Monday, September 22, 2014
Plato's Cave
Plato argues that most of us are like prisoners in a cave who are bound in such a way that we can only see shadows of objects projected on a wall. Not only can we not see the objects that cast the shadows, we cannot even see the objects outside of the cave. A more modern analogy might have the prisoner's watching a movie or perhaps "plugged in" to a virtual reality program. What is Plato claiming about the ordinary person? What is our epistemic state? Do we have any hope in escaping? And most importantly, is Plato correct? In short, what is your interpretation of Plato's allegory of the cave and is the allegory the correct way to view the human quest for knowledge?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, one of the most well-known commentaries on human existence and intellectual status, presents a fairly radical argument – that the average human is inherently ignorant about their position in the world, and thus the conduct that is proper with respect to that position in the world, with only true philosophical understanding of goodness capable of lifting humans out of the philosophical darkness, and into a world of righteousness and utmost fulfillment. Plato describes the average human as analogous to prisoners in an underground cave, “there since childhood, with their legs and necks tied up in a way which keeps them in one place and allows them to look only straight ahead, but not to turn their heads” (514a-b). These prisoners, unable to live a normal life, are forced to stare, constantly, at “people on the other side of [a] wall who are carrying all sorts of artefacts” (514a). Fundamentally, Plato has created a strange existence for these prisoners, whose entire world consists of strange images and noises, colorless and unintelligible, visible behind a candlelit screen. And yet, while such an existence seems unimaginable, Plato makes the startling, claim that such prisoners are “no different from us” (515a). Essentially, Plato is arguing, most humans are forced to come to conclusions about the world based solely on their own experiences and observations, and thus, like a prisoner in a cave who has limited exposure to things not immediately available to him, is bound to make incorrect conclusions about the state of the world, and how to properly act. Plato imagines a situation in which, somehow, one of the prisoners is able to escape, and finds himself in the outside world. To Plato, it is certain that this man would “be bewildered and would think that there was more reality in what he’d been seeing before than in what he was being shown now” (515d). Here, Plato is making an interesting claim – that humans are so set in their ways, that exposure to anything which may refute common beliefs, no matter how much sense is made, is bound to be refuted with skepticism by any human who had once believed the opposite. Plato goes so far as to argue that “this treatment [would] cause [the prisoner] pain and distress” (515d-516a), as would be expected from someone who, quite literally, has had his entire world turned on its head. However, Plato continues, after enough time out of the cave, the prisoner would begin to adjust to his new world, learning about the patterns of the sun and the stars, seasonal cycles, and other natural characteristics of the world as a whole. His world, once limited to the darkness of the cave, has been literally illuminated by the sun, and thus his worldview has become infinitely more accurate. To Plato, the sun is therefore analogous to the idea of utmost goodness, as goodness “is responsible for everything that is right and fine… and in the intelligible realm it is the source and provider of truth and knowledge” (517c). Essentially, just as the prisoners are blind to reality by being cut off from the sun, any human who is ignorant of goodness is blind to any potential state of intellectual bliss, as, without goodness, humans are unable to understand the proper paths to pursue in life.
ReplyDeleteThe fundamental idea of the Allegory of the Cave is factually correct – humans do tend to make conclusions based on observations of their surroundings, and extrapolate such beliefs to the world as a whole. For example, medieval Europeans, familiar with only Eurasia and Africa, lacking any technology to identify the true shape of the earth, concluded, based solely on observation, that the world was a flat plate lacking any other continents. In fact, it was not until Europeans began to travel far away from their home, and until scientific instruments became more precise, that the idea of a spherical world with four additional continents emerged. This situation is a prime example of a validation of Plato’s argument – knowledge of one’s place in the world was enhanced not by immediate observations
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteof one’s surroundings, but by exploration of the part of the world that could not be immediately visualized. Even today, nearsighted conclusions abound, coming from people who don’t care to truly examine the larger picture. From a born-again evangelist, unable to comprehend or accept ideas of the world that rely on principles more complex than a divine being, to a criminal who refuses to accept the possibility that the happiness of others is worth valuing, nearly every person on earth could benefit from being taken out of their metaphorical cave – to be forced to look at themselves from a different perspective, possibly allowing them to come to alternate, more enlightened conclusions about their place in the universe. However, this is not to say that Plato’s argument is entirely correct – in fact, the core argument which Plato is putting forward is not entirely supported by the allegory. After carefully constructing a situation in which it becomes clear that one’s position in the universe can only be realized through some sort of higher intellectual breakthrough, Plato concludes, with little justification, that this breakthrough must result from exposure to goodness, the ultimate source of universal truth. However, the idea that goodness illuminates intellectual truths does not entirely make sense – no amount of goodness, for example, can make someone realize that they live on a large, spherical planet. In fact, the inverse of Plato’s argument makes far more sense – only with a comprehensive grasp of knowledge can a human being begin to understand the true nature of goodness. It is, for example, not a grasp of goodness that illuminates the idea that the lives of others must be respected, but such knowledge that other humans possess emotions that expose right and moral conduct, and thus goodness. It is certainly true that a caved, isolated individual, who observes the world as a plane and other beings as lacking in emotion (at least to the same degree as the individual), but is knowledge of such things that teach the individual how to act with intelligence and goodness, not some abstract concept of goodness that is suddenly able to provide insight into natural principles or an understanding of human nature. For as long as our knowledge is incorrect or unverified, we are unable to act properly upon truths.
ReplyDeleteIn equating humankind with prisoners in the depths of a cave who can only see the shadows of the things that pass behind them, Plato asserts that humans are inherently ignorant of the truth of the world. But there seems to be another layer to the argument: that their incarceration and ignorance are their own fault. In order to support my interpretation, I will regularly make comparisons between the Allegory of the Cave and the image of Plato’s line. What are these people prisoners of, exactly? If they have been in the cave since childhood, but some still have the power to break free of their chains and explore, it can be inferred that their imprisonment is entirely their choice. Those who stay at the bottom of the cave are satisfied having as little information as possible – ignorance is bliss, as the saying goes. The shadows they see and know to be reality are only distortions of what is truly real; however, the lack of substance is of little consequence to the prisoners, because in their blissful ignorance they are unaware of any other possibilities. Some, though, are not satisfied and decide to free themselves, so that they now have the ability to move about the cave and interact with the world around them. Through this interaction they can formulate a new reality for themselves, a reality more solid than that of shadows and likenesses. In regard to the Line, they move into the realm of material objects, so that more than just their sense of sight is employed. This new reality is one step closer to the realm of the Forms, and in most cases is enough to satiate any human worth their salt. But no, Plato wants more.
ReplyDeleteIn his cave, Plato places a slope, a symbol of the ardor it takes to reach the truest truth. He makes a good point in this, because of course anything that is expected to elevate one’s thinking is going to take a considerable amount of time and effort. So, anyone who even to climb this intellectual slope and venture into the intelligible realm must be among the highest caliber of person. Upon reaching the top of the hill, the light would be overwhelmingly bright, but it would also cast light on the objects in the surface world. Though not able to understand these things at first, the person would combine their confident beliefs (based on that which they observed while still in the cave) and their new-found enlightenment in order to begin to explore this third reality. We are now in Section C of Plato’s Line, filed under “thought.” To me, this section consists of knowing what one has observed and knowing that there is also more to the world that can be understood. Therein lays the reason that the comparison of the sun to true knowledge is so interesting.
From early childhood, we have all been told that it is dangerous to look at the sun. If the sun is knowledge, can our fear of direct contact with it stem from our fear of the unknown? I know I’ve spared myself the trouble of knowing the truth in order to avoid being hurt. So perhaps our imprisonment is not imprisonment at all; rather, it is a self-defense mechanism that we have developed so that we may remain happy in the reality we feel that we can control.
Plato uses the allegory of the cave to present “a situation which you can uses as an analogy for the human condition - for our education or lack of it.” (514a) In this case, it is certainly a lack of education. People living within the bowels of a dark cave since childhood, bound up, being forced to look solely at shadows definitely would pass as a lack of education. I suppose that this situation could be equated to a modern day “gamer” sitting is his dark, musty, basement, eyes glued to the T.V. furiously mashing the game controller. He is bound by a desire to beat the game and spends a ludicrous amount of time doing this. Plato is claiming that a lack of knowledge is a salient part of society and everyone is metaphorically sitting around watching the shadows cast onto the wall. Plato goes as far as saying that “they’re no different from us” (515a). In this case, our epistemic state is rather poor as a result of being oblivious to goodness and the truth. The entirety of these peoples beliefs rest on a projection of a figure of reality. It is so far from the real thing, yet sadly, it is all that they know. It seems as if these prisoners are condemned for eternity to false beliefs although I feel it can be escaped. The first step in this process is to realize that there is more in the world, a large piece of the puzzle is missing. Curiosity comes into play next, one must want to know more and ask many questions, almost as if it is the science of knowledge. After these requisites are in place, one can begin the quest for knowledge. This quest may cause a few poor reactions “And suppose someone tells him that what he’s been seeing all this time has no substance, and that he’s now closer to reality and is seeing more accurately, because of the greater reality of the things in front of his eyes – what do you imagine his reaction would be?” (514d) First off, this adventurer if you will, would not be pleased about his previous false beliefs although this may be put aside due to the newfound curiosity. Secondly, and mainly, this person would be overwhelmed. Knowledge is good, although if all knowledge was to be thrown upon someone, they would drown in it. Similar to the sun, the sun is a fantastic thing although we should not look directly at it through a telescope, our eyes would be overwhelmed. To bring ends of all of this together, Plato is accurate in using this to describe the ordinary person. Lives are being lived with horse-blinders, and we must work to take them off.
ReplyDeleteIn his Allegory of the Cave, Plato attempts to describe how everyone in our world attempts to understand knowledge, but, by using the cave, he is able to explain this difficulty in a more apparent way. First, it is important to note that in order to understand what Plato is trying to say with the cave, a deep understanding of his second allegory, the line, is necessary. Briefly, the line is used to describe a four part continuum where each part of the continuum represents another level of understanding. Essentially, the line shows the reader that there is both the realm of belief, which governs what we can see, and the realm of knowledge, which requires a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of the world. With that, Plato’s cave is designed very simply. It can be imagined as “people living in a cavernous cell down under the ground; at the far end of the cave, a long way off, there’s an entrance open to the outside world.” (514a) He continues to describe that the people can’t see anything outside of the cave as they are strapped down into a specific position. All the people can see are shadows of artefacts from the real world that are cast onto the walls of the cave by the sun. Plato continues by saying that, “the shadows of artefacts would constitute the only reality people in this situation would recognize.” (515c) Essentially, Plato is claiming that, for these people, reality is no more than a form of vaguely limned objects that appear as shadows. In Plato’s line, shadows and abstractions of real objects make up the less advanced portion of the belief realm, where the more advanced portion is when a person actually sees the object itself. The next claim is Plato’s most important. He says, “The region which is accessible to sight should be equated with the prison cell, and the firelight there with the light of the sun… the upward journey and the sight of things up on the surface of the earth [is] the mind’s ascent to the intelligible realm.” (517b) So, Plato draws an essential parallel to how people on earth attempt to reach the intelligible realm. The people in the cave can’t really see the actual objects that the shadows create; they have a “belief” of what the object will look like. As people are attempting to access the last portion of the line, or the “forms”, we need to transcend the basic conceptions of the world. We need to let go of mathematical equations and societal concepts that simply describe what reality is. Somehow, in order to do this, a person would need to climb out of the figurative “cave”, and access that knowledge that exists in some ethereal place.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I think Plato’s allegory is a great way to explain what the difference is between the third and fourth section of his line. The allegory is effective because it shows explains that the third section of the line consists of an in-depth description of how things work. For example, a mathematical equation can describe concepts such as gravity and electricity with impeccable accuracy. Unfortunately though, the equation is no more than a well-constructed set of variables that happen to describe the world. In no way does the mathematical equation actually explain to us what gravity actually is. The actual workings of gravity are far more complex than anyone currently understands. Plato’s shadows are the equivalent of the equation and the artefacts are comparable to gravity itself. In this way, his allegory is very accurate as it provides us with a comprehendible way to conceptualize the difference between the third and fourth realms. Unfortunately, his allegory falls short in that it never really describes what the fourth section actually is. It merely explains it in relation to the third. It is still unclear as to how someone could actually go about understanding gravity for example. Would it be a comprehensive understanding if you unraveled the laws of string theory to determine the exact functions of a graviton, or does an understanding of that level require something more? In the end, Plato never really asserts a clear definition to fourth section. So, while the allegory is a useful mechanism for understanding the four sections of the line, it comes with flaws as well.
ReplyDeleteTo address humankind’s ignorance, Plato’s allegory of the cave describes two conditions: imprisonment in a cave and freedom in the outside world. In a very telling analogy, he argues that all people are akin to prisoners in a cave who perceive the world only as shadows until they pursue a deeper understanding of the world. However, as Plato thoroughly describes the process of leaving the cave, his depiction of life within the cave remains somewhat ambiguous. He states that all people live most of their lives in an ignorant state, but the reason for their ignorance is cloudy. In other words, if we live our lives tied up inside a cave, who is the jailor? Plato would argue that poor education is the reason for our incarceration. He compares educating the mind to pointing an eye towards light so that it can see. Thus, he considers education the “art of orientation” (245). He claims that by trying to implant knowledge in a mind, we can only make it better suited to identifying the shadows on the cave wall. Instead, education should point a person to the mouth of the cave so that he can crawl out. However, despite Plato’s eventual clarification, the underlying reason for our ignorance is open to interpretation. Why is education so poor? Is it a misunderstanding of how to attain knowledge, or is it perhaps a fear of knowledge? According to my interpretation of Plato’s allegory, humanity is ignorant because we find true knowledge unnecessary. Inside the dim cavern, the prisoners spend their time trying to recognize shadows as they pass. Those who can quickly and accurately identify the shadows gain the praise of their fellow prisoners. I interpret this guessing game as an analogy for our society; petty and myopic in comparison with an understanding of the world. And yet, the few who manage to escape the cave in the allegory are ridiculed and killed upon their return. So why should we strive for greater knowledge when it will only lead to our downfall as we inevitably make our way back into the cave? Knowing how to recognize shadows, on the other hand, will garner admiration and affluence. As a result, education points to the wall of the cave rather than the mouth and the outside world is forgotten in our fervor to stare at the cave wall. Therefore, as long as we measure a person’s worth by his ability to identify shadows, we will always be ignorant of what casts them.
ReplyDeleteThrough describing the Allegory of the Cave, Plato arrives at an absolutely astonishing analogy to describe the obtainment of knowledge and goodness. His model does not neglect making comparisons between knowledgeable and ignorant people, in terms of both behavior and development. He proposes a model in which tied cave-dwellers, apparently representing the general public which he views as ignorant, watch mere shadows and reflections of people walking with their artifacts. The fact that these people are incapable of both realizing and seeing the real objects, but merely their reflections represents the fact that ignorant people are unable to perceive the "true" reality and knowledge which would be the objects themselves, in my opinion. A few cave-dwellers are experimentally brought to the surface of Earth, first blinded by light, and eventually accustomed to it. Initially, these stunned former prisoners first look at shadows on the ground of objects when unaccustomed to light, then at the objects themselves, and finally at the sun itself, which is depicted as the ultimate goodness. After this rigorous process of obtaining knowledge, these cave-dwellers return to their habitats, willing to sacrifice freedom for ruling over their fellow cave-dwellers, who are by then trivially playing games of identifying the objects and people who are reflected. He uses this Cave allegory in conjunction with his Line of Forms (which divides likenesses, confidence, thought, and then knowledge) to show the impressive gap between the capable philosophers and undeveloped citizens.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Plato’s analogy is absolutely correct. He seems to refute all possible claims against his argument. Why doesn’t the cave-dweller simply stay on Earth and become a ruler? Well, that would mean he is very ambitious like a timocrat, and does not possess the modest characteristics of an aristocrat, who has the highest knowledge. Does an upward ascension and subsequent return cause the same reaction in everyone? Plato would use his response that “‘what education should be’” is “‘the art of orientation’”, referring to education as the obtainment of knowledge. So only he who is properly orientated towards knowledge and goodness would be capable of reaching it.
Thus, Plato, in my opinion, is making a profound statement that knowledge is not memorization or cramming of facts, but rather one’s approach and mindset towards the World. Partly, Plato actually seems to be claiming that knowledge is believing in the existence of a greater world and that all actions pertaining to the present world of such person are trivial. It seems truly knowledgeable people are those who think broadly and generally and approach life situations in such a manner. In other words, he realizes that his present life is rounded with an “eternal sleep”, that his current life is nothing compared to his future and past. Consequently, he is less involved with trivial, worldly issues and more with intangible but essential issues, such as contemplating abstract concepts like morality. Such concepts, it seems he believes, are otherworldly, and it requires the ultimate skill to achieve accurate acquisition of abilities to work with such concepts. However, if no one can go to Heaven and back whenever desired, how can that person escape his state of constant enslavement to this World?
Plato’s allegory of the cave is the description of how and what we learn as humans. We are the prisoners in the cave and we are being taught things, which we believe, are true, these are the shadows in the cave. What we are seeing of shadows of artifacts, which are being held up by people attempting to deceive us into believing certain things. The fire, the source of our deception, is creating the shadows. If it weren’t for the fire we would not be in the process of being indoctrinated. Everything inside the cave that is teaching us and creating these teachings is not real. We are being taught what the captures want us to believe. That is why we are in the cave, so we may be taught in a realm enclosed from the outside world, the world of reality. The world outside is the real forms and very few achieve freedom from the cave and are allowed to learn these forms. Plato also describes prisoners who escape and are blinded or return to the cave. These are the people who see the true forms but have been so indoctrinated that they do not believe what they are seeing. They prefer returning to the world of deception or in their case the familiar world. They fear going beyond their comfort zone and prefer staying in the cave where they are only taught what they can comprehend.
ReplyDeleteThe exit from the cave to the outside world is the separation between the second and third group in Plato’s analogy of the divided line. The exit separates our belief of what is true from the forms and the mathematical and geometrical truths. That is the purpose of the divisor of the second and third group in the line. Plato’s cave is an example and more in depth description of what he believes the divided line depicts.
Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" presents a fairly simple idea in an interesting way; although he takes a very long time to say it, Plato essentially believes that human beings live in blissful ignorance of the truth, which he calls "The Forms." The forms, he explains, are things "which only thought can see"(511a). For example, a human being can hold up three fingers, count to three, or draw a picture of the number three, but "three" itself can only exist in the mind; three trees are three trees, not the number three. The forms constitute everything in the universe, and in order to truly understand anything one must first understand the forms. In Plato's mind, since most people do not contemplate such ideas, they therefore do not truly understand the world they live in. However, the escape of such ignorance is attainable; one can become enlightened and see the universe in the correct way through the study of philosophy. In "The Allegory of the Cave" Plato speaks of humans who believe they understand the world but in reality have false perceptions of what goes on around them. These people represent the average person who believes in his or her simple mind that they have things figured out when in reality they don't even know what "the forms" are; however, regardless of their false perception of the universe, this person can live their life in relative happiness. In saying this, Plato has essentially stated that ignorance is bliss, and although an enlightened life is attainable, most people do not bother to achieve this state of knowledge. Plato then discusses how a person that comes out of this cave and into the sun represents a shift in the thinking of an average person towards the heightened intellectual state of a philosopher. He then says that someone who moves into the sunlight will at first be blinded and confused by the sun which symbolizes the new knowledge which the person acquired via philosophy. This knowledge, having changed the way they look at the world, will seem confusing and even fake to the person at first, but then once they begin to adjust to the light they will never want to go back to the cave; a truly enlightened person will have a sense of peace and happiness that cannot be achieved by a non-philosopher. Essentially, Plato believes that through the study of philosophy a person can achieve a better life due to the knowledge that comes with the analysis of the forms. I believe that Plato is correct in saying this, as many people go about their lives without truly thinking about what makes up the world they live in. While I do not necessarily believe that contemplating the forms is the best way to achieve enlightenment, I think that the analysis of morality and other commonly-discussed philosophical topics is an effective means by which a person can become a better human being, as well as a more self-aware individual with a happier life.
ReplyDeletePlato’s cave analogy is often regarded as one of his most famous examples of his view of society’s distribution of understanding of the world. His idea is based on his scaled view of how deeply one can perceive the universe around them using their knowledge, starting from what he calls the “Forms”. The forms are the highest level of understanding and knowledge, their existence cannot be described as they take a philosophical thinking to grasp, but the common and intuitive example used is the “circle”: There are circles everywhere, we see circles, we can draw them, and we can recognize them, but there is a “Form of Circularity” which denotes the base qualities of being a circle; it is not a physical existence, but rather the most fundamental scale on which circles exist, and the qualities that represent the circularity itself. These Forms are represented in the cave analogies as the outside world; the “real” existence of everything, the place that only the most enlightened individuals can see and perceive. Then there is the figurines, dancing in front of the fire and casting the shadows; the figurines are only a representation of the forms, their equivalents being the circular objects as opposed to the Form of Circularity. Then finally there are the shadows, the “copies of the copies”; they are not even the representations of the real objects but instead the shadows they cast. This final lowest form is what Plato claims most of society perceives and is incapable of grasping beyond their reaches until they are aided by people of higher knowledge, but is he correct in this assumption?
ReplyDeleteI can admit I often overestimate humanity, but in this situation I would like to claim that Plato has a very cynical view of people. I understand the suggestion that most people do not live in the “World of the Forms” and that many people don’t even possess the mental capacity to grasp the forms, but to suggest that people only live in the understanding of the lowest form, the “reflections” of the objects which represent the forms, is somewhat unfair. One must realize that manifestations of the forms are just the objects which somewhat obey by their rules; the physical manifestation of the Form of Circularity is simply a Circle. To understand what a circle is, the laws by which it obeys, and even the mathematical ideal of a circle is on the most basic principal is a concept that is not beyond a major section of the adult population. Even if an individual cannot describe the geometric properties of a circle, they can describe one, draw one, and recognize one (for the most part); in the cave analogy, this level of understanding is an individual seeing the figurines, something Plato states most people don’t do until they are guided to this point by people of higher knowledge. Unless Plato’s point applies to elementary school teacher teaching their kids about shapes, it’s simply unfair to say that people don’t live in even the world of the copies until there are pulled into the truth by a more enlightened individual. When Plato makes the claim that most people can only see the shadows, he infers that most people can only see the reflections cast by the objects who obey by the forms, and unless people are “only capable of seeing the reflections of a circle” instead of the circle, the claim is untrue. Plato is a fan of putting himself above others, as can be seen by him claiming to possess the capacity to be a king, but when he puts himself two levels above the rest of the world by his cave analogy, he’s trying to raise himself higher up by putting the rest of the world down as far as he can.
I believe that Plato is claiming that an ordinary person is blinded by their own ignorance so much that they don't know what is and isn't reality. And that because of this, those with an actual understanding of what reality is are able to manipulate and control those who don't. Like in the Matrix for example, Neo was considered to be the "chosen one", but he didn't even know this because of the world he was used to living in and the lie he was used to seeing, he couldn't even tell between a virtual world and reality. Without the help of Morphious and others, he could have been stuck in this imaginary world forever. But also shown in the movie, there is always a flaw to the system, so i would have to believe that even though some people may be blinded or consumed by their ignoring and lack of true "knowledge" there will still be a way in the slightest of cases to break the system and escape from this false world. In fact, how do we know if people haven't already broke out of this epistemic state? And though it's hard to believe that everything we know currently and will continue to be learning throughout life would be false knowledge, I could see some truth behind this idea. Maybe it just being our very own government controlling what we see and learn or maybe to the extent of the matrix were there is an extraterrestrial life form controlling us. This ideas seem far catch when you first begin thinking about this, but is it really that hard to believe? So in conclusion, I believe that Plato is claiming that an ordinary person has knowledge, but it's false knowledge and doesn't know the difference between reality and a virtual world. And Plato's allegory in the cave is the correct way of viewing the human quest for knowledge because how do we know what the differences are between what is and isn't false knowledge? Does our school system supply us with knowledge we in life or is it all a false world to distract us from what truly is reality and knowledge? Will we be able to figure this out? I believe so because there is never a perfect system and there will always be a flaw in it, and humans are known best for pointing out and finding flaws within others
ReplyDelete