Explore BrainMass

Explore BrainMass

    History and Systems of Psychology

    Not what you're looking for? Search our solutions OR ask your own Custom question.

    This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

    Both Plato and Aristotle believed that there is a world of true knowledge, the ultimate reality of the world that has been created perfectly by God (or the equivalent concept of God). What did each of the two philosophers propose as the route or method to obtaining that true knowledge? Because of their particular theory about the search for true knowledge, what would be each of their views on the nature/nurture debate? Which of the two views is superior to the other? Why? [300 plus word count. In text, citation and 3 sources needed. Write in 3rd person scholarly writing. No quotes please.] This is a personally developed question not an assignment or home work.

    © BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com December 24, 2021, 11:00 pm ad1c9bdddf

    Solution Preview

    Here is an excellent article:
    Vlastos, G. Plato's Theory of Man. The Philosophical Review, Vol. 56, No. 2 (Mar., 1947), pp. 184-193

    Plato's theory of forms is famous. Put very, very simply, Forms are eternal, uncreated archetypes of all natural things. It is the "limit" placed on the chaotic nature of matter. Matter is known to us only because it reflects the Form whose cause it is.
    Forms are separate from matter - natural objects and processes are only reflections of it.
    Plato reaches this conclusion though the objects of mathematics - these objects exist separately from any manifestation of them.
    Form is the model of perfection. Matter is the realm of chaos and rebellion. It adds nothing to Form except that we can, in a sense, "see" the form reflected in the material object.

    How do we know things?
    This is controversial, yet, you'll see the nurture-nature concept below:

    The Forms are transcendent. Most people have no idea as to their existence.
    The world of matter is deceptive - it is mere appearance. In social life, it is equivalent to fashionable opinion. Always changing and usually wrong. Most people live in this world - it is deceptive. No lasting knowledge can come from it.

    The philosopher alone can reach the world of the forms, and this with great difficulty.
    In his Republic, certain people are born with this ability. ...

    Solution Summary

    The history and systems of psychology are given.