Plato it Seems That From

Plato It seems that from the very beginning of time, people have engaged themselves in a continuous attempt to understand who they are, what life is, what the truth is and what is the amending of our existence. From this point-of-view, we can mention three let's call them "methods" which have developed with the purpose of providing answers to the above mentioned questions. These three methods are psychology, epistelomology and metaphysics.

The present paper has the purpose of analyzing the differences which exist between these methods while making explicit references to Plato's book "The Republic." Psychology is usually defined as a process which tries to understand the manner in which the mind works. It is therefore focused on metal processes. It's objective is to understand how thoughts, feelings and emotions are connected and how they manage to influence the individual's behaviour. Epistemology on the other hand has been called the theory of knowledge.

It addresses all the possible aspects which are concerned with this issue. The epistemological process is aimed at establishing what exactly is knowledge, the manner through which people achieve it, it's nature, it's content, etc. A very interesting connection is to be made here between real knowledge (as awareness of an infallible truth) and beliefs. If the judgement process is based on values and beliefs, how can we be sure that that which we perceive is knowledge is actually knowledge and not just a mere opinion.

In a world where numerous opinions coexist, each of them supported by strong arguments, what is the manner in which one can get to know the truth (assuming that there is one general truth to be known and accepted by everybody). On the one hand we can state that truth and therefore knowledge is better connected with experience. In other words we address the issue of empiric demonstrations.

On the other hand, it has been demonstrated that the empiric demonstrations are not always efficient and that not all things can be demonstrated in this manner. The allegory of the cave that Plato makes in The Republic is nevertheless a good example in which experience proves to be an instrument for the discovery of the truth and the acquisition of knowledge. Metaphysics, just like the word suggests it, can be interpreted as a process of analysis regarding all the things which go beyond the realm of the physical.

In the area of metaphysics one is most likely to find attempts at establishing the nature of reality as well as the relation between reality and the mind. Obviously, metaphysics is less likely to find supportive evidence for its theory through scientific methods of empiric observations.

The main question seems to be that of "what is it that we can know"? It is more than obvious that this particular question can not be answered in the absence of considerations regarding the manner in which the mind works (and therefore is structured). In addition, the nature of truth and the ways to get to see it are other fundamental issues. In other words, there is a tight connection between psychology, epistemology and metaphysics on the road to discovering the truth.

This is more than obvious in Plato's book The Republic. Let us analyze the analogy of the cave. There is a dark cave in which people live chained to the walls. Behind them there is a fire illuminating several statues. What the people are able to see are the shadows on the walls in front of them. Since they are not aware of the existence of the things which are to be found behind them they believe that the shadows which they see are real.

The conclusion that we can reach at first is that people tend to identify the truth with what they see. At this point empiric evidence should be enough in order to demonstrate the truth and reach knowledge. This may be true, but only to a limited extent. If human experience is limited, then so is the acquired knowledge and truth can not exist partially only. On the one hand. On the other hand, it is safe to say that unlimited experience is impossible at least empirically (419a).

Therefore, truth might be based on experience but experience is not enough. The fact that people are chained to the wall is a metaphor which suggests the fact that human perceptions are influenced and shaped by the environment we live in through its customs, beliefs and values. It becomes obvious how difficult it is to have a free mind. Returning to the issue of experience, we may have a person breaking free from the chain and thus being able to move around the cave.

Now he can see the statues and the fire and with the use of reason he understands that the shadows on the wall were not reality but an illusion. We now understand the importance of science and scientific development, as well as that of the importance of the manner in which the mind works. Had the freed person not been clever enough to make a connection between the statues and the fire, he would have remained ignorant.

Notwithstanding the newly acquired knowledge, we are still inside the cave and knowledge is still limited. Truth is to be found outside the cave, where the individual can see the existence of a multitude of objects thanks to the sunlight (445e). The sun's light is blinding at first. Man is not ready to understand everything (the mind or the intellect?). Then he gets used to the light and is able to see all the illuminated objects.

He understands that the real world is outside the cage and that one needs the sunlight in order to have proper understanding of the world. Now that he is "illuminated," he realizes that his task is go back to the cave and teach all the people who are still in chains about the real nature of the truth. At this point we can speak about a strong principle of goodness (484a). The analogy of the sun is a very important element.