Anonymous
6/12/2025, 12:00:17 AM No.24459861
What does Plato mean by the “world of Forms,” and how does it relate to the physical world?
Replies:
Thread 24459861 - /lit/ [Archived: 1090 hours ago]
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 12:03:56 AM No.24459872
>>24459861 (OP)
A Form is the ideal version of something — not a physical object, but a pure concept.
Examples: the Form of Beauty, Justice, Circle, Tree, or even Bed.
A Form is the ideal version of something — not a physical object, but a pure concept.
Examples: the Form of Beauty, Justice, Circle, Tree, or even Bed.
Replies:
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 12:18:43 AM No.24459915
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 12:25:43 AM No.24459923
He says different things in different places, the dialogue that deals most directly with them can be interpreted half a dozen different way, nothing he says anywhere is apodictic, and a lot of it is mixed up with mystical speculation about theology and the soul. This is why Plato is boring: he’s a literary figure, a philosopher for people who don’t actually like philosophy. Hence perennially popular on this board.
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 12:56:56 AM No.24459987
it comes from the ideas that something has to rationally order things (Uh... Anaxagoras or whatever) and that a whole is fundamentally more axiomatic than an element (Parmenides). So basically if there are gonna be multiple instances of a thing in the world there has to be some separate thing that accounts for the order among them. Similarly, that thing is probably one thing instead of an assemblage of things. the there is one form of beauty that organizes all the beautiful things. You can extend the idea quite far too, from a historical perspective.
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 1:16:01 AM No.24460018
>>24459861 (OP)
Plato believed that beyond the physical world we perceive with our senses, there exists a non-physical, timeless, and unchanging realm called the world of Forms. This realm contains the perfect, ideal versions (or "Forms") of all things.
Plato believed that beyond the physical world we perceive with our senses, there exists a non-physical, timeless, and unchanging realm called the world of Forms. This realm contains the perfect, ideal versions (or "Forms") of all things.
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 3:28:58 AM No.24460265
laws of nature and the mind and morality and beauty
there are no forms of human made things
there are no forms of human made things
Replies:
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 3:37:26 AM No.24460287
>>24459872
This.
This.
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 4:23:41 AM No.24460384
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 4:25:33 AM No.24460389
>>24459861 (OP)
Imagine a feminine penis.
You know, that no such thing truly exists, but your mind can conceptualize it. That is your internal spirit reaching the world of the forms.
Imagine a feminine penis.
You know, that no such thing truly exists, but your mind can conceptualize it. That is your internal spirit reaching the world of the forms.
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 4:32:42 AM No.24460400
>>24459872
What kind of things have forms? If there's a tree form and bed form, are there forms of species that haven't evolved yet and tools people haven't invented yet, but will? What about things that will never exist?
In what way do these forms constitute a 'world'? Or is that a misnomer?
What kind of things have forms? If there's a tree form and bed form, are there forms of species that haven't evolved yet and tools people haven't invented yet, but will? What about things that will never exist?
In what way do these forms constitute a 'world'? Or is that a misnomer?
Anonymous
6/12/2025, 6:32:43 AM No.24460641
>>24460265
>“We get, then, these three couches, one, that in nature which, I take it, we would say that God produces, or who else?” “No one, I think.” “And then there was one which the carpenter made.” “Yes,” he said. “And one which the painter. Is not that so?” “So be it.” “The painter, then, the cabinet-maker, and God, there are these three presiding over three kinds of couches.” “Yes,three.” “Now God,whether because he so willed or because some compulsion was laid upon him not to make more than one couch in nature, so wrought and created one only, the couch which really and in itself is. But two or more such were never created by God and never will come into being.” “How so?” he said. “Because,” said I, “if he should make only two, there would again appear one of which they both would possess the form or idea, and that would be the couch that really is in and of itself, and not the other two.” “Right,” he said. “God, then, I take it, knowing this and wishing to be the real author of the couch that has real being and not of some particular couch, nor yet a particular cabinet-maker, produced it in nature unique.” “So it seems.”
>“We get, then, these three couches, one, that in nature which, I take it, we would say that God produces, or who else?” “No one, I think.” “And then there was one which the carpenter made.” “Yes,” he said. “And one which the painter. Is not that so?” “So be it.” “The painter, then, the cabinet-maker, and God, there are these three presiding over three kinds of couches.” “Yes,three.” “Now God,whether because he so willed or because some compulsion was laid upon him not to make more than one couch in nature, so wrought and created one only, the couch which really and in itself is. But two or more such were never created by God and never will come into being.” “How so?” he said. “Because,” said I, “if he should make only two, there would again appear one of which they both would possess the form or idea, and that would be the couch that really is in and of itself, and not the other two.” “Right,” he said. “God, then, I take it, knowing this and wishing to be the real author of the couch that has real being and not of some particular couch, nor yet a particular cabinet-maker, produced it in nature unique.” “So it seems.”