Plato and Aristotle both talk about similar concepts when they describe knowledge. However they look at it from two opposing angles altogether. The same shall be discussed hereunder.
In simple words, Aristotle focuses of smaller elements as being integral to the concept of knowledge, while Plato believes that universal concepts are the key to the essence of knowledge. Determining this difference is vital.
Plato was of the opinion that belief is to be separated from knowledge on account of its justification. Beliefs, he elucidated, can be there without adequate inquiry or scrutiny into a particular matter. However, the knowledge acquired has to be based upon rationalistic ideas, that are guarded by logic and understanding. This is what would make the same knowledge acceptable to many people at the same time, whilst a belief may well hold true for just a singular person amongst all humanity.
Aristotle on the contrary believed that knowledge lies in the understand of smaller factors, which will gradually all add up to join the jigsaw puzzle, and show us the bigger picture. He claimed that by knowing the essence of fundamental principles, one would be able to make sense of what is going on the bigger canvas. Inadvertently, this is a consequence of knowing as to what really can be a basic ingredient within the bigger construct, and then studying the same for greater knowledge.
Plato advocates the importance of all-encompassing knowledge, which ultimately gives birth to and yields smaller constructs. This reality can be identified with, and the highest thinking can subsequently be attained by means of knowing what knowledge is. Contemplation gives insight, and ultimately self-actualization. There can be no better strength than realizing one's true potential of existence. All our endeavors or desires primarily follow from the necessity of our intrinsic nature. This concept given by him refers to the identification of the power that the human being yields and associates from within himself, thereby attempting to acquire knowledge at the bequest of all available events.
Aristotle on the other hand states that smaller elements combine together to make all knowledge, and therefore understanding should begin from smaller ideas, which may be expounded into complex theories. Whatever one might seek or ask, it is basically a product of how one identifies with the concept of knowledge. The most significant thinking here becomes knowing about oneself. A person, who realizes the details, is truly on the path of acquiring knowledge. If one has the tendency to doubt one's self-concepts, then true actualization of knowledge can never be there. Knowledge starts from knowing oneself - it is only with reference to the same would one ever be able to gather some perspective. "Although he had the idea of constructing a system for deduction, he was never able to construct one. Instead, he relied on his dialectic, which was a confusion between different sciences and methods" (Bocheski, 1951).
Mysteries, intricacies and secrets of the finite world can only be known with reference to the person. Therefore, if and when a person appreciates his own personal standing and inception, it subsequently becomes the greatest source of endowment and fulfillment for the person. The fundamental factor here is about insisting on knowing reality as it is. This again is a propagation of the belief that an individual