Aristotle, Plato, Dante
This is an excerpt from the paper...
1. The human being is seen by different philosophers in a somewhat different light. Plato sees being human as a matter of balance, with an emphasis on the value of reason in ascertaining this balance. Socrates in The Republic analyzes human psychology, showing that the human mind is a tri-partite structure of reason, desire, and emotion. Socrates uses this truth to make a moral statement about the nature of the state and its relationship to the individual. Socrates says at the outset:We are bound to admit that the elements and traits that belong to a state must also exist in the individuals that compose it. There is nowhere else for them to come from (Lee 209). Socrates has already noted that the state has three natural constituents, wisdom, courage, and self-discipline, and he wants to show that these same three forces are to be found in the human soul: We shall expect to find that the individual has the same three elements in his personality and to be justified in using the same language of him because he is affected by the same conditions (Lee 209). Aristotle agrees with Plato that everything in this world is striving toward the Good. Aristotle created a teleological system in which everything had to be striving toward some ultimate and concrete perfection that exists as the Telos, or goal. Aristotle called this the Prime Mover, the cause of the universe, not as that which started the universe but as that to which the universe is moving as the Final Cause.
. . .
that the universe can express itself externally in concrete form or internally as a concept in the human mind at one and the same time. The Idea is the foundation of reality itself.
Aristotle was originally one of Plato's students, but he came to disagree with what he called the "other-worldliness" of his teacher. For Plato there were two worlds, the world perceived by the senses, and the world of the Forms, the ideals of which the objects in this world are only pale imitations. Aristotle disputed this, asking how, if the Forms are the essences of things, the Forms could exist separated from things, and how, if the Forms were the cause of things, they could exist in a different world? Aristotle made a distinction between form and matter, but he said that these two features of reality could be distinguished only in thought, not in fact. The forms are not separate entities but are embedded in particular things in this world. Every object has both form and matter. Form is universal in that many particulars may have the same form. Form is the thing's essence or nature and is related to its function. The object's matter is what is unique to that object, the object's "thisness," and it stands as the principle of individuatio
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Divine Plato, Platonic Ideas, Socrates Republic, Peter Abelard, Aristotle Plato, Ethics Aristotle, Plato Aristotle, Virgil Virgil, I82-84 Virgil, , world forms, real world, dark wood, human nature, form matter, changeless world forms, allegory cave, bobbs-merrill 1962, york bobbs-merrill, lee desmond, tr york, york bobbs-merrill 1962, aristotle nicomachean ethics, nicomachean ethics martin, tr york bobbs-merrill,
Approximate Word count = 1638
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|