Exploring Plato’s Philosophy: Dialogue, Ideas, and Knowledge
Dialogue as a Way to Philosophize:
Plato followed his teacher Socrates, expressing their thoughts through dialogue as it was felt that while writings and speeches do not allow us to clarify the doubts and aporias (difficulties) they contain, dialogue, on the contrary, is a living form of philosophizing that plays the drama and the force of dialectic dialogue through questions and answers, clarifications, and rebuttals. By qualifying certain views and rejecting others, it conducts research to discover the truth. The dialogue, then, is a kind of intellectual competition through joint discussion that highlights the slow and exhausting effort of the scientific process.
In general, most dialogues begin by focusing on an issue, a particular topic, or theme, then develop or disprove a negative process, in which the rejection of false opinions, that is, errors, are eliminated. Finally, a maieutic process takes place, which leads to the discovery of truth. Almost all the characters speaking in Plato’s dialogues are real, though often anachronistic situations are used to place them in relation to each other, i.e., many partners are located at different times than those who actually existed. The main character is Socrates, who, by a feigned naivete (Socratic irony), refutes the positions of his partners, frequently from the Sophists, professional educators, who, in the eyes of Plato, confuse sophisms with genuine knowledge.
There are currently 42 dialogues attributed to Plato, but, on the one hand, this is not doubtful, and, secondly, it is very difficult to establish the correct timing between them. In general, following the main writers, we can distinguish four periods, namely:
- Socratic Dialogues: They contain prevalent ethical concerns, including the Apology of Socrates, Crito, Protagoras, Charmides, and Euthyphro.
- Transitional Dialogues: Continuing ethical concerns, but also addressing current political problems, such as issues related to pre-existence and immortality. This period includes Gorgias, Meno, Cratylus, and Menexenus.
- Mature or Doctrinal Dialogues: In these, Plato develops the doctrine of ideas as the foundation of ethical and political theories, including the Banquet, Phaedo, and Republic.
- Critical Dialogues: Plato subjected these to a review of his previous ideas, with important works such as Theaetetus, Parmenides, Sophist, Philebus, Timaeus, and Laws.
The Socratic dialogue or dialectic consists of two phases: the rebuttal and the maieutics. The rebuttal consists of signaling to his partners that the knowledge they possess is not genuine because of their experience, attempting to dismantle their conception or opinion of things. If the student is removed, the second opinion begins: maieutics, which consists of giving birth to the truth that every man has within himself.
Theory of Ideas
The theory of ideas is at the core of Platonic philosophy and is the basis for the various scientific content of his thought, namely, ontology, epistemology, psychology, ethics, and politics.
However, this theory was never fully elaborated; it shaped slowly, with constant additions and corrections, and it seems the author never fully completed it. It began to emerge in the transitional dialogues, especially in the Meno, and was the focus of doctrinal dialogues: Banquet, Phaedo, Republic, and Phaedrus, and was repeatedly subjected to revision in the dialogues of old age. In this regard, we will examine Plato’s work focusing on more general characteristics.
A. Features of Ideas: As noted in previous sections, ideas are the authentic self, the true reality, so that against them, every other reality is degraded and poor. Ideas are ungenerated, timeless, and unchanging (eternal), independent and separate from all material objects. Their proper place is the intelligible world, which is beyond the sky.
B. What Are the Realities of Ideas: Plato said that there are ideas in the first place, such as justice, virtue, goodness, etc., i.e., ethical and aesthetic realities. He also referred to the existence of ideas of the similar and dissimilar, unity and plurality, or, which is the same, ratios and proportions. This also includes mathematical entities and, subsequently, the ideas of natural and artificial beings (ideas of horse, tree, table, house, chair, etc.) and the simple bodies (fire, air, water, and earth). Finally, he concluded by admitting the existence of negative things or repugnant ideas (dirt, lice, etc.). Consequently, the theory of ideas assigns each class of objects, forms, and relations of the sensible world to the intelligible world and its own right idea.
C. Meaning of Ideas: If ideas are the true reality, the true self, they first possess an ontological sense and thus derive a logical meaning.
- Essentially: What things are in themselves; that is, the true being of things is in their ideas. For example, the real horse is not the one running on the racetrack, but the content of the idea of a horse.
- Exemplary Cause: The paradigm or model of all things, for all things imitate or participate in the ideas. The horse running in the races is riding in the same way that it approaches the idea of the horse.
- End: (final cause) for all things tend toward ideas (teleology); all horses are better the more they resemble the ideal horse.
In its logical meaning, the idea becomes the universal concept, or expressed in other words, it is a concept that refers to a plurality of objects of the same species. For example, the concept of horse is used to designate all horses. The world of ideas has a pyramidal structure, according to the different strata or levels of being, according to which ideas are lower in existence and dependent on other entities, which, in turn, are higher, and so on until reaching the supreme idea, the Idea of Good, which constitutes the top of the pyramid and, therefore, is the foundation upon which every other reality ultimately depends. According to this setting, there is a community of ideas, where ideas depend upon and relate to others, and ultimately all are under the supreme unity of the idea, namely the idea of goodness.
E. The Idea of Good: The world of ideas culminates in the Idea of Good. But what is the Idea of Good? The Idea of Good is the supreme reality, thanks to which there are true and all other realities, that is, ideas and, ultimately, also the things of the sensible world. The Idea of Good provides existence to everything; everything that exists, and thus is transcendental or, which is the same, rather than being in itself, is at the same time all other realities. In this regard, all other beings actually possess existence as long as they are given in the Idea of Good.
F. List of Things to Ideas: As in the myth of the cave of shadows, as long as they are mere reflections of objects and statues, they have an entity (a reality) apparent in the physical and material world that surrounds us. The realities with which we relate (the house, the table, the horse, justice, etc.) are mere reflections, shadows of the simple ideas that are in the intelligible world. In this sense, Plato sometimes referred to participation and imitation of other things in ideas.
Knowledge
a) Kind of knowledge that distinguishes between two worlds, one real and one apparent. Plato also discerned between two kinds of knowledge: true knowledge, true science, and opinion or apparent knowledge. According to this philosopher, the quality of knowledge depends on the nature of the known objects. Thus, knowledge of objects in the sensible world is also inauthentic or apparent: Doxa. Such knowledge is provided by our senses, but they deceive us. In contrast, when the soul manages to evade the realities of the senses and rise to the world of ideas, true knowledge takes place: Episteme. Thus, true knowledge (episteme) refers to the intelligible world, to beings that always are, that neither are born nor do they appear, whereas apparent knowledge or mere opinion (doxa) refers to the sensible world, to things that are in constant flux, which are born and die. Thus, in parallel with different kinds of beings at each level, Plato distinguished two types at each level of knowledge, namely:
- At the level of mere opinion or conjecture, imagination is limited to knowledge of mere appearances without attempting to penetrate their meaning. Plausible view aims for an orderly comprehension of natural and artificial things.
- Science, in contrast, is the rational discursive thought or activity whose purpose is numbers, mathematical entities, and supreme knowledge, which aims to capture the ideas themselves.
b) The Dialectic: The supreme science, whose aim is knowledge of the supreme reality, proceeds dialectically. There can be only true knowledge of true reality. Now, in the sensible world, humans are greatly removed from that reality imposed; hence, they must make the proper effort to ascend from the knowledge of the sensible world to the knowledge of the intelligible world. This elevation is called dialectic. The dialectic, then, is a first step in moving up from the cognitively sensitive world to the intelligible world, but this process is not enough. Secondly, one must come to the intelligible world, continuing to rise from idea to idea until reaching the supreme idea: the idea of goodness. The engine of the dialectic is Eros (love). For this author, the aforementioned cognitive ascent is at the same time a rise in existence; or, otherwise expressed, the rise is both epistemological and ontological, as in the soul rising to the contemplation of the ideas, it expands itself and acquires its authentic being. In this regard, Plato surpasses his master, Socrates, in dialectics, which was the art of dialogue, through which he stood in the knowledge of sensitive private data to the universal essence. In Plato, in different ways, it was also a rise in being, as explained; this rise in humans is done to achieve their full potential.
There are two kinds of knowledge: sensitive (through the five senses) and intelligible (via intelligence). Sense knowledge is doxa (opinion) and is an apparent knowledge, not real, changing, multiple, and that is our particular view of things. In contrast, episteme is intelligible knowledge; it is knowledge of ideas and is real, stable, and unique. While in the field of view, there are many opinions as individuals, each with its truth, in the field of knowledge (episteme), there is a unanimous agreement by all who are knowledgeable about the only truth. Let’s look at four degrees of knowledge:
- Eikasia: (4th confidence) Greek word for image, which derives from icon. It is knowledge by the mere appearance of things, by images, by phenomena (literally: what is) trying to enter its sense, guessing its meaning. For example, the rash seems brave, but is fearful. Eikasia also means divination, where through images, signs, or events, one interprets or gives a sense or conjecture of meaning. This degree of knowledge is shown in ordinary language when we say: I think … or I guess …. At this level of knowledge, we find the graphic arts: sculpture, painting, etc., and divination.
- Tip: Greek word for belief, faith, and assurance. It is knowledge by experience, the experience of something. This knowledge by experimental observation is more secure and reliable than Eikasia, though still within the realm of doxa. This is the level of knowledge in which all experimental sciences operate: physics, chemistry, biology, etc. For example, if a knowledge of Eikasia is an image of a table or sea, serious leads to observational knowledge of the table or the sea. This degree of knowledge is reflected in everyday language when we say: I think … I am confident that … sure ….
- Dianoia: Greek word: dia (through) and nous (intelligence). This degree of knowledge is a leap from the plane of doxa (opinion of something pure) to the plane of episteme (knowledge of something). Knowledge is discursive, deductive, rational, and argumentative via logos of the principles. At this level of knowledge, one leaves appearances and experiences to reach through reason to know something. At this level of knowledge, we find mathematics, logic, and reasoning. It is reflected in everyday language when we say: I understand that … or that … gather.
- Dialectic: Greek word meaning formed by dia (through) and logos (word or reason). It is the supreme knowledge by an intellectual vision of the truth of the principles; it is knowledge of ideas through the logos: it is where wisdom resides. At this level of knowledge, ancient wisdom is found and is reflected in everyday language when we say the reason is … or the truth is ….
Humans
In Plato’s thought, the human being is not composed of body and soul, but is exclusively soul. In this sense, the soul is of immaterial and spiritual nature, resembling divine things, so it is immortal and exists before the body. To demonstrate the preexistence of the soul and the body, the philosopher premised on the existence of innate knowledge in it (do not forget that knowing is remembering). As for the demonstration of the immortality of the soul, it is supported by life itself.
The proper and adequate place of souls is the intelligible world. However, due to a mistake, they fell into this world, the sensible world, and joined a body. This union of body and soul is accidental in nature; the soul is in the body as the navigator on the boat or as a rider on the horse, but it is also unnatural and enforced: in this union, the soul suffers a significant impairment of intellectual and volitional faculties. The body becomes, therefore, a prison, a tomb for the soul: soma.
Mission of this Union: In Plato’s theory about the soul, there are many contents from Orphic and Pythagorean mysteries, most notably, perhaps, the purification and transmigration. The soul, in its union with the body, has the mission to purify itself from the negative inclinations of the body, the multitude of desires, affections, passions, etc., that accompany it while it is attached to the body. But how can this be achieved? The answer, in principle, seems easy: adequately. In this case, if the purified soul succeeds, once again dead, it returns to its proper place: the intelligible world, where it remains happily contemplating the truth, namely, ideas. Otherwise, after the disappearance of its body, it wanders lost, reincarnating in another body and so many times.
The Three Kinds of Souls: Plato differentiates between three kinds of souls, namely, rational, irascible, and concupiscible. The rational soul is in the head and has the intellectual faculties: thoughts and desires. The irascible soul is in the chest and regulates our violent impulses, related to inclinations of anger, revenge, courage, or cowardice, etc. The concupiscible soul, located in the belly, refers to the appetites and impulses related to eating, drinking, and other sensual pursuits. Of these souls, Plato highlights especially the rational soul, which is authentically human and, as a human, has the task of controlling the other two. Only it is immortal, because only it belongs to the world of ideas, while the irascible and concupiscible souls, however, still depend on the body and perish with bodily death.
Epithymia (desire) is the Greek term for desire and obfuscation. This part of the human psyche consists of all the passions and impulses that come from the soma, moving them to the realm of ideas (or the mental sphere). It is the seat, therefore, of fantasies, dreams, obsessive thoughts, and impulses derived from all three somatic instinctual sources. It is also home to the movements of passion, emotional and volitional (will) too relaxed; it is the capricious part that tends to satisfy all appetites and tastes of the soma. According to Aristides Quintilian in his book on music, epithymia is the female part of the soul. The words that activate this part are simple and gentle words (words of a mother).
Thymos (anger) is the Greek term for impulse, thrust, power, and anger. It is the dynamis or power of man, the principle of action. It is the seat of the will, strength, mood, temperament, constancy, patience, courage, and freedom of choice, but it has a negative side as well; it is the seat of aggressiveness, anger, pride, selfishness, and narcissism. There is a tension there volitional, too. It is the male part of the human soul. The words that activate this part are strong (Bronze).
Logik (rational): rational means in Greek. It is the highest part of the human psyche. It is the headquarters of the word, thought, reasoning, memory, and intelligence. However, this intellectual part is severely limited and constrained by the domain it exerts over the other two parts: epithymia and thymos. This attraction causes the psyche to have a partial and superficial knowledge of itself, unable to know its depth. The rational part has a positive face, which is the seat of intelligence, and a negative side, which is the seat of arrogance. The words that activate this part are concise and severe logos (words from a teacher or educator).
The Political Conception
The primary motivation that led Plato to philosophical meditation was political. In this sense, almost all investigations were politically oriented, intended to find a perfect system of government that would serve to eliminate all injustice in the polis. In the mind of this author, from a practical point of view, politics is the main science and must subordinate all others: the economy, military art, ethics, and any other concerns regarding the behavior of individuals. Political science aims to seek the welfare of all citizens and is more just, more noble, and better looking for the good of everyone than for a few or one in particular. In this regard, Plato distinguished three classes in society, namely wise (or philosophers), warriors, and producers, giving each class a role: the wise rule, the warriors defend society, and the producers provide food and utensils. If each class is doing its duty, good order and harmony reign, that is, justice. As we see, therefore, the main task assigned to Plato is to the wise, believing that only those who know the truth, goodness, and justice can handle a just society.
From a political standpoint, the wise, therefore, have two main tasks, which are to govern the polis and educate future leaders.
Different Forms of Government: As you can deduce from our analysis, for Plato, the right system is aristocracy, the best form of government, where power is in the hands of scientists and philosophers. In contrast, he considered oligarchic regimes, timocracy, democracy, and tyranny to be weak. Timocracy is a political regime based on boldness, hubris, and the desire for honor and glory of its rulers. According to Plato, the self-exaltation of freedom ends up destroying democracy, which degenerates into anarchy, and this, in turn, facilitates the emergence of some individuality that turns into a tyrant.