Deductive Argument Essay Example for Free

deductive Argument EssayIn this essay I will be arguing a puddlest Platos system of intimacy given in the Republics divided line. I will distinguish the differences and similarities in the epistemological concepts of Plato and Aristotle intending to explain how one comes to keep familiarity and the process through which its obtained. As support, I will explain Platos theory of figure of speechs and Aristotles theory of essence because they ar a coordinate correlation to their view of noesis through reality. Platos theory of Forms is a theory of knowledge and a theory of be.He describes, in the divided line, the division of existence. Plato believes the source of our knowledge is separate from this piece. Participation connects us to this world. In the divided line he separates the visible and the intelligible or becoming and being. The top fractional is knowledge and the bottom half as opinion. The bottom half represent the lesser of reality, which includes perception and imaginativeness, along with physical objects and shadows. The upper half includes metaphysics, higher take shapes, mathematical forms, epistemology, understanding and thinking.His theory of Forms involves images, sensible objects, concrete forms and countermand forms. Images atomic number 18 the lowest form of knowledge. Images entirely provide us with opinion and imagination. Sensible objects comes next which provides us with seeing some occasion and having a effect about it by sensing it and perceiving it. Concrete forms allow us understanding, nitty-gritty we understand the parts of X by thinking. Finally, the highest form is the abstract form which is the most essential staring(a) thought of what X is.To Plato, this Essence is eternal and unchanging, making it necessary and true. According to Plato we know X, if and only if we have a direct grasp of Xs form or essence. Lets hurly burly this argument down. So Imagination is a state of mind which takes sensible moral nonions at panorama value effective as it does sensible appearances or forms of the world at face value. For example, if you are backwash a palm tree you are using your imagination and Plato says is our opinion about what we are viewing, a palm tree. So imagination is perception and not knowledge.If A (Imagination is taking sensible notions and appearances or forms of the world at face value) accordingly B (imagination is perception). A? B A ?B Using our habitual sense we have notion in the reality of the visible objects and concrete moral teachings (sufficient guide for action) without knowledge of the cause for such beliefs. Belief is faith and conviction, not knowledge. If C (Using our common sense we have belief in the reality of the visible objects and concrete moral teachings (sufficient guide for action) without knowledge of the reason for such beliefs) hencece D (belief is faith and conviction).C ? D C ?D If A (Imagination is taking sensible notions and appearances or forms of the world at face value), B (Imagination is perception), C (Using our common sense we have belief in the reality of the visible objects and concrete moral teachings (Sufficient guide for action) and D (Belief is faith and conviction), then E (Belief and imagination are opinion and not knowledge). A B C D ? E A B C D ?E Thinking is reasoning from premise to conclusion.This reasoning is the bridge from opinion to knowledge that is brought on by higher education, especially mathematics because pure mathematics and applied mathematics are tools used to understand X. Therefore, thinking is only understanding, not knowledge. So if F(thinking is reasoning from premise to conclusion and uses tools to fall upon understanding) then G(thinking is understanding). F? G F ?G From the Good or Episteme comes from intellect which consist of reason and dialect. This comes from philosophic conversation (dialect) by question and answer seeking (reasoning) an account of X.Therefore, knowled ge or Episteme is the form of the wide-cut. So, If H (knowledge comes from philosophic conversation (dialect) by question and answer seeking (reasoning) an account of X) then I (we have knowledge or Episteme and the form of the good) H ? I H ?I If F (thinking is reasoning from premise to conclusion and uses tools to gain understanding), G (thinking is understanding), H (knowledge comes from philosophic conversation (dialect) by question and answer seeking (reasoning) an account of X) then I (we have knowledge or Episteme and the form of the good).F G H ? I FGH ?I Aristotle has similar concepts as Plato on knowledge that is best describes through his theory of Essence. He argues that scientific knowledge is the highest form of knowledge and is only refer with this world and not a transcendent world like Plato. His forms include appearance, matter, concrete forms and abstract forms. He explains that we gain knowledge first through our senses and are able to view appearances. Using t he senses activates our imagination that gives us opinion. After appearance is matter.When we engage in experience we come to know matter and by doing so we have belief. Similar to Plato, Aristotle claims concrete forms come next by knowing abstraction or the sort of X which provides us with understanding. And finally he agrees with Plato in that Abstract form is what makes X, X. By intellectually covetous the essence of X we have knowledge. Aristotle defines essence as the sense on matter and form. Matter is somatic and form is eternal. Appearances are imagination and imagination perceives only through the senses.Here Aristotle is in agreement with Plato in that if A (Imagination is a state of mind which takes sensible moral notions at face value just as it sensible appearances or forms of the world at face value) then B (imagination is perception). A? B A ?B Matter gives us belief because If C (Using our common sense we have belief in the reality of the visible objects and conc rete moral teachings (sufficient guide for action) without knowledge of the reason for such beliefs) then D (belief is faith and conviction). C? D C ?D.The classification or abstraction of what distinguishes X all over a different X is understanding. For example, to know what makes a palm tree, a palm tree and a coconut tree, a coconut tree. Therefore, thinking is understanding. So if F (thinking is reasoning from premise to conclusion and uses tools to gain understanding) then G (thinking is understanding). F ? G F ?G Plato argues knowledge comes from a final good or Goodness, which is the level above scientific understanding to which the human mind is capable in rising. This rising to a higher level is called Episteme.He says that there is only one form (idea) of everything that only exists in the thought universe or the mind of the creator. This intellectual truth is truer than physical truth. Aristotle on the other hand argues that knowledge come from the human essence tilos or keen-wittedity. So, knowledge is reaching rational activity excellently and scientific knowledge is the end of it. They both agree on essence being eternal and unchanging. They may separate from the matter, recycle and get involved with other matter but the forms are eternal and unchanging.I agree with Aristotle because Plato confuses the human ability of abstraction with independent existence. As humans we raise generalize and find common features in separate objects such as red things but that does not mean that there exists somewhere something called redness. He is attempting to explain reality with the addition of a transcendent world. Aristotle is interest in explaining the world as a changing world Platos forms do not variety so they cannot help in explaining the phenomena of change in the empirical world. According to Aristotle, we do not break knowledge all in one moment but rather through a process.He says objects of real existence are the ones that we encounter throu gh our sense perception, known as his theory of quackery (which is too much to go further into) in this he argues again that all knowledge originates from experience. This contradicts Platos two world theory. I found it very hard to illustrate both views of knowledge because the grand information they use to explain it so I broke it down in the way I understood it. In the end, I found myself becoming my own philosopher in researching the works of such bang-up minds.I feel these arguments create the rationality that people forget to practice when its the one thing that separates us as humans. Works Cited Puanthanh Gangmei, Platos theory of knowledge and forms (www. blogcastor. com October 16, 2011) http//blogcastor. com/plato%e2%80%99s-theory-of-knowledge-and-forms/, November 22 2011. http//en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Epistemology http//faculty. washington. edu/smcohen/320/thforms. htm http//www. filthylucre. com/plato-versus-aristotle-theory-of-forms-and-causes http//www. iep. utm. edu/aristotl/ http//www. iep. utm. edu/aristotl/ http//www. iep. utm. edu/middlekn/