensible world.

In geometry and arithmetic, we make use of specific figures to show our ideas and make examples clear. In these sciences, certain postulates are made and conclusions are drawn from the postulates. The intelligible, on the other hand, is "that which the reason itself," rather than image-assisted imagination, lays hold of by the power of dialectic, treating its assumptions not as absolute beginnings but literally as hypotheses, underpinnings, footings, and springboards so to speak, to enable it to rise to that which requires no assumption and is the starting point of all, and after attaining to that again taking hold of the first dependencies from it, so to proceed downward to the conclusion, making no use whatever of any object of sense but only of pure ideas moving on through ideas to ideas and ending with ideas. (511b-c)

Based on Plato`s account of ”The Forms” FROM THIS DIALOGUE how would he explain change in the universe and would he view it as good or bad?

Plato describes "The Form of the Good" in his book, The Republic, using Socrates as the example. The Form of the Good is the ideal or perfect nature of goodness, and so depicts the absolute measure of justice. Plato expounded the theory of justice in The Republic, in relation to his conception of the ideal state, both of which necessitate rule of the rational mind; in other words, philosopher-kings, who can grasp the Form of the Good.

He compares the Form of the Good to the sun. He says that just as the sun radiates light, so the form of the good radiates truth. Another parallelism is that if we are able to perceive the world through eyes with the aid of the light of the sun, we can also perceive the world through our rational minds with the aid of the truth, derived from the Form of the Good (referred to as Plato’s god).

Plato believes that the highest form of knowledge is the form of the good, from which all things that are considered just derives their worth. Humans are bounded by duty to find the good, but no one can hope to achieve this without philosophical reasoning.

The visible world comprises of imperfect copies of the intellectual world of forms or ideas. These forms are unalterable and perfect. These can only be understood by the use of the intellect or understanding such as using that part of the mind that does not include sense-perception or imagination. Change in the visible world therefore is neither good or bad because in the intellectual world of forms everything remains the same.

Given that The Republic is a fantasy about an ideal polis or city state, is Plato`s embedded theory of Forms to be taken as serious and substantial metaphysics or just wild fantastic yard spinning, why so?

It is to be taken seriously. The Republic maybe a fantasy about an ideal polis or city state but it reflects timeless truths that are applicable up to now.

According to these accounts, the metaphors serve as elucidation of the complex and difficult theory which Plato preaches : the presence of The Form of the Good, which pertains to the ultimate truth and which illuminates on the rest of the forms such as the universals: abstract kinds and attributes and from which all other forms "emanate". That is at the core of the theory of Forms which compares and contrasts the visible from the intellectual world. These truths are as real today as it was then.