Final Revision Guide Philosophy OF Religion PDF

Preview

Summary

Philosophy Notes...

Description

PHILOSOPHICAL LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT 1.) Ancient Philosophical Influences Background  Ancient Greek philosophy is dominated by two philosophers: Plato and Aristotle. These men are called the fathers of philosophy.  Both were crucial in the development of western and middle eastern thought for the last two thousand years. Their reach includes, mathematics, philosophy, ethics, politics and much more.  Aristotle was Plato’s pupil and Plato was in turn the pupil of Socrates.  Socrates never wrote anything down; his ideas are contained in Plato’s works which are written as a dialogue between Socrates and members of the Greek elite in Athens at the time. Aristotle was then Plato’s student at the Academy in Athens.  Plato and Aristotle disagreed on where universal truth about reality could be found which is encapsulated in the above painting by the artist Raphael. It is also significant to note that this painting is found in the Vatican in Rome which illustrates how influential both Philosophers would be on Christian thought though both of them lived over 300 years before Christ.  In the image, Plato points to the sky – highlighting his concern with the metaphysical realm that can only be discovered through philosophical investigation. (Metaphysical – the realm beyond the physical. The TRUE reality.)  Aristotle points to the ground – highlighting his concern with the physical realm that can be discovered through science.

Plato Plato was the student of Socrates. Socrates was a poor and controversial philosopher and teacher who spent his life asking people difficult questions trying to discover answers and truth. He was never satisfied with the answers given to him and was eventually condemned to death under the accusation of ‘corrupting the youth of Athens’. Socrates himself claimed that the only thing he knew was that he knew nothing. This is why he never wrote anything down. Plato was Socrates’ student and he wrote about Socrates and so Socratic Philosophy contained in Plato’s books is also called Platonic Philosophy. Plato describes Socrates’ personality as difficult. His role was to antagonize, to try to discover the truth by a process called dialectics where he asked people questions and tried to annoy them or illustrate to them the errors in their thinking.  Plato and Socrates were not content with our normal knowledge of reality. The world as it appears to us normally is essentially unreal and a pale reflection of the true nature of things. Ordinary knowledge is based on sense observation and is therefore untrustworthy. True knowledge can only be found through reason.

1



This led to Plato’s two great contributions to modern Philosophy, The Theory of the Forms and the Analogy of the Cave. Both of these can be found in the dialogue ‘The Republic’. The Analogy of the Cave

   

















The Republic is a dialogue, written by Plato around 380 BC. It is Plato's best-known work and has proven to be one of the most intellectually and historically influential works of philosophy and political theory. In it, Socrates along with various Athenians and foreigners, discuss the meaning of justice and examine whether or not the just man is happier than the unjust man. Plato attempts to illustrate how ordinary knowledge, known as empirical knowledge (from the senses) cannot be trusted and that true knowledge is metaphysical (above/beyond the physical) and accessible through reason. He asks his audience to imagine a Cave…

Imagine a cave underground, Plato says. In the cave are prisoners who have lived their entire lives chained together facing a wall. They cannot at any point turn their heads and have never been told about the nature of the cave. Behind them is a fire and a raised walkway. In-between the fire and the prisoners objects are routinely paraded casting an intricate series of shadows on the cave wall in front of the prisoners. Naturally, Socrates says, the prisoners assume that the shadow images are the true nature of reality because they are all they have ever known. They simply have no way of knowing that they are actually illusions. One day, a prisoner is set free and dragged out of the cave. At first he is deeply confused. His eyes cannot adjust to the light. Once they have adjusted, he starts taking in the true nature of reality. The ‘real’ world is far more ‘real’ and vivid than he or his fellow prisoners could ever have imagined. Filled with his new knowledge, he runs back into the cave to share his discovery with his fellow prisoners. However, because his eyes are not adjusted to the darkness in the cave, he appears clumsy and stupid to the prisoners who simply don’t believe him and laugh at his stories. The purpose of the analogy is to illustrate how ordinary knowledge that we gain from the sense world around us is assumed to be all that there is. However Plato is claiming that the world we inhabit in our ordinary lives is actually a shadowy reflection of a more ‘real’ world. This is known as the world of the ‘Forms’. Plato is also illustrating that true and real knowledge is often misunderstood and ridiculed in its own time by people who are too comfortable or invested in the world in which they inhabit. This perhaps explains why Socrates himself was put to death for ‘corrupting the youth of Athens’

2

Object in Analogy Prisoners Chains Shadows Prisoner who is set free The Sun/The Fire

What it means Ordinary humans Our senses What we take to be real in ordinary life, what we can feel with our 5 senses. The Philosopher The Forms, the true nature of reality, in particular the form of ‘the good’ which imparts all substance to all other forms and to shadows

The Forms 



 





Plato’s second great contribution to western philosophy is his concept of the forms. The idea of the forms can actually be found within the analogy of the cave. The forms are the essential ‘real’ nature of reality outside the cave. They are part of the INTELLIGIBLE world. The shadows on the wall are simply a paled, distorted image of the forms and are part of the VISIBLE world. The Forms are what underpin and give structure to all reality. They are perfect and present in all of reality, however, they cannot be viewed directly through the senses. This is because the world that is available to our senses is a shadowy illusory world that is only a pale distortion of the forms. The only way the forms can be accessed fully is through REASON. The way Plato reasons that the forms must exist is that the world we normally see, our shadow world, is full of impermanence and change. However, we seem to be able to identify structures and fixed ideas that persist despite the change we see around us. For example, no one has ever seen a perfect apple. There are hundreds of different kinds of apples: green apples, red apples, big apples, small apples, rotting apples, bruised apples. However, despite all this change, we can identify that there is one thing that unites all these different apples. This is the FORM APPLE. The same is true of beautiful things. We have all experienced beautiful things: -beautiful people, -beautiful music, -beautiful art, -beautiful actions,

3

-beautiful cloths. What is it that unites all these things? The FORM BEAUTY that all of these objects participate in. The only true knowledge is of the forms; all other knowledge is simply distorted reflections of the forms as they participate in other material sensory objects.  The ultimate form that underpins, unites and gives structure to all other forms and therefore the whole universe is the form of the GOOD. This is illustrated in the Republic with the analogy of the sun. The sun illuminates, gives life, energy and structure to all life on earth in the same way as the form the GOOD illuminates, gives energy and structure to all of reality.  Plato illustrates his argument with the example of a slave boy in his dialogue ‘The Meno’. Why is it that a slave boy, who has never had any formal training in mathematics, can work out a complex equation about the surface area of a triangle?  It is because, before we were born to this imperfect world, all of our immortal souls were once living in the world of the forms. We therefore all have knowledge of the forms that is innate and inborn and therefore all knowledge and learning is simply The form of the good, is the highest form, it participates in and remembering. The slave boy had innate underpins all other forms as well as all shadows and reflections knowledge of the form ‘Maths’, or ‘Triangle’.  An easy way of seeing how this works is by asking someone who has never seen a perfect equilateral triangle to draw one. They will still be able to, because they are familiar with the idea/form.  Philosophers, because they have full access to the forms of Good, Justice, Beauty etc. Should be the rulers. 

Aristotle Aristotle rejects the Platonic idea that there are two separate realms, the visible world of the senses and the intelligible realm of the forms. For Aristotle, there are still forms that guide and control matter, however, these forms are found in the visible world and accessible through the senses. Aristotle therefore focusses his attention on the natural world around him rather than the metaphysical world of pure reason. For Aristotle, everything has a purpose. Aristotle’s Philosophy is based on a particular view about nature and the universe. That view is that the universe has a natural order that works to achieve an 'end' or 'purpose'. This order, direction or purpose is determined by a supernatural power. Human beings are part of the natural world and so they too have a 'purpose' or 'nature'.

4















Aristotle had to explain why we seem to have reliable, repeatable knowledge of things which by nature are always changing. For example, the world is always changing but we seem to understand our life according to it. For example an acorn and an oak tree are, physically, two very different things, however we know that actually they are one and the same thing but in different stages of growth or development. How is it that we can know this? He explained this by suggesting that substances have two aspects: matter which changes, and form which is permanent. Form is a thing’s actuality – what it actually is in essence; matter is a thing’s potentiality – a thing’s potential to become a different form. All forms are actual, and everything has the possibility / potential to become something else. Actuality always precedes potentiality (e.g. fathers procreate sons, a father is a being in which the form of a man is already actualised); so there must always be an actual being existing as the cause of any potential being – an idea which led Aristotle to consider the idea of a First Efficient Cause to start the ball rolling. The idea is similar to Plato’s Forms, the crucial difference is that the form is found within the sensory world in the object itself rather than in the metaphysical world that is only accessible through reason. According to Aristotle, then, there are four causes which explain why the world works the way it does, and why everything is the way it is:

Aristotle believed that everything has a nature and purpose. It achieves supreme good when it fulfils its purpose.

Aristotle’s four causes that led to a thing being the way it is. Material cause: the matter or stuff a thing is made from- statue made from stone. Formal cause: the kind of thing that it is (form, plan) Efficient cause: The agent that brings something about- stone tools or sculptor Final cause: the goal, purpose or aim that a thing moves towards.

Example of the spoon:

  



  

      

The first was the material cause or the material out of which something is composed. We will use the example of a spoon. The spoon is made of metal. The second was the formal cause or the plan that caused it to exist. The spoon was designed by a craftsman who planned its shape and size. The third was the efficient cause or that which brings something about or causes it to be. The craftsman shapes the spoon so that we can recognise it And the fourth was the final cause or the purpose of something. The purpose of the spoon is that it is to be used for eating.

5















Aristotle developed his thinking into explaining the final cause for living things as well, that is, their purpose. It is not obvious what the final cause of a natural object is. The final cause of a non-living object such as a statue must have been in the mind of the artist (external to it). The case of a living object is different. Aristotle sees the final cause in terms of the function it performs. Objects in nature seem to be driven towards a goal to obtain a certain form proper to them, and their actions are all directed towards this goal. Aristotle refers to this goal as 'telos'. Telos - the end or purpose of something or its function; for Aristotle, the telos of a human being was to be rational and moral. Aristotle thought the teleological goal for man was to live a life of a certain kind, that is, to be a reasoning creature and to use reason to recognise how to behave (i.e. morally). It is when human beings act morally that their purpose or telos is fulfilled. Hence the combination of reason and moral action is in accordance with the natural order of things. Overall, Aristotle saw the goal (purpose) of human life as 'eudaimonia' (happiness). He argued that we pursue other goals in order ultimately to achieve happiness. Confusion can arise because of modern usage of the word 'happiness'. For Aristotle, 'happiness' was very different from 'pleasure' since he regarded the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as mere gratification. In contrast, happiness was living well and being fulfilled, since it involved behaving rationally (i.e. consistently with human nature and the order of the natural world). Therefore, he thought that making reasoned choices would bring Eudaimonia. Eudaimonia - a term used by Aristotle literally meaning 'good spirit' and is translated as 'happiness' or 'well-being'.

The Prime Mover 







For Aristotle, the entire natural world is in motion, it is moving from potentiality to actuality. For example an apple tree is first a potential apple tree (seed) and then strives to fulfil its telos of actualizing its potential. Aristotle asks if the entire universe is in motion and moving towards a goal, then what started this motion? When we look at our world we see that the motion in objects is caused by motion in other objects which in turn is caused by the motion in still other objects. For example, - a snooker ball is moving because a cue ball hit it. 6

- The cue ball is moving because the cue hit it - The cue is moving because the human hit it - The human is moving because he has eaten food etc……..







Aristotle reasons that logically, there must have been a first prime mover that is - The original cause behind all movement - Not moving itself, otherwise we may ask, what moved it? The prime mover therefore makes its first move as a final cause (it’s purpose) not as an efficient cause (the bringer about of motion) because it cannot itself be effected by moving, it is perfect. It causes motion but DOES NOT MOVE - Always existent - The prime mover is immaterial (not made of anything physical) - It is perfect - It is pure actuality (form) with no potentiality (matter) The Prime or first mover seems to be, for Aristotle, similar to the idea of God. However, logically, he cannot cause the first movement through his own motion as we may then be entitled to ask, who moved the mover? Therefore how does the first movement happen? This is the idea that God is pure actuality, he cannot make movement through his own movement as this would suggest he has potentiality. The potential to be other than that which he already is. Aristotle states that the first movement is caused by the prime mover in the same way as a saucer of milk CAUSES a cat to move towards it. The milk doesn’t actually do anything, it doesn’t move. But its presence causes movement.

Similarities and Differences between Plato’s Method and Aristotle’s Method Similarities Differences Both are based on clear, rational, logical Plato has a dualist understanding of the thought universe. There are two layers to reality. The Visible and the Intelligible. For Aristotle there is only the Intelligible world Both understand that the world we see Aristotle based his ideas on sense ordinarily is underpinned by a world of observation. Plato based his ideas solely on forms reason and ignores the senses. Both believe the world is essentially Plato believes this world can never truly intelligible and accessible through yield truth and that truth can only come REASON from the metaphysical world where the forms reside. For Aristotle the forms exist as the structure of the material world we inhabit, they are not separate from it. 7

Similarities and Differences between Plato’s Form of the Good and Aristotle’s Prime Mover Similarities Both ideas seem to underpin their understandings of reality for both Philosophers. For Aristotle the Prime Mover explains motion and structures in the natural world For Plato the form ‘Good’ explains how everything gets its nature from ideas.

Differences Aristotle is quite clear about the nature of the Prime Mover. Plato is vague in his description of the form ‘the good’ What actually is it?

Both explain the nature of reality

Prime mover seems to be closer to the idea of God than the form of the good All objects and forms participate to some degree in the form of the good, whereas the prime mover is simply the one who sets motion going. The form the good is needed to sustain reality, the prime mover is only needed to start it.

Both seem to point to a universal order or even intelligence behind reality

2.) Soul, Mind, Body Background  From the earliest philosophers to modern scientists and all religious traditions, the issue concerning the nature of and relationship between body, mind, soul and consciousness has been a divisive issue.  For most religions there is distinction between our material body and the nonmaterial soul. However, we are entitled to ask the following questions. How does a non-material soul interact with a material body? How does a material body interact with a non-material soul?  The issue has been re-addressed in modern psychology and science with many claiming that the issue is itself simply a ‘category’ mistake. Materialist’s state that, to claim that there is an entity separate from the material brain called ‘consciousness’ is a step too far. There is only one category, the physical body including the brain/mind. This is the view of the 20th century philosopher, Gilbert Ryle. – We are our brains!  However, the issue has its roots, like most of philosophy in ancient Greece and Plato and Aristotle. Plato – The Immortal Soul 

Plato’s understanding of the soul comes from his metaphysics. As the theory of the forms and the cave illustrates, there are two realms or levels of human existence. 8



  











The visible material world that is inhabited by material objects. This is the visible world accessible through our senses. THIS IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MATERIAL BODY. And there is… The invisible, absolute, perfect world that is available to us only through rational thought and contemplation. THIS IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMMORTAL S...