Plato, Descartes, and Freud's Take on - Essay Example

In an attempt to do just this, a well known philosopher by the name of, Plato, asked the question, “What is a good life for a human being?” This question carries with it the supposition that all humans have at least two of the same built in devices, reason and human nature. It also implies that these two devices steer people toward the same goal or purpose. It is philosophy that undertakes the study of discovering what this purpose is, by turning people away from mere appearance and toward reality.

The ultimate goal of any philosopher is to uncover how the world looks objectively instead of subjectively, and from what truly is good instead of what just appears to be good. By the use of reason three theories have been developed by the world’s most prominent philosophers during their attempt to divide what is reality, and what is merely and illusion of reality. The first theory, The Divided Line Theory, was developed by Plato. The second theory, Method of Doubt, was created by Descartes.

The final theory, Psychoanalysis, was developed by Freud. By taking an in-depth look into how each philosopher reasoned his conclusion and the similarities and differences each theory contains, one might develop a broad answer to one of philosophy’s most probing questions. Divided Line Theory To develop his, Divided Line Theory, Plato used the reasoning that human beings live in a world of visible and intelligible things. The visible world is made up of those things that surround humans. What they can feel, tough, taste and see.

However, Plato states that the visible world is made up of uncertainty. The intelligible world on the other hand is made up of unchanging products of human reason; this would consist of anything arising from reason alone, such as mathematics, or abstract definitions. The intelligible world therefore is made up of eternal “forms” or in Greek “ideas” of things; the visible world, then, is the imperfect and changing manifestation in this world of these unchanging forms. An example would be the Form or Idea of a horse is intelligible, and applies to all horses.

This form or idea never changes, even though each horse may vary wildly individually, the form of a horse would never change even if all horses across the world were to disappear. An individual horse, on the other hand, is a physical changing object that can easily case to be a horse. Plato therefore describes these two worlds as existing with a line between them; the intelligible world and the visible world. He says that in the intelligible world one can have knowledge and in the visible world one can have opinion.

He then further divides each of the worlds in two. The visible world he divides into illusion which is made up of “shadows” paintings, poetry, etc. and beliefs which is made up of things that can change, such as an individual horse. The intelligible world is then divided into the sub-categories of reason, which is things such as mathematics, and intelligence, which is the understanding of the ultimate good. Plato’s theory differs from Descartes and Freud’s in that he doesn’t attempt to apply it in any way, it is a simple method of grouping aspects of the world to further uncover the ultimate truth.

Method of Doubt Descartes Method of