Theory of Forms (Platonic Idealism)

Plato

The Theory of Forms or Theory of Ideas,^[1][2][3] also known as Platonic idealism or Platonic realism, is a philosophical theory credited to the Classical Greek philosopher Plato.

A major concept in metaphysics, the theory suggests that the physical world is not as real or true as Forms. According to this theory, Forms—conventionally capitalized and also commonly translated as Ideas^[4]—are the timeless, absolute, non-physical, and unchangeable essences of all things, which objects and matter in the physical world merely participate in, imitate, or resemble.^[5] In other words, Forms are various abstract ideals that exist even outside of human minds and that constitute the basis of reality. Thus, Plato's Theory of Forms is a type of philosophical realism, asserting that certain ideas are literally real, and a type of idealism, asserting that reality is fundamentally composed of ideas, or abstract objects.

Plato describes these entities only through the characters (primarily Socrates) in his dialogues who sometimes suggest that these Forms are the only objects of study that can provide knowledge.^[6] The theory itself is contested by characters within the dialogues, and it remains a general point of controversy in philosophy. Nonetheless, the theory is considered to be a classical solution to the problem of universals.^[7]

Etymology

Referring to Forms, Plato used a number of Ancient Greek terms that mainly relate to vision, sight, and appearance, including ἰδέα (idéā; from a root meaning to see), a word that precedes attested philosophical usage. Plato uses these aspects of sight and appearance in his dialogues to explain his Forms, including the supreme one: the Form of the Good. Other terms include εἶδος (eîdos) meaning "visible form", and the related terms μορφή (morphḗ) meaning "shape",^[8] and φαινόμενα (phainómena) meaning "appearances", from φαίνω (phaínō) meaning "shine", ultimately from Indo-European *bʰeh₂- or *bhā-.^[9] The original meanings of these terms remained stable over the centuries before the beginning of Western philosophy, at which time they became equivocal, acquiring additional specialized philosophic meanings. Plato used the terms eidos and idea interchangeably.^[10]

Pre-Socratic philosophy

The pre-Socratic philosophers, ancient Greek thinkers born before Plato, noted that appearances change, and they began to ask what the thing that changes "really" is. If something changes, what component or essence of it remains "real"? The answer was substance, which stands under the changes and is the actually existing thing being seen. The status of appearances now came into question, including how the appearance is related to the substance. For instance, the earliest known pre-Socratic philosopher, Thales, argued that the fundamental substance all things are made of is water.

Scriptures written by Pythagoras, another pre-Socratic philosopher, suggest that he developed an earlier theory similar to Plato's Forms. For Pythagoras, like Plato, the substance or essence of all things was not something physical (like water) but rather something abstract. However, Pythagoras's theory was much narrower than Plato's, proposing that the non-physical and timeless essences that compose the physical world are specifically numbers, whereas Plato conceived of his Forms as a vast array of intangible ideals.

Plato's Forms

The Forms are expounded upon in Plato's dialogues and general speech, in that every object or quality in reality—dogs, human beings, mountains, colors, courage, love, and goodness—has a Form. Form answers the question, "What is that?" Plato was going a step further and asking what Form itself is. He supposed that the object was essentially or "really" the Form and that the phenomena were mere shadows mimicking the Form; that is, momentary portrayals of the Form under different circumstances. The problem of universals – how can one thing in general be many things in particular – was solved by presuming that Form was a distinct singular thing but caused plural representations of itself in particular objects. For example, in the dialogue Parmenides, Socrates states: "Nor, again, if a person were to show that all is one by partaking of one, and at the same time many by partaking of many, would that be very astonishing. But if he were to show me that the absolute one was many, or the absolute many one, I should be truly amazed."^[11]: 129 Matter is considered particular in itself. For Plato, Forms, such as beauty, are more real than any objects that imitate them. Though the Forms are timeless and unchanging, physical things are in a constant change of existence. Where Forms are unqualified perfection, physical things are qualified and conditioned.^[12]

These Forms are the essences of various objects: they are that without which a thing would not be the kind of thing it is. For example, there are countless tables in the world but the Form of tableness is at the core; it is the essence of all of them.^[13] Plato's Socrates held that the world of Forms is transcendent to our own world (the world of substances) and also is the essential basis of reality. Super-ordinate to matter, Forms are the most pure of all things. Furthermore, he believed that true knowledge/intelligence is the ability to grasp the world of Forms with one's mind.^[14]

A Form is aspatial (transcendent to space) and atemporal (transcendent to time).^[15] In the world of Plato, atemporal means that it does not exist within any time period, rather it provides the formal basis for time.^[15] It therefore formally grounds beginning, persisting and ending. It is neither eternal in the sense of existing forever, nor mortal, of limited duration. It exists transcendent to time altogether.^[16] Forms are aspatial in that they have no spatial dimensions, and thus no orientation in space, nor do they even (like the point) have a location.^[17] They are non-physical, but they are not in the mind. Forms are extra-mental (i.e. real in the strictest sense of the word).^[18]

A Form is an objective "blueprint" of perfection.^[19] The Forms are perfect and unchanging representations of objects and qualities. For example, the Form of beauty or the Form of a triangle. For the form of a triangle say there is a triangle drawn on a blackboard. A triangle is a polygon with 3 sides. The triangle as it is on the blackboard is far from perfect. However, it is only the intelligibility of the Form "triangle" that allows us to know the drawing on the chalkboard is a triangle, and the Form "triangle" is perfect and unchanging. It is exactly the same whenever anyone chooses to consider it; however, time only affects the observer and not the triangle. It follows that the same attributes would exist for the Form of beauty and for all Forms.

Plato explains how we are always many steps away from the idea or Form. The idea of a perfect circle can have us defining, speaking, writing, and drawing about particular circles that are always steps away from the actual being. The perfect circle, partly represented by a curved line, and a precise definition, cannot be drawn. The idea of the perfect circle is discovered, not invented.

Source: Wikipedia