Today, I want to discuss Plato’s theory
of mind. Plato’s theory of mind provides
a transcendental thesis of consciousness and
we will try to see, how transcendentalism
is advocated by Plato. As you know, Plato’s
theory of mind or Plato’s conception of
the soul is a kind of a metaphysical theory
of the notion of consciousness.
Now, this metaphysical theory, as I mentioned
to you, is something significant because it
is initiating a debate on dualism, that is,
dualism between the forms and the particulars.
So, Plato’s construction of the soul is
developing a dualistic thesis, that is, how
the forms are independent of the particulars
that are there in the world. So, this idea
of knowing the particulars or knowing the
world is possible in Plato’s philosophical
schema with the help of the anthology of the
forms. The anthology of the forms is presupposed
to understand how knowledge is possible.
So, Plato’s dualism as a metaphysical theory
of reality starts with an epistemological
discourse, that how knowledge about the world
is possible and how can we have the objective
knowledge about the world. So, in the epistemic
discourse of Plato’s philosophy, we will
find, that metaphysics is dealt very significantly
and let us go in to details of what is the
Plato’s idea of the soul or what is the
Plato’s notion of soul as a kind of a transcendental
entity.
The nature of the soul in Plato’s theory
shows, that soul is the subject of knowledge;
it is the source of all our cognitive activities.
Whatever we do, whatever we perform and whatever
we think, all flows from the soul, meaning
thereby, soul is the source of the entire
activities.
Hence, soul is considered as the principle
of movement in this lecture. When I am trying
to discuss Plato’s notion of soul, I would
particularly refer to philosophical essay
on Plato’s view of the soul, published in
1995 in the journal mind. Robert’s essay
is kind of an interpretation to Plato’s
understanding of the soul, where about reconstructs
Plato’s notion of mind, giving a contemporary
interpretation to Plato’s thesis, that is,
how mind, the transcendental phenomenon can
be viewed from a conscience perspective.
As you all know advocated transcendental philosophy
very strongly. Now, going back to this understanding
of conversion of soul, soul as a principle
of movement can be interpreted as the source
of voluntary actions and also the source of
our thinking. Thinking also represents some
kind of a process or a movement of these activities
of the mind, is like the activities of the
human beings. Human beings perform voluntary
actions and they also think voluntarily.
In fact, say is natural to the being, that
the being thinks. So, this thinking is a kind
of a natural activity, is possible because
there exists a spiritual vital force, because
the Greeks have defined soul as a vital force.
According to them this vital force can be
translated as intelligence; the subject, that
performs all mental activities.
So, from that point of view, soul is the source
of thinking. Thinking is a mental activity
and the activities, that are happening in
the mental life, flows from this vital force
or possible because of the existence of this
vital force.
Now, when, let us say, that let us talk about
motion when Plato talks about the vital force
as the basis of both voluntary movements and
cognitions.
Therefore, it is important, that we talk about
modes of actions referring to this idea of
cognition, that how do I recognize things,
how do I interpret things, how do I view a
particular thing in the world?
So, therefore, the mode of cognition is important
or the mode of action is important because
it talks about the recognition of cognitive
actions or thought is an important activity
of the soul.
So, what is that the soul is doing? The soul
is, in fact, recognizing the activities. What
is that the soul is doing? The soul is, in
fact, recognizing the activities, activities
happening at the realm of the mental or the
realm of the mind.
Now, this act of recognition, recognition
of what is being so perceived, what is being
perceived or what is given to our sense experience
or what is being experienced by the soul or
the subject is important. So, this act of
recognitions recognizing, that what is being,
let us say, represented and whatever is represented
is there at the realm of thought or thinking
thoughts are representations of the world.
So, it is the soul, which recognizes thoughts,
which try to understand the content of thought.
Hence, recognizing is a kind of a unique activity
of the soul, it recognizes something as something.
Now, this act of recognition or identification
is a kind of an epistemic act, it is not viewer
psychological act. Plato’s epistemology
talks about psychology, let us say it is an
epistemic act because epistemology talks about
truth and falsity. Epistemology can talk about
how the religions of believe is possible,
it talks about how believes are revised.
Believes are not knowledge in Plato. We will
see, that how believes are different from
knowledge.
So, it is important, therefore, that we talk
about the world because as a, as a knowing
subject, as a conscious subject, the soul
understands the things in the world, the soul
posses knowledge about the world, the soul
recognizes what is there in the world and
what is there in the mind.
So, what is the world? The world is the totality
of things as says. So, there are things in
the world. So, in platonic worldview we find,
that Plato describes of the world having particulars.
So, there are particulars, there are unique
particulars and these particulars are different
from or the forms.
So, in Plato’s theory of mind or Plato’s
theory of soul, we will see, that there are
particulars, say we have man, horses, things
like that, there are n numbers of particulars,
now these particulars are known. So, the knowledge
of, the knowledge of these particulars is
possible through the subject who is a knower.
So, this dichotomy between the knower and
the known, the subject and the object, the
particulars and the forms, how the individual,
the subject who is a knower, knows the particulars?
How does it recognize, that yes, this is a
pen and this is my pen? The very fact, that
I recognize this as something; the fact, that
I identify the pen and this identity is different
from the identity, that other particulars
are having, that it is different from chairs,
tables, pencils and scale. So, that identity
is something, which Plato is concerned with.
How we have this identity? How do we have
the knowledge of identity? How do we know,
that yes something is the case? So, that is
how we will talk about Plato's epistemology.
Plato's epistemology is concerned about knowledge
as unchanging reality. Knowledge is different
from, from your experiences; your experience
of things is changing. So, knowledge is something
about unchanging reality; knowledge as ceaseless
flow of particulars in the world.
So, there are two ways in which we know things,
one through our sense experiences. I see that
there are chairs; I see, that people sitting
on the chairs; I see, that people are listening
to the lectures. Now, this very fact, that
I have this sense experience shows that I
know through sense experiences, that if this
knowing will give impression of the knowledge,
which Plato is talking about. Plato is rather
more concerned with the intuitive knowledge.
Plato does not deny the fact, that there is
sense experiential knowledge, but is sense
experiential knowledge permanent? For Plato,
visibility is different from intelligibility.
So, there are knowledge and knowledge claims,
which are more intelligible in the sense,
that which is known through intuition, which
is known through the reason, so reason and
intuition plays an important role in cognizing
the objects that are there in the world in
cognizing those particulars that Plato is
talking about.
So, the sense experiential knowledge on the
one hand, which are temporary and the intelligible
knowledge, which derived through the use of
intuition or reason is something very significant.
Now, what is that knowledge the Plato is concerned
with? Plato is obviously concerned with the
knowledge of forms. How do we know, that it
is a human being? How do we know, that this
is my horse or this is a horse? According
to Plato, these particulars are nothing, but
the copies of the universals.
So, Plato gives the primasitive, the forms
in the sense, that forms are ontologically
real and the knowledge of particulars is possible
because they are the copies of those universals,
universal ideas or forms. So, the very fact,
that Plato is giving primacy to the universals,
we need to know, how do we complicate those
universals? How do we understand those universals?
Now, Plato, it is through the soul we have
the knowledge about those forms, the form
of human beings or man or the horse or the
table or any other particulars you take for
example, will talk about how the soul is engaged
with those forms.
Now, let us little bit, you know, focus on
how it is in epistemic activity. Now, Plato
makes a distinction between Doxa and episteme.
Doxa talks about opinion, which is based on
sense experience, whereas the episteme talks
about the knowledge, that is, the knowledge
about the forms. As I said, forms are eternal;
it is not, that ontological eternity that
Plato is concerned with. Whether the knowledge
of this forms are eternal in the sense, that
knowledge does not change when talk about
the change of knowledge. Then, we need to
talk about how does one goes on understanding
the knowledge of these forms and the extract
knowledge is the knowledge about goodness.
So, Plato talks about the hierarchy of the
knowledge of forms, just beauty, goodness;
goodness is the highest verities of knowledge.
So, in, in that sense, the knower transients
the knowledge, his knowledge about the forms,
permanent or eternal. This process of transcending
one to the other is conceivable, is intelligible,
that is, moving the forms by using forms.
It is pure conceptual knowledge. For his knowledge
about the sense experiences are with permanent,
they are transitory phenomenon. They are transitory
phenomenon in the sense, that we can revise
our knowledge based on our sense experiences.
So, this revision is possible.
Now, the same color appears in many different
ways, the variation of the light, the lightning
condition. So, that kind of things will talk
about how knowledge varies from context to
context, from place to place.
So, knowledge about the particulars is not
permanent knowledge, they keep on changing.
So, from this we can conclude, that there
are knowledge, which are permanent, is a universal
and there are knowledge, that is, knowledge
about the particulars are not universal knowledge.
As I mentioned, that it is the soul, which
comprehend the knowledge of the forms. So,
therefore, it is the soul is akin to ideas
or forms. Now, this relationship is defined
as a kind of an affinity. So, it is affinity
to the forms.
Now, look at what Robert writes. Roberts says,
affinity is a condition by virtue of which
the soul contemplates and apprehends true
being. So, affinity is a kind of an epistemic
relation, it is not mere psychological relation,
it is an epistemic relation, where the soul
contemplates on the forms. So, for example,
when I understand what beauty is or what goodness
is, so my relationship or my engagement with
this form and my engagement with a good action
performed by a particular individual are two
different moods of engagement. So, in that
sense, Plato is making a kind of a distinction
between the sense experiential knowledge,
where the subject is judging the action of
the individual.
And my basic understanding of what good is,
are two different kinds of relationships,
both are in fact, conscious because I am experiencing
the performance of a good act, I am also understanding
or tracing this action as good action. So,
what is important for Plato is to emphasize,
that what kind of engagement or what kind
of relationship we have with forms. Is it
same with the particulars? For Plato, it is
not. So, therefore, let us say, it is a kind
of an affinity by virtue of which the soul
contemplates.
So, what is that affinity, affinity between
the soul and the forms? So, that affinity
we need to talk about when we say that soul
and forms are connected with each other. So,
it is this connection Plato is trying to bring
out, which is different from the connection,
which one would have with the particulars.
So, this connection is different and this
connection is different. Now, Plato’s theory
of forms, vis-a-vis the theory of mind or
the soul, one finds, that Plato is talking
about an ontological dualism, which is an
epistemic concern because Plato’s ontology
developed from the discourse of epistemology
and this ontological dualism, dualism between…
So, the knower and the known are the forms
and the particulars also have some kind of
ethical considerations.
There is an ethical consideration attached
to the ontological considerations because
when we say, that knowledge is universal,
Plato say, truth and good are one because
the knowledge is universal in the sense, that
it is a true knowledge, it is different from
the opinions.
Opinions can be formed by everyone, opinions
are based on our sense experiences, but opinions,
which are produced by understanding things,
for Plato, are insignificant. If opinions
have no grounding on our intelligence, then
opinions are just meaningless. As you know,
that Socrates who is having dialogues with
Plato and, other fellow friends is very critical
of sophists who are the reason why his people
and sophists were all the time engaged in
giving opinions.
So, therefore, they had no idea about what
is goodness, what is justice. For them, this
is, the judgment about justice keeps changing.
So, Socrates was very skeptical about that
kind of approach where knowledge is not a
permanent phenomenon because the definition
of justice keeps changing and that is the
criticism, as the criterion or Platonic criticism
against relativism or against the kind of
approach, which sophist used to have.
So, man who intends to know, who desires to
know truth, this desire is a kind of a, is
a natural desire; man is a of truth. So, so,
the desire to know is something very basic,
something very fundamental to human life.
Similarly, the desire to perform good action
is also very fundamental to human life. In
fact, Plato is talking about this ethical
aspect of human life, he is emphasizing this
ethical aspect of human life, that the, how
the virtue of being good and the virtue of
knowing are interrelated. And knowledge is
identical with virtues; virtue is knowledge,
Socrates’ famous statement.
Virtue is knowledge, now this is described
in his famous parable, that parable of cave.
I am sure, you all must aware of famous parable,
where Plato tries to show, how opinions are
different from knowledge. Plato also shows
the virtue of knowing. We would discuss about
this parable in the next class, but let me
summarize what I was trying to tell you about
the nature of soul.
There are two things I am trying to suggest
here. One that understanding of the nature
of soul is an epistemic activity, or this
epistemic activity shows, that there is an
ontological dualism present in Plato; the
dualism between the form and the particulars.
Now, this dualism is created because of the
mode in which the soul is engaged with the
forms and the soul is engaged with the particulars.
There are two different kinds of engagement.
Forms are independent of particulars, soul
is independent of particulars because soul
is not identical with particulars, but soul
is in affinity with the forms. It is with
this kind of affinity we can talk about how
one relates the forms with the particulars
or how does one recognize the basic particulars
or how does one have the knowledge of basic
particulars.
We will discuss in detail about it in the
next class with reference to Plato’s famous
parable, that parable of cave and we will
try to show, that how ethics, ontology and
epistemology are interrelated.
Thank you.
