Metaphysics, also commonly known as first philosophy, has been studied since antiquity. The study of metaphysics generally seeks to answer the question of what is really ‘there.’ Many philosophers have contributed to this particular branch of thought. However our understanding of metaphysics would be less significant without the strong foundation of work by ancient philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. One of the most important pieces of work to touch Western Society was Plato’s Theory of Forms. Plato’s work attempts to answer questions about reality and the world we live in. Moreover his writing has received both scrutiny and praise. This writing will act as an evaluation on Plato’s theory so that we have a better view of where his theory
…show more content…
This brings us into Parmenides, where the main plot revolves around a dialectic attempting to grapple with the theory of forms. Continuing, the main argument is against monism in the sense that out of everything things can be alike or they can be unlike, but they cannot be both as that leads to absurdity (Rickless). Socrates however, wants to debate that premise and wants to use Plato’s theory of forms to tackle it. Socrates must spend a lot of time discussing the theory of forms and the underlying principles that it requires. Fist Socrates points out that there is a causality of forms. This is shown in the sense that things that are beautiful by virtue of partaking in ‘beauty.’ Moreover another critical point is that of separation, or that beauty exists by itself and is not identical with the things that partake in beauty (Rickless). Socrates does also point out that it is possible for properties to be like something and unlike something, stating they are contrary but not contradictions. In example I am considered large in comparison to an ant, but small in comparison to a skyscraper. In that sense I am both large and small, or simply put, both like and unlike. However it should be noted that although sensible things often have contrary properties, Socrates holds that forms are pure and therefore cannot have contrary properties. Put another way, no form is identical to any sensible thing (Rickless). This is because for every property there is exactly one form, and that each form is
This brings us into Parmenides, where the main plot revolves around a dialectic attempting to grapple with the theory of forms. Continuing, the main argument is against monism in the sense that out of everything things can be alike or they can be unlike, but they cannot be both as that leads to absurdity (Rickless). Socrates however, wants to debate that premise and wants to use Plato’s theory of forms to tackle it. Socrates must spend a lot of time discussing the theory of forms and the underlying principles that it requires. Fist Socrates points out that there is a causality of forms. This is shown in the sense that things that are beautiful by virtue of partaking in ‘beauty.’ Moreover another critical point is that of separation, or that beauty exists by itself and is not identical with the things that partake in beauty (Rickless). Socrates does also point out that it is possible for properties to be like something and unlike something, stating they are contrary but not contradictions. In example I am considered large in comparison to an ant, but small in comparison to a skyscraper. In that sense I am both large and small, or simply put, both like and unlike. However it should be noted that although sensible things often have contrary properties, Socrates holds that forms are pure and therefore cannot have contrary properties. Put another way, no form is identical to any sensible thing (Rickless). This is because for every property there is exactly one form, and that each form is