2. Here's the Carl Sagan COSMOS clip talking about the Pre-Socratics--we only watched 1/3 so feel free to indulge yourselves in all 3 parts
and
3. here's an image to contemplate while you are reading Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Have fun and see you next week!
I've had to read Plato's Cave for a few different philosophy classes. It's interesting to note how intrigued we still are with the notion of reality. In one class we talked about the direct correlation between Plato's Cave and movies like "The Matrix" and how reality is entirely subjective.
ReplyDeleteI agree. This was my first time reading this and I found the whole concept very interesting. I tried to picture myself in that cave scenario and, as expected, I found it quite difficult to grasp a reality like that. A reality where the only thing you know is what you can physically see.
ReplyDeleteYes Charlie The Matrix is often referenced by students when first digging into Plato's Allegory of the Cave--in fact someone brought it up in our very class during the powerpoint performance lecture. Which, if I recall, we ended with a suggestion that perhaps there is nothing but subjectivity, or more correctly, subjectivities, i.e., our relationship to the world, as experienced in any number of ways, normally via the senses and/or thought--our human perception system.
ReplyDeleteFor those interested in digging into that Matrix stuff a bit, here is a link to a Sparknotes discussion on the philosophical background to The Matrix
http://www.sparknotes.com/film/matrix/section1.html
(excerpt) "Four of the most striking philosophical precedents for the Matrix trilogy are Jean Baudrillard’s Simulacra and Simulation, Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, Socrates’ visit to the Oracle of Delphi, and the work of Rene Descartes. The films refer to all four of these at various points."
For Plato, the experience of this prisoner is a metaphor for the process by which certain human beings free themselves from the world of appearances and perceive the world truly, then come back to teach others "the truth". Remember the image of Plato form Raphaels School of Athen, gesturing upwards towards Heaven and the world of 'forms"-universals, ideas, from which our world is in a sense 'copied'.
Aristotle disagreed though, right?
re Brian: what other ways of knowing are there for us besides seeing?
Somewhere in your powerpoint you mentioned Descartes idea "I think, therefore I am." I recently read an article in National Geographic that talked about new robots being invented. One robot in particular they are making is able to learn and develop just like a human with their "brain" mimicking a human's. This made me wonder what Descartes would think about a machine being able to think and learn just as a human does. These robots may present different types of truth, forms, and reality then what has been previously thought.
ReplyDeletePlato's Cave is interesting to me because it is a first hand example of his notion of "form." This notion of form is that things exist first and most purely in the mind before existing in what we know as material reality (please excuse my rough explanation).
ReplyDeletePlato's Cave, in which light and shadows are projected onto a wall where a viewer mistakes these images for actual reality, is the first concept of cinema. This is cinema existing in "form". It is not actual it is merely a hypothetical scenario existing in the mind. It is not until almost 2000 years later that we see this scenario of people sitting in a dark room mistaking projections of light and shadows for reality. The idea of cinema therefor existed for multiple millennia before the actual physical cinema existed.
Is it hard to believe that the idea of things exist in stories and fiction before these things actually exist in physical reality?
In was struck by how the cave allegory was in a way an ancient preconception of cinema...
ReplyDeleteYet, the goodness-knowledge-light theme seems to be a bit ridiculous. As Nietzsche argues in The Birth of Tragedy, Plato's tyrannical, black and white philosophy and championing of the quest for "truth" spelled the death of art.
wait--who are you "UNKNOWN"?
ReplyDeleteWhat's interesting to me within this cave allegory is the notion that not only are these prisoners denied the opportunity to grasp the idea of reality, their captors almost mock them by attempting to confuse them with "shadow puppets."The idea of putting on an act (in this scenario) reflects art's attempt fool the audience into a false reality. Something we are forced to believe despite the non-existant truths, that's what great art does it forces us to believe in a perceived reality.
ReplyDeletenice range of responses--i see some of you are getting a strong sense of Plato's suspicion here of art and artists as falsifiers. Would have loved a Nietschze quote to back up the tyrannical accusation! Nate's comment about form well considered and well taken! Ashley , check out Alan Turing for early theories on Artificial intelligence , an ongoing theme in science fiction , i.e., Do Androids Dream of Electrid Sheep , Phil Dick
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test
I like the parallels drawn between the shadows on display and the essence of film. However, I think filmmaking does not necessarily correlate fully to the "puppeteers" (if you will) fooling the prisoners in the cave into believing a false reality. Certainly, in narrative film, a filmmaker has succeeded when he draws his audience into the reality contained in his film; yet, with experimental filmmaking, the object is to explore the medium itself, and possibly to create something visually stimulating, whether it be to inspire beauty, hatred, or whatever emotion the filmmaker wants the audience to feel. In the second case, the film then becomes self-reflexive in most cases, therefore reminding us of the reality of what we are watching.
ReplyDeleteI have seen and admired The School of Athens several times and always find something new. Our attention was focused in class to gestures of Plato and Aristotle; both their hands are signifying key notions to their philosophical stances on reality. When this was shown in class I noticed that Plato also has one foot up on a stair while Aristotle has both feet firmly on one surface.
ReplyDeleteMartin Eyestone, a wise philosopher and graduate student here at CU, provided his class this aid In understanding Plato's theory of the forms: Plato's metaphor of the divided line.
Plato, Republic Book VI (509d): "you have two kinds of things, visible and intelligible. [...] It is like a line divided into two unequal sections. Then divide each section-namely, that of the visible and that of the intelligible-in the same ratio as the line."
A____B_________C________D___________________E
Segment AC : the visible realm; objects of belief
Segment AB: likeness (shadows and reflections); objects of conjecture
Segment BC: ordinary physical objects; objects of confidence
The highest object in the visible realm, the sun, is at (or just below/left of) point C
Segment CE: the intelligible realm; objects of knowledge
Segment CD: hypothetical ideal particulars or lower Forms; objects of thought
Segment DE: (higher) Forms; objects of understanding
The highest object in the intelligible realm, the Form of the Good, is at point E
The above diagram helps to visualize the Theory of Forms in a similar way to that of the Allegory of the Cave. Based on these teachings, I find the sun metaphor relevant and intriguing.
Plato uses the sun as a metaphor for the greatest possible form of the good. He explains that in the physical world the sun is the greatest good; It is the source of energy for all known life, it illuminates our world so that we can see, and it keeps our planet warm enough for life to continue. Similarly, in the metaphysical world the form of the Good, like the sun, illuminates our thoughts and is the basis for wisdom and well being.
Plato views the soul in correspondence with the perfect forms. The soul is eternal and indestructible, beyond the physical world. On the other hand, Lucretius believes the soul is in essence another organ of the body. It is this sort of animating energy that flows through us; and it's real on the physical level but perhaps only at the microscopic level. Plato believes we should sooth the soul by doing philosophy.
Plato is commonly regarded as a foundation of Western philosophy including many concepts found in religion such as Christianity. However, I recently attended a gathering of Krishna followers, (Krishna is a central deity figure in Hinduism) who were praising, rejoicing, and recommending the holy Bhagavad Gita as a spiritual text essential to the path of enlightenment. Gandhi himself consistently referred to the Bhagavad Gita as his spiritual text. Interestingly, a holy man at this gathering named Ganapati Swami, used a metaphor that was reminiscent of Plato's theory of the Forms. He spoke of the physical world being like smoke of the divine energy which is the fire.
Plato makes some bold comparisons between the cave and a false reality, and some valid arguments that further this analogy; but how can we be so sure that this "false reality" is not in fact reality itself? What if the cave IS the entire universe and the shadows stand alone as truth? That's not to say that we, the entirety of mankind, is all knowing, in fact I believe a quest for wisdom and knowledge will free us of selfishness and greed, but who's to say we will come to find this reality to be anything less than just that. Maybe this is as real as it gets?
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, I recently read about Kenneth Waltz in my War and Peace class. He discusses possible causes of war (why it happens, who causes it, is there a solution etc). One of his possible explanations is that human nature is the cause of war. That humans are naturally defected with stupidity, selfishness, and misdirected aggressive impulses. Plato reinforces Waltz's claim. Plato mentions that people "set about fighting for power, and this internecine conflict ruins them and their country"(235). Greed causes war... You think knowledge could rid us of greed? I don't think it could. It could in fact make us greedy for more knowledge, don't you think?
On pg 60 of The Birth of Tragedy Nietzsche writes: "In a certain sense Euripides too, was merely a mask, the deity who spoke out of him wan not Dionysos or Apollo, but an altogether newborn daemon called Socrates". Using tyrannical was a bit of a reach on my part I will admit. Though Nietzsche does attack the Socratic principle that 'what is reasonable is good, he doesn't necessarily point out Plato (at least in that work).
ReplyDeleteHere is a good quote from Birth of Tragedy regarding the Socratic and science/art:
"The words spoken by the figure who appeared to Socrates in a dream are the only hint of any scruples in him about the limits of logical nature; perhaps, he must have told himself, things which I do not understand are not automatically unreasonable. Perhaps there is a kingdom of wisdom from which the logician is banished? Perhaps art may even be a necessary correlative and supplement of science?" (71)
Also, I agree that filmmaking doesn't at all correlate to the actual allegory of the puppeteers being falsifiers. I more meant just the image of the shadows in a cave, (playing with projecting light in a dark room/ creating images of everyday existence, images which sometimes seam more real than everyday existence. All of this sounds a lot like cinema).
ReplyDeleteI think -- therefore I don't know what I am. Being aware of our own existence alone is really fascinating, something that almost no other lifeforms experience (that we know of). And then on top of that, we are aware and maybe even skeptical of reality; knowing that our minds/brains are shaped and molded through the growing process (biologically and ancestrally). We develop in a way that makes us best suited for survival, but not necessarily best suited for seeing the universe in its most pure and truthful form. And then on top of that, we wonder if the universe is even reality... *head explodes*
ReplyDeleteThe Allegory of the Cave is interesting because it can bring up these issues of explaining the world we live in. We base science and religion off of observations and experiences, but who's to say it's actuality.
The elements in a film are living in a reality of the film, but the people watching the film are living in a false-reality -- only because it can be seen to be a false reality when they look around and observe the world outside. Maybe someday we will step out of our reality and observe that it was in fact a false reality!!! WOAHHHHH
One aspect that I found particularly interesting in Plato's the Allegory of the Cave is the idea of the prisoners mistaking appearance for reality. The prisoners would automatically think that the shadows they see on the wall are real, because they would know nothing of the real cause of shadows. This reminds me of the painting The Treachery of Images by Rene Magritte. The painting depicts a painted pipe and a sentence on the bottom that reads "Ceci n'est pas une pipe"(This is not a pipe). This may seem like a contradiction but it actually makes perfect sense because the painting is not a pipe, it is simply an image of a pipe. For example, if a pipe casts a shadow on the wall the prisoners will think they are seeing a pipe. In fact, they are not seeing a physical pipe but a mere shadow of a pipe. A prisoner may think this shadow of a pipe is real, only because it is the way he has come to know this pipe. In order to see the physical pipe object the prisoner would have to turn his head around. The prisoners may learn what a pipe is due to their experience with the shadow, but they would be mistaken if they thought that the word "pipe" refers to something that any of them has ever seen.
ReplyDeleteOne aspect that I found particularly interesting in Plato's the Allegory of the Cave is the idea of the prisoners mistaking appearance for reality. The prisoners would automatically think that the shadows they see on the wall were real, because they would know nothing of the real cause of shadows. This reminds me of the painting The Treachery of Images by Rene Magritte. The painting depicts a painted pipe and a sentence on the bottom that reads "Ceci n'est pas une pipe"(This is not a pipe). This may seem like a contradiction but it actually makes perfect sense because the painting is not a pipe, it is simply an image of a pipe. For example, if a pipe casts a shadow on the wall the prisoners will think they are seeing a pipe. In fact, they are not seeing a physical pipe but a mere shadow of a pipe. A prisoner may think this shadow of a pipe is real, only because it is the way he has come to know this pipe. In order to see the physical pipe object the prisoner would have to turn his head around. The prisoners may learn what a pipe is due to their experience with the shadow, but they would be mistaken if they thought that the word "pipe" refers to something that any of them has ever seen.
http://www.friendsofart.net/static/images/art3/rene-magritte-this-is-not-a-pipe.jpg
whoa it posted the same thing twice!!
ReplyDeleteGood thoughtful responses--and now we are all here! Glad you brought up Magritte's work Katie--the question of representation is key here--representing reality as however experienced by us, the bodily humans whose perceptual apparatus is itself a "medium". I wonder arent shadows as real as anything else is real? Its not a pipe, true, but it IS really a painting!
ReplyDeleteAs Iris Murdoch says in the excerpt we read from The Fire and The Sun: Why Plato Banished the Artists" , "...Plato pictures human life as a pilgrimage from from appearance to reality." In his metaphor (from the Greek, to transfer, or to carry over) "...we move from an uncritical acceptance of sense experience to a more sophisticated and morally enlightened understanding....But how is it that although sensa are in flux we can have *knowledge*, as opposed to mere opinion or belief? His Theory of Forms as changeless was a way to answer that--there must be things single and steady for us to know, which are separate from the multifarious shifting world of 'becoming'." And so here we have the subjective/objective discussion in it's early stages.
One of the many other issues touched upon by some of you, regarding the role of maker of shadows (the artist?) and the believer of shadows (the spectator) recalls anotehr Platonic term , that of *mimesis*, in other words, imitative, i.e., Art imitates Life. But Iris Murdoch asks us to consider this : "Surely art transforms, is creative rather than pure imitation."
Apologies for my very delayed response Jeannie,
ReplyDeletereading over the packet it reminded me of a reference to the dark ages or when people we're moving west in the United States and education, particular reading and writing weren't standard. Yet shortly after the dark ages, the Renaissance and the Baroque period took place, and shortly after the "wild west," the industrial revolution exploded. Both these periods of enlightenment provided immense amount of invention and forward thinking. It was if populations of people we're dragged out of the "dark cave." it also similarly mimics human growth; when your young, ignorance is bliss. For instance, in my case, certain types of subject matter in movies were way out above me, even certain jokes didn't make sense until later in life. If I were to watch an Ingmar Bergman film without studying the criticism and theory I would probably have a less visceral reaction and my understanding of his films wouldn't be as profound. Stepping out of the dark and into the light is a process we all go through even as we read this Plato reading. A lesson within a lesson. :0
I, too, apologize for my delayed response. First I just want to give props to Chris for that cool spectrum of the divided line. I like that Plato placed the sun at the highest end of the visible realm. Light, being the only thing that allows us humans to see visible objects, should be the greatest of all visible things. Plato, like most philosophers, places philosophy (or the Form of the Good) at the highest end of knowledge. Aristotle, when ranking professions, also placed philosophy at the highest end. Similar to the sun and visible objects, philosophy allows us to absorb true knowledge. Yes, experience does provide knowledge, but without questioning or analyzing it we only obtain a sort of cause and effect understanding. Second, I noticed that no one has taken a look at Plato's analysis of positions in public office and the necessity for that to be held by individuals who look down upon it. Particularly in our two party system, it is evident that NO ONE fits this description. Power, power, power is all that's at stake. I would love to see a philosopher in Congress who shared this belief and only wanted to educate and enlighten the masses. Alas, that's not going to happen any time soon.
ReplyDelete