Plato vs. Aristotle: Philosophy, Knowledge, Ethics, and Politics
Plato and Aristotle: Contrasting Philosophies
Plato’s Theory of Ideas
Plato, in his Theory of Ideas, proposed a division of reality into two realms: the material, physical world, which is a mere shadow of the world of Ideas—intangible, perfect essences. From Plato’s perspective, the world of Ideas is more real and true than the material world. Consequently, the rational knowledge that grasps these Ideas is superior to sensory knowledge, which can only perceive the material appearances of things.
Aristotle’s Hylomorphism
Aristotle disagreed with his teacher’s philosophical theories and countered with his theory of hylomorphism to explain real entities. He believed that by dividing reality into two worlds, Plato had complicated the explanation of reality. In his dualistic theory, Plato asserted that change and multiplicity exist in the material world. However, since we cannot rationalize the physical world, it follows that we cannot rationalize multiplicity and change. Ultimately, Aristotle questioned how the essence of beings could reside in a realm separate and distinct from the beings themselves.
Aristotle’s Unified Reality
For these reasons, Aristotle proposed a different conception of reality in his philosophy: the hylomorphic theory. According to this view, natural beings are composed of matter (hyle) and form (morphe). Form, or substance, is the way in which matter is organized and structured. Thus, the essence can never exist separately from the matter it constitutes, contrary to Plato’s assertion. For Aristotle, there is only one reality, and the essence of beings is inherent in them as subjects.
Aristotle’s Empiricist Epistemology
Our knowledge, according to Aristotle, is knowledge of this singular reality. He advocates for an empiricist theory of knowledge, where sensory information received by our understanding forms the basis from which we generalize and create general concepts about the nature of things—their essence. Aristotle places great importance on the role of sensation in knowledge precisely because he believes that the essence of things is expressed in the very beings we perceive, and our initial knowledge of these beings originates from our sensory organs.
Ethics: The Pursuit of the Good
Just as the ontology and epistemology of Plato and Aristotle differ significantly, so do their ethics and politics. In his ethics, Aristotle explains that the good is the perfect fulfillment of a being’s core potentialities. For Aristotle, the good is not an abstract idea detached from material existence, as it was for Plato, but something intrinsically linked to each natural entity. For humans, the good is the realization of rationality, their distinctive natural quality. This is achieved through the daily exercise of deliberative reason to adopt the most moderate attitude in every situation. Thus, Aristotle defines virtue as the choice of the golden mean. Virtue is not attained through a life of asceticism and abstract knowledge, as Plato suggested, but a quality accessible through everyday life, available to anyone who desires it.
Politics: The Common Good
In terms of politics, we know that Plato never accepted the political systems of his time, as he deemed them all corruptible. He therefore advocated for the establishment of a utopian state ruled by philosophers. Aristotle, in contrast, believed that political life should be governed by one principle: achieving the common good in the state—the material and spiritual well-being of all citizens. Consequently, any form of government is acceptable as long as the state aims to achieve this common good over the particular interests of its rulers.