FREE ESSAY ON ARISTOTLE VS. PLATO ON METAPHYSICS

ARISTOTLE VS. PLATO ON METAPHYSICS

The Opposing Views of Great Minds
The word metaphysics is defined as "The study or theory of reality; sometimes used more
narrowly to refer to transcendent reality, that is, reality which lies beyond the
physical world and cannot therefore be grasped by means of the senses." It simply asks
what is the nature of being? Metaphysics helps us to reach beyond nature as we see it,
and to discover the `true nature' of things, their ultimate reason for existing. There
are many ways to approach metaphysics. Two of the earliest known thinkers on the topic
are Plato and Aristotle. These two philosophers had ideas that held very contrasting
differences that can be narrowed into a strong, select few. Both of the two thinkers
approached metaphysics differently. They both held different views on the levels of
reality. The two men held different approaches to forms. Although both men believed in
the concept of forms, they both defined this concept differently.
Plato lived between 427 and 347 BC. Aristotle lived between 384 and322 BC. He grew from
being Plato's pupil to being an independent thinker and rival. Plato was an inside/out
philosopher as opposed to Aristotle's outside/in thinking. This simply means that Plato
developed his ideas from within and applied them to the outside world. Conversely,
Aristotle took the views from the world around him and applied them within. These
different approaches to metaphysics lead to the issue of Aristotle's imminent reality
versus Plato's dualistic, transient reality. Aristotle's beliefs lead to him seeing only
one level of reality. He felt there was only one imminent world and that forms existed
within particular things. Aristotle held that form had no separate existence and existed
in matter. Opposed to Aristotle, Plato's thoughts tended to believe in two levels of
reality. Plato held that metaphysics is dualistic: he proposed that there are two
different kinds of things - physical and mental. There is what appears real and what is
real. Plato believed that everything real takes on a form but doesn't embody that form.
This is the position of Plato that there are "two worlds", the being and the becoming. 
These two different approaches lead to the biggest idea that Plato and Aristotle differed
on: their view on forms. Plato originated the Theory of Forms. Plato saw forms a
descriptions. A form applies to more than a single thing, such as something as good. For
Plato, two or more items (flagstones) can both be said to be round if they participate in
the Form roundness. According to Plato, the Form roundness exists apart or separately
from individual flagstones (and other round things). Round things depend upon the Form
roundness for their existence. So Plato's answer to the basic metaphysical question -
what is reality? - is that fundamentally it is the Forms of things that are real and not
physical matter. Aristotle concerned himself with the relation of matter and form.
Aristotle saw only four ultimately basic questions that could applied to anything, or as
he called them, four causes: the formal cause, or what is the thing?; the material cause,
or what is it made of?; the efficient cause, or what made it?; and the final cause, or
what purpose does it serve? CONCLUSION
In conclusion, these two great thinkers were quite different in many quite a number of
manners. Plato believed in an inside/out view of metaphysics which shows two realms to
our reality: the realm of changing, becoming things and a realm of fixed, and being
forms, which are unchanging and that all things owe their reality. Aristotle saw in his
outside/in view, that there was only one level to our reality and that in it; forms are
found only within particular things, which have both form and matter.
If there were not individual round things, there would be no such thing as the Form
roundness. Forms do not exist separately or apart from particulars. Roundness, for
example, has no independent existence apart from particular round things. You cannot
think the Form roundness without thinking of a particular round thing. 
Aristotle: example, a statue is a chunk of marble (matter) with a certain form (statue).
Each thing is made of a particular matter and has a particular form. Neither form nor
matter is ever found in isolation from the other (except for God). Things do change; they
become something new. 
Plato: Example: Beauty. A beautiful statue and a beautiful house are two very different
objects. But they have something in common, they both quality as beautiful. 
Beauty is not something you encounter directly in the physical world. What you encounter
in the physical world is always some object or other - statue or house - that may or may
not be beautiful. 
Beauty itself is not something you meet up with; rather, you meet up with objects that to
varying degrees possess beauty. Beauty is an ideal thing, not a concrete thing. 
It would be a mistake to think that forms are just ideas or concepts in our minds. Before
there were minds there were beautiful things; round things. 
Forms are eternal and unchanging. Beauty and roundness have no age. The circumference of
a circle is equal to times twice the radius distance, regardless of the circle, time, or
place. 
Forms are unmoving and indivisible. What sense would it make to suppose that they might
move or be physically divided? 
Only Forms are truly real. A thing is beautiful only to the extent it participates in the
Form beauty; it is round only if it participates in the Form roundness. Likewise a thing
is large only if it participates in the form largeness. 
The same principle holds for all of a thing's properties. Thus, a large, beautiful, round
thing - would not be beautiful, large, or round if the forms beauty, largeness, and
roundness did not exist. 
Objects owe their reality to Forms. So the ultimate reality belongs to the Forms. 
Of course, Plato was aware that there is a sense in which the objects we see/touch are
real. Even appearances are real appearances. But Plato's position is that the objects we
see/touch have a lesser reality. 
They have a lesser reality because they can only approximate their Form and thus are
always to some extent flawed. Any particular beautiful thing will always be deficient in
beauty as compared with the Form beauty. 
And, as any particular beautiful thing owes whatever degree of beauty it has to the Form
beauty, the Form is the source of what limited reality as a beautiful thing the thing
has. 
Plato introduced into western thought a two-realm concept. On the one hand, there is the
realm of changing, sense-perceptible or sensible things. This is the cave: the realm of
flawed and lesser entries (consequently, it is also, for those who concern themselves
with sensible things, a source of error, illusion and ignorance). 
On the other hand there is the realm of Forms - eternal, fixed, and perfect - the source
of all reality and of all true knowledge. 
Plato also believed that some Forms (truth, beauty, goodness) are of a higher order than
other Forms. For example, you can say of the Form roundness that of is beautiful, but you
cannot say of the Form beauty that it is round. So the Form beauty is higher than the
Form roundness. 
When we examine the sense world in terms of what we perceive, we find it possesses no
permanence, stability, or coherence. Such a world is not real, only an illusion (the
cave). 
The world of things is understood by the senses; Form by reason. Example: beautiful
things vs. beauty. 
What is real is the totality of Forms and these Forms account for whatever stability and
intelligibility the world of illusory sense experience may possess. 
Plato was inside out.
1. He believed in 2 level reality (transcendent).
The being was fixed and certain.
The becoming was changing.
2.form - exists in the world of being.
Copies exist in the world of becoming and are imperfect.
3. Prime mover- form in the world of being
4. Being - levels of reality - top level is justice.
- blending of forms
Aristotle was outside in.
1. one level of reality (imminent).
e god/s ?
2.forms - exist inside the thing itself
a.material cause
b.formal cause
c.efficient cause
d. final cause
pg 97
3.Nature - assumptions
its real
it's a unity, a system
its essintial
predictable and constant