Philosophical thoughts

Philosophical thoughts

Plato’s analogy

The analogy of the cave is one of the three similes that are used to illustrate theory forms. Plato uses the theory of the cave to illustrate the philosophical difference between a difference of the world of forms and the physical world. The analogy describes the world as full of illusions. The world’s true reality is found in the eternal unchanging world of forms. The cave represents the visible world in the sense of experience. The shadow seems to be more real than the truth itself. It directly represents human soul imprisonment which prevents it from seeking the true knowledge. All the prisoners are chained up and are facing the wall. Fire is located behind the wall. Behind the wall, other people are busy walking up and down carrying statues on their heads. Plato describes our condition as human beings, he stipulates that our senses chain us and deter us from accepting the world around us.

Prisoners symbolize the ordinary people who haven’t discovered the philosophical truth. They are constrained to believe that the shadows they see are real objects. Plato outlines that the shadows are equivalent to the sense of human body that deceives human minds from the reality of the form. Plato believes that objects we see are reflections of the world of forms reality.  If one prisoner is released, he will have to overcome some tough challenges. He will be confused and not able to comprehend what he sees around. In this analogy, one of the prisoners is released; he realizes that the shadows he saw on the wall were not real objects anymore. The journey towards the outside of the cave would represent the discovery of true knowledge in philosophy. It is the toughest journey of enlightenment in philosophy. The steepness of the cave shows how the prisoner struggles to take in the new world order.

One outside the philosopher the prisoner slowly was able to see objects as they really are. He is able to understand the value of the Sun, supporting life and the season of the year. The outside world represents the World of Forms. The sun shapes the outside world so the sun represents the Form of Good. This analogy illustrates the sun as a source of the other Forms. In the analogy, the sun sustains all the living things in the world above ground. The fire in the cave is a superficial sun. The fire only gets the energy from wood which comes through the energy of the sun. Plato believes the true knowledge can only be found in the world of forms. The knowledge that comes through the five senses cannot be true as the physical world is constantly changing.  In this analogy, the soul is imprisoned.  The soul can be free by becoming a philosopher and discovering the reality. Plato suggests that philosophers should have the authority to rule the world as they seek the truth. He argues that the freed prisoner should go back to the cave and teach the other prisoners the reality and truth. As prisoners enter the cave, he is unable to see. This clearly depicts the difficulties associated with viewing the forms within the world. The other prisoners believe in the traditional way of life. The statement of the other prisoners killing the freed prisoner shows the death of Socrates. Socrates inspired a lot of people. He was Plato’s teacher. In conclusion, Plato uses this analogy to explain the world forms. The analogy shows the state in which people live in the society.

Freewill, Determinism, and compatibilism

Freewill is the ability and power to act without any restriction of necessity or fate. People are morally responsible for their conduct. Attempts to articulate moral responsibility conditions produce different accounts of the type of agency required to satisfy those conditions. Free will entails people exercising control over their conduct in the manner essential for moral responsibility. Determinism in conjunction with nature laws provides every truth about the future. Every event is casually articulated by antecedent events. Determinism applies to person conduct in that, if determinism is true, there are several casual conditions that person’s action in the past, prior to her birth, that is adequate responsible for each of her actions. Compatibilism holds that free will and determinism are logical ideas without logical inconsistent. The main adversaries that deny compatibility determinism and free will are incompatibility. These incompatibilities are known as libertarians. Libertans holds that a person may have a free will but false determinism. Hard determinists are incompatibilities that have a less optimistic view. It suggests that some people have determinism but lacks free will. Hard incompatibility lacks free will in both presence and absence of determinism.

Aquinas argument for existence of God

Aquinas first argument is changed. He argues that things are in motion. He outlines that motion is the reduction from potentiality to actuality. He stipulates that their objects that are in motion and capable of becoming to actuality. In his second premise, he argues that if anything is in motion, it is moved by a mover. He is referring to the causality of existence. In the third premise, he argues that there is the first mover and another mover, the argument of a necessary being. His fourth premise is the argument for gradation, this argument stipulates that there must exist a maximum being that can’t be compared to the degree of quality and goodness. The fifth premise is the Teleological argument, teleology has reference to design. Therefore for the universe to come into existence there must be a designer. This case majors on the perfect design of the human body and the universe.   Through this, he means that there must be a mover and a starting mover. The first mover is a god. He suggests that god exists without the requirement to come into being. Aquinas argues that god is the first one to be created since he moves the mover.

Descartes method of systematic doubt

Descartes method can be widely used to gain knowledge. The philosopher states doubt as everything that can be called into question.  He lays his foundation on the fact that the beliefs that come to us are from our senses but not of mind. The philosopher tries to show how our knowledge on several things is open to doubt. A posteriori claim cannot be the foundation for knowledge claims. We are not certain whether what we experienced through our senses is true. Descartes thinks that God is powerful enough to disapprove all his mathematical reasoning and sense experiences. Descartes understanding on God and mathematical reasoning can be used to seek knowledge. He focuses on breaking down every foundation of all beliefs created through sensory experience. Descartes dreaming argument is very refuting and therefore faces objection. It concludes that there is no difference between waking and dreaming.

Locke knowledge and limits

As human beings, our knowledge is limited and therefore we should work rationally. We should discover where ideas come from; ascertain the ideas and examine the issue of opinion and faith to identify how we should proceed logically with our limited knowledge on the ideas. Locke suggests that human beings cannot have established unfamiliar ideas in their minds. Knowledge is built from complex and simple ideas. These ideas emerge from senses and reflection. Well propagated ideas provide real essence. Real essences are invisible arrangements and structures of atoms that allow observation. Human knowledge is limited in that people use words without really knowing their meaning, people think that words refer to things rather than ideas, people use words inconsistently and that people use words without knowing the meaning of such words.  To maintain our rationality, we should always use words consistently and never use a word without knowing its meaning. We can achieve genuine knowledge with traceable ideas. Knowledge of identity and diversity is used to evaluate whether the ideas are clear. Knowledge of coexistence can be used to provide detailed information about the coincidental appearance of secondary powers and qualities of ideas. The degree of certainty in our lives fully depends on knowledge of real existence. We should discover the demonstrative link between the real essence and the ideas it produces on us to overcome knowledge limits.

Categorical imperative

All imperatives are either commanded categorically or hypothetically. The hypothetical imperative dictates that an action is good only as a means to something else. It tells us about best means to achieve our ends. For example, in the modern world, education is viewed as the greatest tool to achieve in life. It provides knowledge and knowledge is power. It does not outline the ends we should choose. The categorical imperative states that the nature of the moral act is one which is the right thing to do for any person in similar circumstances. For example, doctors should treat patients suffering from the same disease and condition equally without any ethnicity. The practical imperative says that we act to treat humanity whether in your own person or another. This is true since with all our professions we serve ourselves and the entire society that is humanity.

Objective vs. subjective

The objective is a fully unbiased statement. It does not involve speaker’s previous experiences or tastes. The method can be verified using facts and performing mathematical calculations. On the other hand, subjective involves statements that have been colored by the writer or speaker. It has a basis in reality but depicts the perspective through which the speaker views the reality. The subjective method cannot be verified using concrete figures and facts. The objective method is independent whether true or false whereas subjective method is dependent.