Do Chairs Exist?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I'm actually not a huge fan of Plotinus and the Neoplatonists, generally. (Though their quasi-pantheistic worldview is rich and fascinating.) I prefer to say Plato was mostly wrong, but correct in an important way (concerning his forms).

From the video I most liked the view that metaphysical objects (like chairs... or justice) are 99% real. But ultimately not real. I find myself thinking this is a rational position and mereological nihilism is the best competing position. So where I'm at, I'm defending the 99% real position (I forget what it's called) against objections from the mereological nihilists.

In a way I'm defending Plato. But, of course, Plato thought things like chairs (and justice) are 100% real... because they are intelligible. I must admit, I have a soft spot for this outlook.

---

Yeah, a lot of modern views are skeptical of Plato on this account. But I like to give Plato a little more credit. After all, asking questions like "What is justice?" can yield fruitful insights, whether there really is an essence to justice or not.

John Locke, for example, asked the question--"What is justice?"-- and came away with the notion of inalienable human rights. Human rights are something most of us hold very dear and regard as important. But you don't end up with a concept of human rights unless you first explore the question "What is justice?"

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate all of his ideas because of that one flaw, but it still was a huge flaw.

I love his Allegory Of The Cave, and his Apology. But his idea of "essence" was his biggest mistake. 

This is why I get a lot of flack today in saying that "philosophy" is outdated. It is important to know the history of philosophy for sure. But just like going from the Pony Express to PM on your computer, it is outdated. 

Plato could not have known back then, what we know now, that control groups and peer review were paramount. Any "experiments" back then were not about being objective, but merely appeal to be right. 

Plato was a double edge sword in reality. He most certainly advanced western thinking. But he still did not have the modern tools we do today.

I think criticizing Platonic philosophy on the basis of not having control groups or peer review is misguided. Plato wasn’t an experimentalist, he was a philosopher. 

Boru