Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Plato's Cave
Plato argues that most of us are like prisoners in a cave who are bound
in such a way that we can only see shadows of objects projected on a
wall. Not only can we not see the objects that cast the shadows, we
cannot even see the objects outside of the cave. A more modern analogy
might have the prisoner's watching a movie or perhaps "plugged in" to a
virtual reality program. What is Plato claiming about the ordinary
person? What is our epistemic state? Do we have any hope in escaping?
And most importantly, is Plato correct? In short, what is your
interpretation of Plato's allegory of the cave and is the allegory the
correct way to view the human quest for knowledge?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Plato's cave allegory is very interesting to me. It reminds me of the whole theme behind the Matrix, where people are plugged into a virtual computer program. In order to escape, one must have knowledge that where they currently exist is only a projection and that there is a reality that exists outside. Plato, very similarly to the Matrix, is claiming that the ordinary person has a very limited knowledge. He explains that most people only have a very basic perception of our universe and fail to contemplate the deeper knowledge that lies within. Our epistemic state is very simple, we can only see the projections of the true knowledge rather than knowledge itself. We can only escape through education and the search for truth. This may come through knowledge of the forms or through philosophizing with the rational part of the mind. I feel that Plato hits it pretty close with this allegory. There are a few aspects which I feel he overlooks, however. I think that most people, at some point in their lives are inevitably confronted with issues that force them to think past the basic "projections". In addition to this criticism, which Plato very well may have pondered, I believe that there are questions which truly are beyond human comprehension. Questions such as "what is nothingness" and "what is infinity". Everyone would like to know more about the world which they live in and have the questions which have been evaluated; however, would having this knowledge make you a superior person to those who do not posses this knowledge? Would people live their lives differently? Would they become better people? I think the search for truth is extremely important, however, I choose to interpret the projections merely as shallow perceptions of what is really important, not necessarily what is real.
ReplyDeleteWhile I am not convinced by Socrates' specific distinctions on the levels of understanding of reality presented in the allegory of the Cave and the allegory of the line, I do believe that he has something valuable to say about how we interpret our world. Socrates' theory is that most human beings only perceive the likeness and resemblance of the things they claim to actually be perceiving. In such a way, we are generally deceived into thinking that things actually are the way they appear to be. For example, if a man is looking through a window, he may believe that he is getting a clear view of the outside world while in reality his perception is skewed and distorted by the filter of the glass. In my opinion, this criticism of our perception of reality is very tenuous and illusive, but that may be just because I am in such a state of believing to understand what I perceive to be. Who knows?
ReplyDeleteIf I were to synthesize the points of the allegory that I find applicable to my world view, I would correct Socrates' assertion to say that we as humans tend to over assess and apply unwarranted interpretations to the mundane things we routinely perceive. I think that we tend to pass judgments, criticisms, and principals unto everything that crosses our path. In other words, we judge books, people, and everything else by their covers. When we see someone engaged in something on their Smartphone, we tend to assume that they are texting and not writing a masterpiece novel in French. When we see our friend with a stooped back, low eyebrows, and a downward curving lip, we assume he is upset and not just flexing his facial muscles because he has been smiling for the entire day up until that point. We assume that people walking down the sidewalk with dogs are the owners of said dogs and are walking their dogs out of necessity rather than assuming that the person is just a really great Samaritan and is helping all his friends by walking their dogs for them. When we see an empty bookshelf in the house of a family that has just moved in, we assume that they intend to put books on that bookshelf rather than take it apart to build a table out of the wooden planks. It turns out that when we perceive things, we tend to instantly interpret their purposes, origins, structures, monetary values, etc. We act just like the prisoner's in Socrates' cave who associate the sounds they hear with the shadows of the objects they see. Because we are content with rapid interpretations, we don't often go through the trouble of conducting a further investigation of our surroundings and are left without any real understanding of the true nature of any of the stuff that surrounds us. Because we don't really know how most things work, we have trouble thinking up creative applications, reassigning the purpose of objects, and considering the stipulations of things in a completely different context or environment. Furthermore, the way we act in any human interaction is reliant on what we pretend to know about the attitudes, moods, and opinions of the other people involved which can often lead to compete misunderstanding and confusion. In this way, I believe Socrates' allegory for the human condition has some real merit ( as opposed to the likeness and resemblance of merit).
In Plato’s allegory of the cave, he claims that the ordinary man is a ‘prisoner to illusion’. He argues that we as ordinary humans only see likenesses and things that resemble the ultimate truths, the forms. In arguing this Plato is saying that our epistemic state is that we do not see the real truths, but rather projections of the real truths. However, he argues that we do have the power to ‘escape’ the cave. This can be done through rational thinking, education, and the search for the truth. Ultimately, if a man does the three of these things properly and with enough depth, he will be able to find the real truth.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Plato is incorrect on a fundamental level. To me, the ultimate truth is whatever we as people determine it to be. We must use our experiences here on earth to determine what the truth is, for how can a person accept something as true if no human has ever experienced it?
To analyze my previous point, I would like to look at a particular example. Arguable the biggest ‘unanswerable’ question in most people’s mind is ‘what happens after I die?’ I know that personally, this is something I struggle with a lot. However, if we were to examine this question through Plato’s cave model, we would conclude that there is one single right answer, and if we use rational thinking we will be able to find it. However, in the history of man, while many people have approached this question with a rational mindset, yet we have never agreed upon an answer. Therefore, one could argue that we are all merely trapped in the cave and that no man has ever been enlightened enough to find the true answer.
However, I would like to respond to this by saying that we are not stuck in the cave, but rather there is NO cave. Every person has the right to believe whatever he or she wants about the life after death. Furthermore, each person’s belief is his or her own truth. To a Hindu, the truth is that we are reincarnated and come back as a member of a higher caste. To a Christian, we are either sent to heaven or hell. To many, we simply become nothing, the hardest concept for humans to conceptualize. Ultimately, while all of these beliefs require some degree of faith, they are all equally ‘true’ to those who believe them.
While this is only one example, I believe that similar logic can be applied to most questions of the fundamental truths. Ultimately, I believe that these questions are unanswerable through rational thinking, but rather require faith for one to believe in one’s own truths.
Plato’s allegory of the cave contains different levels of meaning depending on from what reference point you analyze it. On the literal level, it states that there are people in a cave. These people are in chains and have been chained in place there whole life. They can’t turn their heads or move their bodies; they can only see what is directly before them. Before them is a blank wall where the shadows of artifacts are projected. The main source of light in the cave is a fire, very little sunlight enters. Between the prisoners and the fire people walk with wooden depictions of artifacts that cause the shadows that people see. The noises the people hear bounce off the walls of the cave and cannot be traced to the source so these people cannot even communicate with one another. The imprisoned people perceive these shadows and indistinguishable noises to be reality. Plato goes on to ask his audience to imagine one person if freed from his restraints. Now he is permitted to look around the cave. Plato argues that the freed man, who is only familiar with the shadows, would still feel that the shadows are still more real than the artifacts projecting the shadows. Then, if the man were to be moved out of the cave, ripped from his comfort zone, the sunlight would blind him, however, after some time his eyes would adjust and he would be able to see not only category A on the line but perhaps even be able to see categories B, C, and D. This man would become knowledgeable beyond his companions in the cave. And finally the freed man would return to the cave to tell the others there what he had learned, however the others, having never seen anything, not even sunlight, wouldn’t believe him and wouldn’t be able to comprehend what he is saying. In the end of the allegory the enslaved people are somehow able to get their hands of the freed man and kill him.
ReplyDeleteOn the symbolic level the allegory extends to describe nearly all people in the world. According to Plato, out epistemic state is only a perception of Category A on the line. I personally feel that if the allegory is true then we see A, B, and C along the line, and what we don’t see is the forms. And in general I don’t know if I agree with Plato’s Cave. I’m worried it, and many of the things Plato says, are too safe. They can’t be proven. And reason tells me to question everything to beyond doubt. But that’s sort of where the beauty of the allegory is most prevalent. If you take the notion that you should put everything through rigorous examinations of both logic and reason as a kind of moral of the allegory then that is exactly what the allegory requires you to do. But then through this rational thinking, if the allegory is true, then you will end up escaping from the cave itself. So while it can’t it can’t determine whether or not there truly are cosmic forms from which everything derives its meaning, it can be said that through reason a higher level of enlightenment is possible.
Lastly, on a historical level I think that the allegory serves to be both a tribute to Plato’s master Socrates as well as a caveat for the rest of us. Socrates just like the person in the cave was killed because of his radical ideas. Socrates was criticizing democracy during unstable times in Athens. During the Peloponnesian war he praised Athens enemy Sparta. Instead of accepting things that Socrates felt were immoral he Socrates questioned main stream ideas and was killed for it. Extending this to the allegory, Socrates was merely trying to free people from the cave, however, frightened, the people he was trying to save killed him. And from that point the caveat originates which implies that people shouldn’t immediately fear what they don’t understand because it can all be explained through logic a
Plato is essentially claiming that the ordinary person not only has a menial understanding of the world around him or herself, but that they also are blissfully ignorant and in most cases may not possess the will to find truth or engage in the pursuit of knowledge. His view seems rather bleak, but he does express hope that we have a chance of escaping, or the ability to find truth. He asserts that an extraordinary person may have the capability to see past the illusions to which we have clung since birth and find true meaning and knowledge in the world. This speaks to the more optimistic side of Plato in that it reflects his belief in the power of free will.
ReplyDeleteI think, for the most part, Plato is right. The human quest for knowledge or enlightenment free of the hindrances of the illusions the modern world has created for us is a very real struggle. There is, however, a kind of constant doubt involved in the acquisition of knowledge that I don’t think is represented well in the allegory of the cave. Say that you’ve studied archeology your whole life, you have a PHD and have won Nobel prizes for your work…what if you’re still living with the shadows of real knowledge, not the real thing? You may think you know everything there is to know, but who can define true knowledge? There is always the danger of believing that you have found real knowledge but in reality are still just being tricked by the illusions and the shadows. In a way, I think the only way Plato is wrong is that he put a definitive end to the story of the acquisition of knowledge; someone eventually will escape the cave, see the real world for what it is, the end. I don’t think there is such thing as finality when it comes to knowledge, and I can’t imagine there ever being a feeling of closure. Knowing what I do about the allegory of the cave, I would never be able to wake up one day and think, ‘I know everything there is to know about the subject I am studying, I must have escaped the cave’. There would always be the fear that although I believe I’ve found true knowledge, in reality, I’m still stuck in the cave. Essentially, I think Plato is correct except for his belief in any kind of finality or ‘end of the line’ when it comes to knowledge.
Plato's allegory of the cave raises an interesting, even scary, question of human knowledge and perception of reality. Plato's argument is essentially that humans are benighted to the world around them; unconscious and unaware of the "truth" of reality. However he does offer prospect of liberation from this unawareness and hope of enlightenment suggesting that humans choose to stay in unawareness.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with Plato's argument here however I see it in a slightly different way. I agree that many humans live in unawareness and are ok with it. Meaning, as Plato suggests, that they choose not to seek out the truth and instead settle for what they are told. This inertia to change and passivity to becoming enlightened supports the theory that humans are lazy beings. This laziness can occur from two different reasons. Either we simply don’t care about finding the truth and have given up or we are waiting for someone else to do the work of becoming enlightened and are expecting them to come back and teach us. For example in The Matrix series a man named Neo is told by Morpheus that everything he has come to know as true is a lie. Morpheus then gives Neo a choice holding two pills one blue and one red. It is explained to Neo that if he takes the blue pill he would forget whatever he was told about his life by Morpheus and wake up in his bed as if it were all a dream. Morpheus then explains to Neo that if he takes the red pill he would show Neo what the reality of human life is. Neo very easily could have chosen quick and easy way out of that situation and taken the blue pill and gone back to his normal life however he fought this urge and instead choose to find out the truth. Not to say that all humans are lazy but I think the majority of people rather take the blue pill than the red pill, because becoming enlightened is not an easy thing. It requires you to disregard everything that you once thought to be true and completely change your perception of reality which can be an overwhelming and discouraging task. Personally I think it is an impossible task for a person to become totally enlightened because that would entail learning and knowing everything about everything. However I do think that it is in our best interest to become somewhat philosophical in our thinking and to not be afraid to question something just because we might not like the answer get.