Plato's Epistemology

Epistemology is the branch of formal philosophy concerned with the nature and limits of human knowledge. The Greek philosopher, Plato, has given us much to debate and ponder regarding epistemology from his thesis that all learning is recollection. Plato believed that our souls once existed in the realm of “the Forms” – a separate existence outside of reality – and that we are all born with an innate conception of knowledge, even if we do not remember it. This differs greatly from the empirical doctrines, which hold that we derive all knowledge from our senses; and that we only obtain knowledge from our interactions with the world around us. In The Republic, Plato details his theory of learning through the analogy of what he calls, ‘the divided line.’ This essay will explore the concept of the divided line, explain the difference between knowledge and opinion, and the value, or dangers, of both.

In Book VI of The Republic, Glaucon is asked by Socrates to imagine a line divided into two unequal parts and then divided again in the same proportion. Of the two main divisions, one is visible and the other is intelligible. Of those, their subdivisions represent visible images of shadows and reflections and the other section everything which we see – “that grows or is made” (Plato, ch. VI). With this simple illustration, Plato created a complex metaphysical framework by which one can compare and contrast types of knowledge or opinion with their relative truths and realities. The difference between knowledge and opinion is crucial in understanding Platonic epistemology.

To Plato, knowledge can always be defended or proved by logic; whereas opinion can only possibly be true. The two sections of Plato’s divided line that deal with knowledge involve accessing the psyche via ‘the Forms’ and assuming hypotheses while using reflections of ‘the Forms,’ as in numerical logic. These are the highest relative truths. The other two sections of the divided line deal with opinion –– which is either belief or conjecture concerning things that are visible to the eye –– the lowest forms of relative truth (Uebersax).

Via the voice of Socrates, Plato maintains the difference between true knowledge and opinion is in our ability to justify it (logos). Justification can validate an opinion, by providing the logic. His theory and teachings on knowledge are inherently connected to his belief about ‘the Forms’ – we can be fooled by the eye, by the surface appearance of things around us, which are ever-changing; however, ‘the Forms’ represent all innate knowledge and essence of all objects or things.

Opinion, which Plato represents as the lowest level of awareness, exists outside of ‘the Forms’ and is based on surface data collected by the mind and the eye from things which are illusory or transient, inherited or emoted. A higher level of opinion exists where one attempts to develop an informed awareness which is based only on observation of things seen. On the divided line, Platonic epistemology comprises four states which encompass the levels of transition from knowledge to opinion: (1) knowledge (noesis), (2) thought (dianoia), (3) confidence (pistis), and( 4) conjecture (eikasia) (Garrett).

To Plato, the object of all knowledge was a remembrance of ‘the Forms.’ Through the three parts of our souls –– reason, spirit, and appetite –– we continuously struggle to remember the Forms. This struggle is entwined with morality, as Plato believed it was only through perseverance and a rational mind that we could overcome the human condition – the appearance of surface illusions –– and remember ‘the Forms’ to achieve harmony and balance. To follow that to its logical conclusion, Plato equated knowledge with virtue and virtue with justice.

In equating knowledge with virtue, Plato also equated opinion with a non-virtuous life. Opinion, or that which lies at the lowest level of Plato’s divided line, does not rely on justification or deduction or reasoning. Opinion relies only on visible things which are seen, or the likenesses of visible things (Cohen). In an instant, an opinion can be formed on nothing more than illusion, an inherited belief, or a fear. Plato valued the morality and goodness of knowledge, for it was at this higher level of thinking that man could see beyond likenesses and imaginings, to ‘the Forms,’ or what was real.

The danger of opinion, or lower-level thinking, is evidenced clearly in daily headlines and newscasts. Opinion sees a hoodie and believes danger. Knowledge would have seen a young boy walking home. Opinion hears thug music and sees gangsters. Knowledge would have seen a car full of young teens on the way home from a mall, their lives in front of them. Opinion sees a socialist/Marxist from Kenya undermining the Constitution. Knowledge sees the President of the United States. The danger of opinion, in all those cases, is self-evident.

In contrast, knowledge is as valuable as opinion can be dangerous. Plato, while sometimes difficult to understand, teaches us the value of knowledge to a life well-lived. Inherent goodness and virtue strive for better understanding and a more thorough comprehension of all that exists around us. Those who subsist only on the lower dimensions of thought –– who never seek to see beyond what is transient and physical –– never realize the balance and harmony of a full and fruitful life. For those who exist in knowledge, in purposeful and logical reasoning, life can be lived on a higher plane and with more perfect peace, as one is able to lift back and pierce the veils that surround the Forms, in all their original glory.

Works Cited

Cohen, S. Marc. Theory of Forms. U of Washington, 7 Nov 2011. Web. 22 Feb 2014.

Garrett, Jan. Introduction to Plato. WKU, 26 Oct 2009. Web. 22 Feb 2014.

Plato. The Republic. Translation ed.: Public Domain Books, 2009. Kindle file.

Uebersax, John. “Plato’s Divided Line Analogy.” John Uebersax Home Page. N.p., 2006. Web. 22 Feb 2014.