Theory of forms
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- This article is about Plato's forms. For other uses of "form" and "forms", see Form (disambiguation).
Theory of Forms typically refers to Plato's belief that the material world as it seems to us is not the real world, but only a shadow of the real world. All relation as form becomes the basis for discovery of the form, an inference of the ancient Greek schools. The allegory of the cave then becomes the distinction in their inference as objective. Plato spoke of forms (sometimes capitalized in translations: The Forms) in formulating his solution to the problem of universals. A cause to the relation then clearly appears this singluar inference form relative to all other.
The forms, according to Plato, are roughly speaking archetypes or abstract representations of the many types and properties (that is, of universals) of things we see all around us.
[edit] Forms
 |
| Platonic idealism |
| Platonic realism |
| Middle Platonism |
| Neoplatonism |
| Articles on Neoplatonism |
| Platonic epistemology |
| Socratic method |
| Socratic dialogues |
| Theory of forms |
| Platonic doctrine of recollection |
| Individuals |
|---|
| Plato |
| Socrates |
| Discussions of Plato's works |
| Dialogues of Plato |
| Plato's metaphor of the sun |
| Analogy of the divided line |
| Allegory of the cave |
Form and idea are terms used to translate the Greek word eidos (plural eide). "Idea" is a misleading translation, because for Plato, the eide do not exist in the human mind. Nevertheless, both terms eidos and idea stem from the same verb "orw-an", which means "seeing".
According to Plato's view, there is a form for every corresponding type of object in reality: forms of dogs, human beings, mountains, colors, courage, love, and goodness. Indeed, for Plato, "God" is identical to the Form of the Good. Forms exist in a "Platonic heaven," and when people die, their souls achieve reunion with the forms. Plato makes it clear that souls originate in this "Platonic heaven" and have recollection of it even in life.
The objects that participate in a Form are called particulars. Forms are not the cause of a particular. If the Form cannot exist, the object under that Form--the particular--cannot exist. The Forms constitute the possibility of things, they are the necessary condition for a particular to exist.
These Forms represent the essence of various objects: they are that without which, a thing would not be the kind of thing it is. For example, there are countless tables in the world but the Form of tableness is at the core, it is the essence, of all of them. Plato held that the World of Forms was separate from our own world and also the true basis of reality. Forms are, in this way, the most pure of all things. Furthermore, Plato believed that true knowledge/intelligence was the ability for a person to grasp the world of Forms with their mind.
A Form is aspatial (outside the world) and atemporal (outside of time). Atemporal, that is, it does not exist within any time period. It did not start, there is no duration in time, and it will not end. It is not eternal. It exists outside of time. Forms are aspatial in that they have no spatial dimensions, and thus no orientation in space. They are non-physical, but they are not in the mind. Forms are extra-mental.
A form is an objective "blueprint" of perfection. The Forms are perfect themselves because they are unchanging. For example, say we have a triangle drawn on a blackboard. A triangle is a polygon with 3 sides. The triangle as it is on the blackboard is far from perfect. However, it is only the intelligibility of the Form "triangle" that allows us to know the drawing on the chalkboard is a triangle.
Several of Plato's dialogues make use of the Forms, including Plato's Parmenides, which outline several of Plato's own objections to his Theory of Forms.
[edit] Evidence of Forms
The idea of Forms was explained or alluded to in several Platonic Dialogues, most notably the Republic. Various forms of evidence are given for Plato's belief in Forms.
- The ethical argument. Heraclitus argues that everything is in motion, thus giving rise to ethical relativism. However, by arguing that only our false material world is in motion, and that the world of forms is static, Plato could save moral universals by postulating the Form of the Good.
- The argument from human perception. We call both the sky and blue jeans by the same color: Blue. However, clearly a pair of jeans and the sky are not the same color. Thus, we somehow have an idea of the basic form Blueness which we can relate to various objects.
- The argument from Perfection. No one has ever seen a perfect circle, nor a perfectly straight line, yet everyone knows what a circle and a straight line are. Again, Plato contends that via reincarnation we can have a recollection of the perfect forms. It was during extreme physical stress (i.e. birth) that we forget the Forms. If during life you recollect all of the Forms and learn to love the Forms, you can escape the circle of reincarnation.
The debate about forms would become among the most important discussions in the middle ages, though the notion of forms as being otherworldly was typically rejected. Kant revived the Platonic theory (In contrast to Aristotle's theory about forms; see: Hylomorphism) in his suggestion that we can not know things-in-themselves. In more recent times, the notion of the form has been rejected by Heidegger.
[edit] Criticisms of Platonic Forms
Plato offered his own criticisms of the theory of forms in his dialogue Parmenides. Among these is the famous Third Man Argument. It is debated whether Plato saw these criticisms off as conclusively disproving the theory of forms. Of note, he excludes forms from his last work, The Laws.
Aristotle rejected his teacher's (Plato) conception of Forms. His rejection was perhaps best presented in the Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle believed that Plato erred in assuming that Forms were 'otherworldly'. This error was the result, Aristotle believed, of Plato's assumption that since the human mind could contemplate a particular object and its abstract form separately, then both must exist separately.
Aristotle claimed that the human mind naturally thought in the abstract and that the fact that a person could separate forms from objects in their own mind didn't necessarily mean that forms existed separately from objects. Aristotle calls the theory of forms "idle chatter" in Posterior Analytics.
