25 Great Philosophers From Plato to Sartre

Davild Mills Daniel

• Publisher: SCM Press
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780334042129
• eBook ISBN: 9780334048121
• Topic: Théologie et religion
• Subtopic: Christianisme

SCM Briefly 25 Great Philosophers offers a brief guide to the lives, writings and principal philosophical ideas of some of the world's great philosophers, from Plato to Jean Paul Sartre. Here is a brief and accessible introduction to philosophy and its main proponents. In only five pages, readers get an introduction to the life, the context and the writing of each philosopher. A glossary of philosophical terms is provided at the end of the book

1

Plato
(c. 429–347 BCE)
The theory of forms, the form of the good and philosopher–rulers
The role of women in government and society

Context

Why did the Cambridge philosopher Alfred North Whitehead say that the Western philosophical tradition was best described as a series of footnotes to Plato? It is because of the range of ontological, epistemological and ethical issues which Plato addresses and which have dominated philosophy and metaphysics ever since: What is the nature of ultimate reality? How do we discover it? What is knowledge? What is the difference between knowledge and opinion? What is the basis of morality? How do we distinguish between right and wrong? What is justice? How should a state be governed? Who are the best people to rule it?

Plato also provides some interesting answers. However, as Whitehead acknowledges, they are not ones which every subsequent philosopher has accepted. Whereas we, living in a scientific age, tend to be empiricists, believing that knowledge comes through experience and observation of the empirical world and how it operates, Plato is a philosophical rationalist, believing that only through our minds, by the use of reason, can we discover truth and penetrate the nature of ultimate reality.

Why did he think this? For Plato, the world we experience through our senses is in a continual state of flux and so cannot give us certain knowledge. He believes that individual things, or particulars, in the ordinary, visible, ever-changing world, which we experience through the senses, acquire their identity by being, in some way, copies of the unalterable, indivisible forms or essential natures of these things, which exist in a transcendent, eternal, unchanging world to which only our minds can gain access. Thus, a particular thing is beautiful or just by being a copy of or participating in what Plato calls the form or essential nature of beauty or justice. This view of reality, expressed in Plato’s theory of forms, is dualistic: it holds that there are two orders or levels of reality.

Plato’s writings take the form of dialogues, in which such philosophical issues as what exists, how do we know what exists and what is right are discussed. There is a principal speaker, usually Plato’s teacher Socrates, whose views seem to emerge victorious. For example, in The Republic, Socrates acknowledges the difficulty of determining the nature of justice. He then interrogates and debates with those who hold differing views. He dismisses the conventional view, that it is giving everyone his or her due and helping friends, and the cynical approach, which identifies morality or justice with the interests of the powerful. He also rebuts the contention that people practise justice unwillingly, because it is the middle ground between what they see as most desirable, doing wrong and getting away with it, and least desirable, being the victims of others’ wrongdoing.

Socrates then considers what justice is in the state, concluding that it involves the three classes in society (wealth-creators, the professional soldiers who defend it and the rulers) concentrating on their own role and not meddling with that of the others. He argues that the situation is the same with people. The individual personality consists of three elements: reason, the irrational appetite and reason’s ally, spirit or indignation. Here, justice involves each of the three elements performing their particular function, with reason, supported by spirit, ruling and thus controlling the irrational appetite, leading to a well-disciplined person. Thus, justice or morality, in the state or the individual, is an appropriate division of responsibilities among the elements that constitute it, and the integration, self-discipline and effective functioning that this produces.

Plato’s view of the nature of ultimate reality led him to believe that only those who dedicate their lives to the long process of philosophical reflection will be able to understand the essential nature of things. Therefore, states must be ruled by philosophers, who, after rigorous intellectual training, will understand the true nature of goodness and justice and thus govern well and in their subjects’ interests. In Plato’s eyes, government by philosophers stands in contrast to democracy, an anarchic system which treats people as equal when they are not. Plato’s theory of forms and views about the need for philosopher–rulers is one of the key ideas discussed below. The other is whether or not women are capable of participating in government.

However, although we naturally regard these views as Plato’s own, there is no unambiguous declaration that they are. For example, he discusses his fundamental doctrine of the forms in a number of his dialogues, including The Republic, Phaedo, Timaeus and Parmenides; but, in the last-mentioned, it is robustly challenged. In his exchange with the young Socrates, the philosopher Parmenides subjects the relationship between particular instances of things in the empirical world and their forms to searching criticism: how can many particulars participate in one form, when the forms are held to be indivisible; and are there forms of, for example, mud and dirt, as well as beauty and justice?

Life

The son of Ariston and Perictione, Plato was born into a leading aristocratic Athenian family at a critical period in the history of the Greek city-state. Under Pericles’ leadership, Athens had become not only Greece’s cultural heart, but also had developed democratic institutions, while its formidable navy, which had played a crucial part in defeating the Persian invasions of Greece, had enabled it to build up a large empire. However, Athens’ success produced tensions with other Greek states, notably Sparta, Greece’s leading military power.

In 431 BCE, the second Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta broke out, and Plato may have taken part in the successful naval battle of Arginusae in 406. But, generally, the war went badly for Athens. The failure of an expedition against Syracuse (415–12 BCE) discredited the democratic politicians, resulting in political instability and violence. Following Athens’ eventual defeat, in 404 BCE, Sparta supported a successful oligarchic revolution, but this brutal regime was short-lived and democracy was restored.

As a young man, Plato had been taught by the philosopher Cratylus, a follower of Heraclitus of Ephesus, who maintained the impossibility of attaining certain knowledge from the ever-changing world of the senses. By the end of the Peloponnesian War, Plato had become a pupil of Socrates, who devoted his life to the pursuit of truth, particularly in ethics. From Socrates, Plato learned that certain knowledge is only attainable through the reason. However, some Athenians resented Socrates, finding his constant challenges to conventional ideas offensive. He was accused of undermining belief in the gods and corrupting young people. Plato was appalled when, on top of all the other terrible events he had witnessed, Socrates was tried and executed in 399 BCE.

Plato had been considering a political career, but now became disenchanted with politics and all existing forms of government, particularly democracy, which he felt forced political leaders to do what they think will please the majority, rather than what they judge to be right. He left Athens for Megara, where he stayed with the philosopher Euclid. He developed the view that states must be ruled by philosophers, who will know the true nature of goodness and always govern in their subjects’ interests.

Back in Athens, Plato founded his Academy, the world’s first university, around 386 BCE. Designed as a place to train future philosopher–rulers, through study of a range of disciplines, culminating in philosophy, it was attended by students from all over Greece, including Aristotle. Plato devoted the rest of his life to teaching and to writing books, in which he first recorded and then developed Socrates’ thought and his own ideas.

Unfortunately, Plato’s attempts to put his political theories about philosopher–rulers into practice were a failure. He had visited Syracuse in Italy in the early 380s BCE and made friends with Dion, the brother-in-law of its ruler, Dionysius I. In 367, Dion invited Plato to Syracuse, to help with the education of its new ruler, his nephew Dionysius II. However, Dionysius II proved to be a cruel and oppressive tyrant, who forced Dion out of Syracuse and confiscated his estates.

It is possible to trace the development of Plato’s thought through his dialogues, all of which have survived, and fall into three stages: the early dialogues (such as Protagoras, Crito and Euthyphro), the middle dialogues (such as The Republic, the Symposium and Phaedo) and the late dialogues (such as Statesman and Laws).

Key ideas

The theory of forms, the form of the good and philosopher–rulers

In The Republic, Plato argues that the problems of states and their citizens will only end if philosophers become rulers, or if existing rulers become philosophers, as only philosophers are fit to govern. Why does he hold this controversial and elitist view? The reason is his theory of forms and belief in two orders of reality. As things in the ordinary visible world are not perfectly just or beautiful, but only approximate to the beauty or justice of beauty-in-itself or goodness-in-itself in the intelligible world, those who know only particular things, such as beautiful objects or just acts, and not beauty or justice itself, do not really know these things, but merely have opinions about them. Only those who have penetrated to the true nature of ultimate reality and know the essence of goodness are capable of ruling well.

And the essence of goodness, the form of the good, is not just one form among many, but presides over all the other forms in the intelligible world. In the striking simile of the sun, Plato likens its relation to the other forms or essences to that of the sun to visible objects in the empirical world. The form of the good is not only the source of the intelligibility of the other forms or essences, but also of their being and reality. Indeed, it is the source of all reality, truth and goodness. Only those philosophers who have seen it will know what is good in itself and which things and actions really are good, right and just. Plato uses another famous simile, that of the cave, to illustrate the ascent of the mind from the visible world to the intelligible one, where it finally sees the form of the good. It is possession of this vital moral knowledge that equips those philosophers who have acquired it to govern the state.

This knowledge will not just fall into their laps. To attain it, philosopher–rulers (Plato calls them ‘Guardians’) must undergo a course of advanced studies, which will enable them to see the form of the good and gain access to moral truths. Study of mathematics will shift their focus away from the world of change, while dialectic, an intense programme of philosophical enquiry and discussion, will enable their minds to penetrate to the essential nature of things. Those who reach the final stage and see the form of the good will become their states’ rulers, reluctantly taking turns to govern the state and train their successors, while devoting the rest of their time to their preferred occupation of philosophical study.

Is there a world of forms or essences, which transcends the ordinary, empirical world? Philosophers such as Bertrand Russell have been attracted by Plato’s theory, which would account for our concept of universals: the properties, such as whiteness of triangularity, which particular things have in common. However, most people, including Plato’s famous pupil Aristotle, do not agree that there are two orders of reality or that the ordinary world, experienced through the senses, is less real than an invisible, intelligible one. Plato’s theory is speculative metaphysics, which runs counter to common sense and sense experience, and Plato does not explain how the intelligible and visible worlds relate to each other.

The role of women in government and society

What about women? Are they capable of becoming philosopher–rulers or Guardians? Rejecting the view that women belong in the home as wives and mothers, Plato identifies the key question in relation to their role. This is not the one always put by opponents of female equality: are there any differences between men and women? It is: are there any relevant differences between them, which should preclude women from positions of responsibility? There are obvious natural differences between the two sexes, but the issue is not about differences in an unqualified sense, but about those relating to suitability for particular roles and responsibilities.

Plato argues that, in relation to being philosopher–rulers, the relevant factors are intellect and physical capacity. As the major difference between male and female is that the one sex begets children, while the other bears them, there are no relevant differences disqualifying the latter from traditional male occupations. No administrative or other role is suitable only for men as men or women as women. Natural capacities are similarly distributed in each sex, so there...

Table of contents

• Briefly: 25 Great Philosophers
• The SCM Briefly series
• Contents
• Introduction
• 1 Plato (c. 429–347 BCE) The theory of forms, the form of the good and philosopher–rulers The role of women in government and society
• 2 Aristotle (384–22 BCE) The foundations of logical thinking Virtue ethics, cultivating the moral virtues and eudaimonia
• 3 Marcus Aurelius (CE 121–80 ) Living in accordance with nature Leading a virtuous life
• 4 Anselm (1033–1109) God as that than which nothing greater can be thought The ontological argument as a proof of God’s existence
• 5 Thomas Aquinas (1224/5–74) Arguing from the existence of the world to the existence of God The natural law approach to ethics
• 6 Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) The evils of human beings in a state of nature The need for the absolute power of the ruler
• 7 René Descartes (1596–1650) Cartesian or systematic doubt The rationalist foundation of knowledge
• 8 John Locke (1632–1704) Government by consentThe tolerant society
• 9 Baruch de Spinoza (1632–77) Monism God or nature
• 10 Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 – 1716) The principle of sufficient reason and other fundamental principles of metaphysics The best of all possible worlds and theodicy
• 11 George Berkeley (1685–1753) No such things as abstract ideas Subjective idealism, the non-existence of an external world and the existence of God
• 12 Joseph Butler (1692–1752) The reasonableness of religious belief The nature of human beings and the authority of conscience
• 13 David Hume (1711–76) Basing knowledge on experience and the limits of human knowledge The logical gap between ‘is’ and ‘ought’
• 14 Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) The social contract and the general will Interpreting the idea of the general will
• 15 Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) Deontological ethics and the categorical imperative of morality Moral freedom and responsibility
• 16 Thomas Paine (1737–1809) The past cannot bind the present Democracy, representative government and human rights
• 17 Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) Utilitarian ethics: the maximization of happinessThe rights of animals
• 18 John Stuart Mill (1806–73) he principle of liberty/harm principle and the role of the individual in societyUtilitarian ethics: quantity versus quality of pleasure and the use of secondary principles
• 19 Søren Kierkegaard (1813–55) Faith and the individual’s relationship with GodPutting God above morality
• 20 Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) Master and slave moralitiesThe new philosophers
• 21 Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) The value of philosophyKnowledge by acquaintance and description, the inductive principle and the theory of definite descriptions
• 22 G. E. Moore (1873–1958) The defence of common sense and proof of the external worldThe naturalistic fallacy and the open question argument
• 23 Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951) The picture theory of meaningLanguage-games and forms of life
• 24 Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–80) Consciousness and existence Bad faith
• 25 A. J. Ayer (1910–89) The verification principle and the elimination of metaphysicsEthical emotivism
• Glossary of Philosophers and Thinkers
• Glossary of Terms