theoraclesl
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
Hey, I'm doing OCR A-Level Philosophy of Religion.

I was wondering which are the most important arguments to use? I'm going to use the third man argument but apart from that I don't know what else to use.
0
reply
Hal.E.Lujah
  • Study Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
Going to have to be more specific my friend

His forms in general (I.e with assumptions)? Or with regard to the form of a specific item e.g Beauty
0
reply
theoraclesl
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#3
(Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
Going to have to be more specific my friend

His forms in general (I.e with assumptions)? Or with regard to the form of a specific item e.g Beauty
Sorry about that. His forms in general.
0
reply
Hal.E.Lujah
  • Study Helper
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
Hmmm without regarding specifics, nothing can touch his reasoning, he's like Freud, set above disproving.

The third man argument is brokenby the way, unless you're doing historical philosophical context.
1
reply
Eboracum
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
Aristotle?
0
reply
Kalliope
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by theoraclesl)
Hey, I'm doing OCR A-Level Philosophy of Religion.

I was wondering which are the most important arguments to use? I'm going to use the third man argument but apart from that I don't know what else to use.

These are my notes from AS


Weaknesses

• Contradicts his own argument for reason as it seems unreasonable! More reasonable to believe our senses
• Is knowledge innate – isn’t it taught? - Aristotle – knowledge comes from experience, not from the world of the Forms.
• Problem with categorisation – not so simple, modern science says. Is there a form of a dog, or each species, or..? it leads to an infinite regress of forms (especially given evolution)
• Explains away the fact the world is in flux rather than confronting it
• Are there really Forms for things which haven’t been created/ invented yet?
• Are there forms for bad things? (e.g. atomic bomb)
• Is there really an absolute standard of goodness? cf. Moral relativism
• Soul/body dualism can be disagreed with according to materialist arguments
• Ideal forms don’t make sense – Beauty isn’t anything without something beautiful

• The obscurity of the notion of participation or imitation: Aristotle argues, it is almost impossible to explain what exactly this participation or imitation is. The properties that the forms have (eternal, unchanging, transcendent, etc. ) are all incompatible with material objects. How, for example, can a white object be said to participate in or copy the form of whiteness? Is the form of whiteness white itself? How can there be whiteness without any thing which is white? The forms cannot explain anything in the material world.

• The third man argument: The resemblance between any two material objects is explained by Plato in terms of their joint participation in a common form. A red book and a red flower, for example, resemble each other in virtue of being copies of the form of redness. Because they are copies of this form, they also resemble the form. But this resemblance between the red object and the form of redness must also be explained in terms of another form. What form does a red object and the form of redness both copy to account for their similarity? One can see that this will lead to an infinite regress. The theory of forms really explains nothing about the similarity of objects; another form is always needed beyond the one proposed.

Hope that helps Quote me if you have any other questions.
5
reply
mr j man
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Kalliope)
These are my notes from AS


Weaknesses

• Contradicts his own argument for reason as it seems unreasonable! More reasonable to believe our senses
• Is knowledge innate – isn’t it taught? - Aristotle – knowledge comes from experience, not from the world of the Forms.
• Problem with categorisation – not so simple, modern science says. Is there a form of a dog, or each species, or..? it leads to an infinite regress of forms (especially given evolution)
• Explains away the fact the world is in flux rather than confronting it
• Are there really Forms for things which haven’t been created/ invented yet?
• Are there forms for bad things? (e.g. atomic bomb)
• Is there really an absolute standard of goodness? cf. Moral relativism
• Soul/body dualism can be disagreed with according to materialist arguments
• Ideal forms don’t make sense – Beauty isn’t anything without something beautiful

• The obscurity of the notion of participation or imitation: Aristotle argues, it is almost impossible to explain what exactly this participation or imitation is. The properties that the forms have (eternal, unchanging, transcendent, etc. ) are all incompatible with material objects. How, for example, can a white object be said to participate in or copy the form of whiteness? Is the form of whiteness white itself? How can there be whiteness without any thing which is white? The forms cannot explain anything in the material world.

• The third man argument: The resemblance between any two material objects is explained by Plato in terms of their joint participation in a common form. A red book and a red flower, for example, resemble each other in virtue of being copies of the form of redness. Because they are copies of this form, they also resemble the form. But this resemblance between the red object and the form of redness must also be explained in terms of another form. What form does a red object and the form of redness both copy to account for their similarity? One can see that this will lead to an infinite regress. The theory of forms really explains nothing about the similarity of objects; another form is always needed beyond the one proposed.

Hope that helps Quote me if you have any other questions.
Do you have notes on his theory?
0
reply
Ryot Peaks
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
To explain any argument as a sole contributor, one needs forms, see my little bit in this thread?
0
reply
mumble8721
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by Hal.E.Lujah)
The third man argument is brokenby the way, unless you're doing historical philosophical context.
What do you mean by broken? As in its easily criticised or?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

University open days

  • Sheffield Hallam University
    Get into Teaching in South Yorkshire Undergraduate
    Wed, 26 Feb '20
  • The University of Law
    Solicitor Series: Assessing Trainee Skills – LPC, GDL and MA Law - London Moorgate campus Postgraduate
    Wed, 26 Feb '20
  • University of East Anglia
    PGCE Open day Postgraduate
    Sat, 29 Feb '20

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (425)
67.57%
No (204)
32.43%

Watched Threads

View All