RE: Deconversion and some doubts
July 30, 2019 at 12:08 am
(This post was last modified: July 30, 2019 at 12:09 am by vulcanlogician.)
Plato doesn't have an Aristotelian teleology. Plato thinks that every material thing partakes (to some degree) in the form of the Good. So, if you are looking at a fly wing, you would say that it is a good fly wing inasmuch as it partakes in the form of the perfect fly wing (which is something that exists to Plato... and I agree with Plato. In theory, there IS A SUCH THING as a perfect fly wing.)
But this does not mean purpose. Aristotle saw things backwards. He saw the plants and lower parts of the food chain as meant for food for those higher up on the food chain. But an evolutionary biologist can tell you that's backwards. The "lower" life forms allow the "higher" life forms to evolve. They don't exist for us. We exist for them.
So let's talk about Plato's telos as described in Timaeus. Full disclosure: I have not read this work. But I have read a lot about this work. He proposed a cosmology in this book, sure. And he also proposed a God who fashioned the world. The thing is, the god fashioned the world using the form of the good as a template. This means that goodness exists independently of God in Plato's conception. And if the God Plato proposes in Timeus suddenly ceased to exist... goodness would still exist.
Plato isn't concerned with "the purpose" of things like Aristotle is. Plato is concerned with a very abstract and nonphysical perfection. Plato understood that you cannot draw a perfect circle. Even if the circle appeared to be flawless, if one were to inspect the circle you would see minor squiggles and imperfections. But how can you say that these squiggles are imperfections? Because there is an IDEA of a perfect circle.
To Plato, in our lives we might have some minor squiggles and imperfections. That's to be expected. But we ought to model our behavior after the Form of the Good. There is no teleology. Our purpose isn't to be good. But those who are wise... those who recognize the Form of the Good... they will try their best to model their behavior in the form of the good, just as one who tries to draw a perfect circle tries to model his drawing after the form (idea) of the perfect circle.
But this does not mean purpose. Aristotle saw things backwards. He saw the plants and lower parts of the food chain as meant for food for those higher up on the food chain. But an evolutionary biologist can tell you that's backwards. The "lower" life forms allow the "higher" life forms to evolve. They don't exist for us. We exist for them.
So let's talk about Plato's telos as described in Timaeus. Full disclosure: I have not read this work. But I have read a lot about this work. He proposed a cosmology in this book, sure. And he also proposed a God who fashioned the world. The thing is, the god fashioned the world using the form of the good as a template. This means that goodness exists independently of God in Plato's conception. And if the God Plato proposes in Timeus suddenly ceased to exist... goodness would still exist.
Plato isn't concerned with "the purpose" of things like Aristotle is. Plato is concerned with a very abstract and nonphysical perfection. Plato understood that you cannot draw a perfect circle. Even if the circle appeared to be flawless, if one were to inspect the circle you would see minor squiggles and imperfections. But how can you say that these squiggles are imperfections? Because there is an IDEA of a perfect circle.
To Plato, in our lives we might have some minor squiggles and imperfections. That's to be expected. But we ought to model our behavior after the Form of the Good. There is no teleology. Our purpose isn't to be good. But those who are wise... those who recognize the Form of the Good... they will try their best to model their behavior in the form of the good, just as one who tries to draw a perfect circle tries to model his drawing after the form (idea) of the perfect circle.
