Plato posits two layers of reality, the layer of Being and the layer of Becoming. The layer of becoming is the layer of what appears to be real. To Plato, this layer accounts for the constant and fleeting changes rendered by subjectivity. He thinks that subjectivity happens because humans are imperfect beings (at the layer of Becoming) who therefore are not capable of conceiving perfection (at the layer of Being).
The layer of Being is what Plato refers to as what is real, something “which always is and has no becoming…”. To Plato, this is the layer that transcends space and time. This is how Plato’s Forms came about. He thinks that since all there is at the layer of Becoming are imperfect copies, there must be a perfect copy at the layer of Being which transcends time and space. Plato names this transcendent perfect copy, Form.
I agree with Plato that our world - the layer of Becoming - is constantly changing. What was deemed beautiful in the past might not be viewed the same way in modern times. This is …show more content…
He thinks that Plato’s forms do not provide a link between intelligible ideas (the Form Beauty) and the world of sensible things (beautiful things). To Aristotle, Forms need to be present in the world of sensible things, as opposed to Plato’s Forms which are beyond sensible things. This supports his own argument about how there is no innate knowledge when it comes to forms. Aristotle also thinks that Forms are more meaningful if they can be found in which the objects which they represent, proceeding to raise the idea that neither form nor matter can exist independently without the other, and thereby outrightly rejecting Plato’s idea of transcendent Forms. Given Aristotle’s views on form and matter being unable to exist without the other, it is probable that he will agree that forms cannot exist before the existence of sensible