The question I wish to propose here is this: justification aside, to what effect would Plato’s theory of Forms, as discussed primarily using the terminology of the invisible, rather than the visible, realm such as around Phaedo 79a, contribute to an overall change within a society’s cultural metaphysical understanding? To what extent does this advocacy of a perfect, idealistic afterlife for all the virtuous ones so to speak (namely philosophers as far as this text is concerned) establish a perhaps lessened appreciation for life and of the aspects of living if, as Plato seems to propose, these Forms are to be the standards by which all of existence must be compared?
Emphasis throughout the text of Phaedo is placed at great length upon the two strata of a soul’s existence existing before and after this present reality, yet for the most part it would seem to disregard what otherwise Aristotelian philosophy would tend to cover in much greater detail: life as a human being. Within The Nicomachean Ethics, for example, there is great concern for the actions of an individual morally and ethically speaking insofar as it is possible for a human being. One should strive towards the mean within all his or her actions and behaviors, and yet even though Aristotle briefly alludes to a perfect embodiment of one who attains this ‘golden mean’, this great-souled man, the ideal is not one which is conceived as being attainable practically. The theory of means does not present all who fail as deficient by nature in the same manner as do the Forms of Plato, rather they simply serve to illustrate in an understandable, relatable format the abstract concepts of temperance, magnanimity, the virtuous friendship, etc.
For Socrates at Phaedo 74e offers this question: “whenever someone, on seeing something, realizes that that which he now sees wants to be like some other reality but falls short and cannot be like that other since it is inferior, do we agree that the one who thinks this must have prior knowledge of that to which he says is like, but deficiently so?” Within the argument advocating for the theory of recollection, there are comparisons made between the invisible and visible realms by Plato for the purposes of accepting the former over the latter as the more desirable.
Although even in modern society individuals may happen upon a certain balance between reality and the afterlife, as the duties of civilized life necessitate for such, ultimately Plato’s theory of Forms would appear to haunt one’s experience of daily living. Surely standards cannot be abolished from the psyche of this social creature that is the human being, for coherent communication would seem to require some ideal essence within an object so as to be able to distinguish its most complete form from what may be seen at present. Concerning the notion of equality, Socrates states to Simmias that “it is definitely from the equal things, though they are different from that Equal, that you have derived and grasped the knowledge of equality” (74c). Granted that when measuring the length, depth, breadth, extent, and so forth, one needs a standard by which to measure differences between two objects, and yet could not the Forms, or Heaven to use a modern conceptual term, be no different than our society’s anorexic supermodel, whose ideal nature is no more conventionalist than what is proffered by Hermogenes within the Cratylus?
In other words, often when one is presented by what is some notion of perfection, that individual is usually compelled to shape his or her life and natural inclinations to resemble what is perfect, usually what seems to be at the cost of their sense of being human, inextricably flawed. For, rather than working towards some noble cause, ideals in beauty, for example, more often strive to root out the many original differences between individuals, much as is often the case with women who are compared to an ideal so as to highlight minute variations and extricate them. As such, would not individuals arguably be seen to lean towards the conclusion that death would be more significant than life given that the afterlife was to be of such a more enticing, desirable caliber?
This is a complicated series of questions.
ReplyDeleteYou are right to observe that Plato's theory of the soul and the forms seems to discount the value and worth of the present world in comparison to the eternal world of Being.
A simple answer to your question about whether Aristotle in fact gets it right by showing that virtue in the present life is desirable in its own right: Plato's account in Book 9 of the Republic regarding the many-headed monster is his own response to the question, and in many ways it's basically Aristotelian in spirit. He says that only just people (i.e. those with ordered souls) can truly acquire what they want in life, whereas the unjust are subject to a disordered, tyrannical soul. Plato to my mind does seem to think that there is some worth in doing things well in this life and that this path is choiceworthy in its own right, though it doesn't come out so much in the works we've been reading for this course.
As for your larger question about the value of the present life in comparison to the future: this is a much more long-standing question in the history of ideas than what Plato contributes. For instance most Christian denominations hold that the present life is just a blip in comparison to the everlasting state of the afterlife. Compare also the theories in Christianity that hold the world itself is temporary and will at some point be destroyed (after the Second Coming, etc.). What's interesting in Plato's case (and this was also true of Aristotle; see Book 10 of the Nic Ethics) is that he believes it's our role in this life to mimic and otherwise strive for the eternal realm of Being from which we are presently distanced. There's a definite sense that this is what we are supposed to do in the present life, viz. imitate the order and harmony of the cosmos and thus become closer to Being and to God. The cosmological theory of the Timaeus makes an even stronger case here: to the extent that each one of us contains a piece of the world-soul, the best we can do in life is try to actualize and harmonize the part of us most like the eternal.