A Convincing Reproduction of the Real - Essay Example

How did Plato and Aristotle differ in the way they believed the mind should perceive reality The term reality perhaps most often refers to that which constitutes the actual thing, as distinguished from what is merely apparent or external and underlies and is the truth of appearances or phenomena. The first definition of reality as beyond external appearances, even obscured by mediation through language, is in dramatic tension with this second definition of reality as, not the presence, but simply a convincing reproduction of the real. This second definition of reality as only a resemblance, without a more than visual tie to the real, further develops in debates on hyperreality; a term used beginning around the early 1970s (Kroiz, 2002). When we speak of the material world, we think we are referring to the underlying reality, the object of our perception. In fact we are only describing our image of reality. The materiality we observe, the solidness we feel, the whole of the real world that we know, are, like color, sound, smell, and all the other qualities we experience, qualities manifesting in the mind. This is the startling conclusion we are forced to acknowledge; the stuff of our world-the world we know and appear to live within-is not matter, but mind (Russell). While psychology is interested in the nature of humanity, in understanding how human beings function, psychology is by no means the only field of inquiry that seeks answers to the puzzles of human nature.The earliest roots of the modern discipline of psychology can be traced to two different approaches to human behavior. Philosophy is a means of exploring and understanding various aspects of the nature of the world in general - including human nature. Philosophy operates primarily through introspection - the self-examination ofideas and inner experiences. The second field from which psychology derives is physiology- the scientific study of living organisms and of life sustaining processes and functions. Plato (428-348 B.C.) and Aristotle (384- 322 B.C.) also believed that the mind was to be found within the body. Plato located it in the brain and Aristotle placed it in the heart. Plato and Aristotle had a profound effect on modern thinking not only in psychology but also in many fields. With regard to psychology they particularly impacted three areas: the relationship between mind and body, the use of observation versus introspection as a means of discovering truth, the question of what is the original source of our ideas (Sternberg as quoted by Griffin, 2004). Plato's theory of representation is substantially different from Aristotle's, for whom some sensations are objective. Reason for Aristotle need only distinguish between accurate and inaccurate sensory images in order to gain access to the real outside world. For Plato no sensory evidence is objective. Reality is only within the inner, ideal, remembered world. Plato and Aristotle had different views on the nature of reality.Plato had a very different attitude towards representation than Aristotle. Plato believed that reality lies not in concrete objects that we are aware of through our senses but in the ideal, abstract forms that these objects represent. These ideal forms exist in a timeless dimension of pure abstract thought. The objects we sense are simply poor, imperfect and transient copies of the "real" idea that exists in our minds. Plato reasoned that the head must be the seat of the mind because it resembles a sphere, which he considered to be a perfect abstract form. Mind and body interact with one another according to Plato but they are essentially different and the mind is superior to the body. Truth is found in our thoughts (via introspection) not through our senses (via observation). Aristotle, in contrast, believed that reality lies only in the concrete world of objects that we apprehend through our senses. From Aristotle's point of view, Plato's abstract forms derive from concrete objects. He believed that reality is a unified whole, that it is not separated into physical substance versus the non-physical mind. His position on this issue is known as monism. Plato's position was a form of dualism. According to Aristotle, the mind (soul) doesn't exist apart from the body. It is an illusion, a byproduct of anatomical and physiological activity. Because Aristotle held to this physically-based view of reality, he believed that the study of the mind and body are one and the same. He believed that we understand the mind by studying the body and that we rely on observation of concrete objects and actions (rather than on our own thoughts - introspection) to discover truth (Sternberg as quoted by Griffin, 2004). Aristotle was an empiricist. Empiricists hold that knowledge is gained by experience, observation and experimentation. Plato was a rationalist. Rationalists believe that knowledge is gained through thinking and analyzing in an effort to understand the world and people's relationship to it. Aristotle's view formed the foundation for the methods of empirical psychological research. Plato's view formed the foundation for theorizing about psychological processes, an activity that may or may not lead to subsequent empirical investigation. Today most psychologists (and most scientists in general) would agree that both approaches have merit. Most would agree that theorizing needs empirical research to confirm its conclusions while empirical research needs theorizing to organize and make sense of its observations. With regard to the origin of ideas, Aristotle believed that ideas come from experience. Plato believed that ideas are innate and need to be "dug out" of the places in the mind where they might be "hiding." This foreshadowed the modern debate (known as the nature-nurture controversy) over whether abilities and dispositions such as athletic skills or intelligence are innate or acquired through various kinds of experiences. Today most psychologists would say that innate ability and experience interact with one another to produce many aspects of personality, skills and abilities (Sternberg as quoted by Griffin, 2004). Platonic Dualism The most basic form of dualism is substance dualism, which requires that mind and body be composed of two ontologically distinct substances. According to the dualist, mind (or soul) is comprised of a non-physical substance, while body is constituted of the physical substance known as matter. According to most substance dualists, mind and body are capable of causally affecting each other. This form of substance dualism is known as Interactionism. Plato likens the body to a prison in which the soul is confined. While imprisoned, the mind is compelled to investigate the truth by means of the body and is incapable (or severely hindered) of acquiring knowledge of the highest, eternal, unchanging, and non-perceptible objects of knowledge, the Forms. Forms are universals and represent the essences of sensible particulars. While encumbered by the body, the soul is forced to seek truth via the organs of perception, but this result in an inability to comprehend that which is most real. We perceive equal things, but not Equality itself. We perceive beautiful things but not Beauty itself. To achieve knowledge or insight into the pure essences of things, the soul must itself become pure through the practice of philosophy or, as Plato has Socrates provocatively put it in the dialogue, through practicing dying while still alive. The soul must struggle to disassociate itself from the body as far as possible and turn its attention toward the contemplation of intelligible but invisible things. Though perfect understanding of the Forms is likely to elude us in this life (if only because the needs of the body and its infirmities are a constant distraction), knowledge is available to pure souls before and after death, which is defined as the separation of the soul from the body (Calef, 2006) Aristotle's view of reality and method is a radical anomaly in the philosophical tradition - a validation of human common sense, and a repudiation of nonsense. Mind (soul) is defined by Aristotle as the perfect expression or realization of a natural body. From this definition it follows that there is a close connection between psychological states, and physiological processes. Aristotle regards the soul or mind not as the product of the physiological conditions of the body, but as the truth of the body -- the substance in which only the bodily conditions gain their real meaning. The soul manifests its activity in certain "faculties" or "parts" which correspond with the stages of biological development, and are the faculties of nutrition (peculiar to plants), that of movement (peculiar to animals), and that of reason (peculiar to humans). These faculties resemble mathematical figures in which the higher includes the lower, and must be understood not as like actual physical parts, but like such aspects as convex and concave which we distinguish in the same line. The mind remains throughout a unity: and it is absurd to speak of it, as Plato did, as desiring with one part and feeling anger with another. Sense perception is a faculty of receiving the forms of outward objects independently of the matter of which they are composed, just as the wax takes on the figure of the seal without the gold or other metal of which the seal is composed. As the subject of impression, perception involves a movement and a kind of qualitative change; but perception is not merely a passive or receptive affection. It in turn acts, and, distinguishing between the qualities of outward things, becomes a movement of the soul through the medium of the body. For Aristotle, the heart is the common or central sense organ. It recognizes the common qualities which are involved in all particular objects of sensation. It is, first, the sense which brings us a consciousness of sensation. Secondly, in one act before the mind, it holds up the objects of our knowledge and enables us to distinguish between the reports of different senses. (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2006). Aristotle seems to have a basic belief in human perception and mind as the best means available to us of attaining knowledge. This is a position that every human individual implicitly believes and takes for granted in his daily life, but it is one often challenged by philosophers both in Aristotle's age and ours. Some of these common sense beliefs are: reality is real; contradictory predicates cannot apply to the same thing, in the same way, at the same time; human beings prefer to live; and that facts are facts. Aristotle rejects the mystical Platonic notion of a 'higher' reality which is beyond the reach of normal human perception. As for the mystical Platonists, and their 'higher' reality, all we can say is that while human senses may not be perfect, they are the best we have; by definition, we cannot know or consider things which fall outside the range of human perception. Therefore, it is useless to denigrate our knowledge of things as being inferior to the knowledge of Forms - we have no way of knowing if these Forms exist, and if they do, we cannot know anything about them. Aristotle's suggestion is that essences of things are contained not in their "Forms", but in themselves. Every horse or desk or house has something essential in it which is common to all other members of its species and kind (Creative Commons). Bibliography Calef, S. (2006). Dualism. Retrievd November 11, 2007 from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Website http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/dualism.htm Creative Commons. Aristotle and Common Sense. Retrieved November 11, 2007, from http://wso.williams.edu/rbhattac/aristotlesense.html Griffin, M.F. (2004). The Roots and Branches of Psychology: Historical and Contemporary Views on Human Nature and Psychology. Retrieved November 11, 2007, from http://www.gpc.edu/mgriffin/PSYC1101/WritingAssignments/RootsandBranches.html Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2006). Aristotle. Retrieved November 11, 2007, from http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/a/aristotl.htm Kroiz, L. (2002). Reality, hyperreality (2). Retrieved November 11, 2007, from The University of Chicago Website http://humanities.uchicago.edu/faculty/mitchell/glossary2004/ realityhyperreality2.htm Russell, P. Reality and Consciousness: Turning the Superparadigm Inside Out. Retrieved November 11, 2007, from Read More