The most important part, I felt, is when the newly freed prisoner is afraid of what he is seeing. It's exhilarating, but terrifying. He wants to go back to the safety of the cave, but by now he understands that would be going back to ignorance. He cannot go back to believing the shadows because he already knows the truth. He tries to drag out the other prisoners, wants someone else to experience what he experiences, but they refuse. They do not want to go into the light, they want to stay. They want to stay ignorant. So the prisoner has to come to terms with what he has learned, has to learn to accept facts, to be free of ignorance. It's that understanding that made the biggest impact on me when I first first read Allegory of the Cave.
Wow, the allegory has a lot more depth and meaning than my first understanding of it. Thank you for explaining it so clearly and for increasing my understanding of the allegory a little further. Going to have a lot of fun exploring your channel :)
Thank you so much for this video. I've read many articles and saw videos, but your video just help me to understand all meaning behind the The Allegory of the Cave. Thank you so much.
Not merely appearances, but existence itself. This is difficult to explain. Let's start with one appearance: red. You can have a red pen, a red rose, and red ribbon. The essence of all those appearances is RED (we'll use caps to indicate that we are talking about the form as opposed to the appearance). RED is what all red appearances have in common. Consider the color of the sky, a blue marker, a blue flower, and even a blue shirt. BLUE is the form of these appearances. It is what all appearances of blue things have in common. Now, here is a weird consequence: since the form of these colors is what these colors have in common, the form does not look like any particular shade. RED does not look like any particular red shade. BLUE does not look like any particular blue shade. It is all shades; the form is the essence. Okay, this abstraction continues up. DOG is the essence of all dogs. CAR is the essence of all cars. TREE is the essence of all trees. The abstraction continues. Forms have forms. RED, BLUE, YELLOW, are all in the form of COLOR. ROUGH, SMOOTH, GRAINED, RIDGED, are all in the form TEXTURE. DOG, CAT, HORSE, are all in the form MAMMAL. MAMMAL, REPTILE, FISH, AVID, are in the form ANIMAL. ANIMAL and PLANT are in ORGANISM. This gets abstract very quickly. These abstractions all subsume under the GOOD, TRUE, and BEAUTIFUL-but they are not actually distinct. These are all the same thing (according to Plato) as BEING. So, in a way, "yes", the GOOD, the TRUE, and the BEAUTIFUL are the essence of appearances, but not *only* the appearances. These are the essence of everything.
@@haugenmetaphilosophy 🤯 Whoa thank you 🙏 sooo much for taking the “time” to answer my question. I will be reading this and watching more videos over and over till “Dawn falls on Marblehead”. 🤗❤️
My undergraduate degree is in Catholic Theology and my Masters is in Systematic Theology. I am teaching a college class that I have to teach this subject and you have no idea how much this help! If you have additional material that I can use PLEASE let me know! You are so clear with your video!!!
I personally thought this video was amazing. It was very insightful on the understanding of the Allegory of the Cave. My one critique is that I don't think this video struck Plato's point dead on. I believe Plato wrote this story for those who did not understand philosophy, for those who did not understand reason. He was trying to show them that everything they knew could be false and then he would start from there. As Socrates' student one would think Plato held this same view as him, the view being that it is everyone's responsibility to become a philosopher, that they should sculpt their reason and ideas to be foolproof as a potter would sculpt pots to be waterproof. Imagine if the man who escaped the cave went back to his fellow prisoners and tried to explain to them the outside world. The man would find some trouble indeed. He is just stumbling back into the cave and telling everyone what they know is wrong, the man needs good reasoning behind his clams . It is always a difficult subject when you are telling someone they are wrong without shattering their beliefs in a violent way. Plato knew that, before writing the Allegory of the Cave Athens had just put Socrates to death. Plato was very aware at what people would do to someone calming to know the truth. You have to persuade the cave dwellers, be kind and nurturing in a way they can understand. We are all born in the cave, some of us never leave it, and Plato saw it to be his duty to show people the sun. ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNYway I freaking love your videos, you're a very intellectual individual and this video was AWESOME!!!!!
I am glad you liked the video. I am not so sure Plato would be in favor of trying to teach everyone to philosophize. In the Republic he seems to think that the vast majority of people are simply incapable. Plato was a great thinker, but he was also an elitist. Thanks for watching and spread the word.
The part that gets me that isn't mentioned is if you were to go back to the cave not only would it be extremely dismal but if you were to tell your friends what you saw they would laugh at you because what you experienced is a reality that they cannot comprehend. It would be like going back in time and trying to explain a smartphone to George Washington. Bell would not even invent the phone for another century and computers much less any form of networking had no frame of reference then.
Yeah, I didn't talk about that part. I thought about it, but I thought it tended to distract from his exposition of the Forms and his account of knowledge and existence. Plato is a great thinker, but he has a lot to learn about how to treat other people. For all his virtues, he was also an elitist and did not think highly of those who were not philosophers. I suppose this is a way to go. Humans of all kinds have found ways to denigrate, devalue, and despise other humans all the while recognizing (while not willing to admit) that we also DEPEND on other humans. I tend to think this is a problem and not something to be admired.
My problem with this analogy is that is assumes that the world perceived by the prisoner who was freed is somehow more true than the world perceived by the other prisoners. It reflects the vanity of Plato and of intellectuals throughout time. They assign a greater significance to their conceptions and label alternative views as delusional. This tendency is demonstrated in Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society". Great read. I also talk about this issue at more length in my blog; 99morequestionsthananswers.wordpress.com/2016/06/22/the-cave-analogy-revisited/Do you think my criticism are valid? Is it really a mistake to assume that we can know that one particular understanding is more true?
Thanks for the thoughtful response and taking the time to look at my writing. I would first like to clear up a misconception. You say " You think your theory is true" but I have not claimed that my ideas are true. You might think it is reasonable to assume that each person believes in the truth of his own conception, but I do not. I attempt to collect ideas that have utility in the context of my life, but I recognize that the same ideas in another context may be misguided, and that the idea I utilize can be improved to better achieve the ends I desire. I think your criticism that I have simplified Plato's work is fair. I did not mean to suggest that Plato, or other thinkers with whom I am at odds, have no arguments. I just think it is worth recognizing that arguments are not proof. An example; Plenty of evidence and reasoning was presented to support the conclusion that stress caused people to develop ulcers. In the 1980's, new medical research convinced many people that this had been a mistake, and that bacteria was actually responsible. Now that there is a new consensus (at least as I understand, not being a doctor) in the medical community, should we be confident that we now have the "truth"? I would not suggest that their new consensus is arrogant and therefore incorrect, I only challenge the level of confidence I hear among so many. It is that confidence that drives people to feel justified in forcing their judgment on other people. I believe in the freedom of conscience in personal matters. I do not mean to suggest that you are against freedom of conscience, but I share this to let you in on why I regard the distinction between reason and knowledge as so significant.
I appreciate the suggestion, but I would feel obnoxious if I was constantly prefacing every statement with "I'm not sure, but it seems to me..." Instead, it will just have to be understood that my opinions are opinions. When I said that I believe in freedom of conscience, I did not mean to say that I know that there is some thing, in "reality", that is called the freedom of conscience. I meant that I am currently convinced in the utility of accepting freedom of conscience as a social norm.
guys please understand also that colour sound taste touch and smell are created inside the brain. they don't exist outside. the colour illusion is a great example of this. no "stuff" exists outside of you. Try to think more along the lines of a matrix within a matrix within a matrix within a matrix going on forever
Plato lived thousands of years ago and even he knew to give an argument and not just contradict. If it is flawed explain why otherwise you just seem silly.
Sorry, no, not Plato. Mr. Haugens presentation of the cave scenario involves circular arguments not useful to understanding Platos allegory. NIce try though.
Man: Is this the right room for an argument? Other Man:(John Cleese) I've told you once. Man: No you haven't! Other Man: Yes I have. M: When? O: Just now. M: No you didn't! O: Yes I did! M: You didn't! O: I did! M: You didn't! O: I'm telling you, I did! M: You did not! O: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?
The most important part, I felt, is when the newly freed prisoner is afraid of what he is seeing. It's exhilarating, but terrifying. He wants to go back to the safety of the cave, but by now he understands that would be going back to ignorance. He cannot go back to believing the shadows because he already knows the truth. He tries to drag out the other prisoners, wants someone else to experience what he experiences, but they refuse. They do not want to go into the light, they want to stay. They want to stay ignorant. So the prisoner has to come to terms with what he has learned, has to learn to accept facts, to be free of ignorance. It's that understanding that made the biggest impact on me when I first first read Allegory of the Cave.
These videos are perfect for helping out students and people who are just getting their toes wet with philosophy! Keep up the great work!
Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for watching. Spread the word.
Wow, the allegory has a lot more depth and meaning than my first understanding of it. Thank you for explaining it so clearly and for increasing my understanding of the allegory a little further.
Going to have a lot of fun exploring your channel :)
I appreciate the compliment. Thanks for watching and spread the word.
I really like your take on this timeless fable.
I can't believe after all of these centuries, we're still discussing what Plato tried to teach us.
because Plato is not going to be born again
You are welcome. Thanks for the compliment. Also, thanks for watching and spread the word.
Thank you so much for this video. I've read many articles and saw videos, but your video just help me to understand all meaning behind the The Allegory of the Cave. Thank you so much.
You are welcome. Thanks for the compliment and spread the word.
Is the good, the true, and the beautiful the essence of all appearances?
Not merely appearances, but existence itself. This is difficult to explain. Let's start with one appearance: red. You can have a red pen, a red rose, and red ribbon. The essence of all those appearances is RED (we'll use caps to indicate that we are talking about the form as opposed to the appearance). RED is what all red appearances have in common. Consider the color of the sky, a blue marker, a blue flower, and even a blue shirt. BLUE is the form of these appearances. It is what all appearances of blue things have in common. Now, here is a weird consequence: since the form of these colors is what these colors have in common, the form does not look like any particular shade. RED does not look like any particular red shade. BLUE does not look like any particular blue shade. It is all shades; the form is the essence.
Okay, this abstraction continues up. DOG is the essence of all dogs. CAR is the essence of all cars. TREE is the essence of all trees. The abstraction continues. Forms have forms. RED, BLUE, YELLOW, are all in the form of COLOR. ROUGH, SMOOTH, GRAINED, RIDGED, are all in the form TEXTURE. DOG, CAT, HORSE, are all in the form MAMMAL. MAMMAL, REPTILE, FISH, AVID, are in the form ANIMAL. ANIMAL and PLANT are in ORGANISM. This gets abstract very quickly.
These abstractions all subsume under the GOOD, TRUE, and BEAUTIFUL-but they are not actually distinct. These are all the same thing (according to Plato) as BEING.
So, in a way, "yes", the GOOD, the TRUE, and the BEAUTIFUL are the essence of appearances, but not *only* the appearances. These are the essence of everything.
@@haugenmetaphilosophy 🤯 Whoa thank you 🙏 sooo much for taking the “time” to answer my question. I will be reading this and watching more videos over and over till “Dawn falls on Marblehead”. 🤗❤️
The Production 🤌🤌 I appreciate all the effort and work put into your videos Professor Haugen! Just had to let you know!
Thank you. I appreciate the compliment. I am glad the videos work for you.
Thanks for posting this. I was randomly linked here from Reddit and I really enjoyed the video.
This was beautiful. Well spoken
Great adaptation of The Allegory of the Cave by Plato. Thanks.
Thanks, Damar. Thanks for watching.
Fantastic video! And some interesting points too.
Great video and a very wise professor.
Thanks Sheridan, and thanks for watching.
very nice explained! keep it up I love it!
You are welcome. Thanks for the compliment and spread the word.
Thank you
You are welcome. Thanks for watching and spread the word.
Thanks for another great video!
This was a great video. Thank you so much!
Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for watching.
My undergraduate degree is in Catholic Theology and my Masters is in Systematic Theology. I am teaching a college class that I have to teach this subject and you have no idea how much this help! If you have additional material that I can use PLEASE let me know! You are so clear with your video!!!
Can you send me an email? I have an idea that might be of use to you.
I personally thought this video was amazing. It was very insightful on the understanding of the Allegory of the Cave. My one critique is that I don't think this video struck Plato's point dead on.
I believe Plato wrote this story for those who did not understand philosophy, for those who did not understand reason. He was trying to show them that everything they knew could be false and then he would start from there. As Socrates' student one would think Plato held this same view as him, the view being that it is everyone's responsibility to become a philosopher, that they should sculpt their reason and ideas to be foolproof as a potter would sculpt pots to be waterproof.
Imagine if the man who escaped the cave went back to his fellow prisoners and tried to explain to them the outside world. The man would find some trouble indeed. He is just stumbling back into the cave and telling everyone what they know is wrong, the man needs good reasoning behind his clams . It is always a difficult subject when you are telling someone they are wrong without shattering their beliefs in a violent way. Plato knew that, before writing the Allegory of the Cave Athens had just put Socrates to death. Plato was very aware at what people would do to someone calming to know the truth. You have to persuade the cave dwellers, be kind and nurturing in a way they can understand. We are all born in the cave, some of us never leave it, and Plato saw it to be his duty to show people the sun.
ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNYway
I freaking love your videos, you're a very intellectual individual and this video was AWESOME!!!!!
Fighting Mongoose is your second paragraph an opinion or a statement?
Fighting Mongoose I can relate to alegory of cave. I have the same situation.
I am glad you liked the video.
I am not so sure Plato would be in favor of trying to teach everyone to philosophize. In the Republic he seems to think that the vast majority of people are simply incapable. Plato was a great thinker, but he was also an elitist.
Thanks for watching and spread the word.
I love good philosophy, this is a great video!
Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for watching. Spread the word.
I don't agree with Plato, yet I still love to read and hear and see his point of view. Very good video.
The part that gets me that isn't mentioned is if you were to go back to the cave not only would it be extremely dismal but if you were to tell your friends what you saw they would laugh at you because what you experienced is a reality that they cannot comprehend. It would be like going back in time and trying to explain a smartphone to George Washington. Bell would not even invent the phone for another century and computers much less any form of networking had no frame of reference then.
Yeah, I didn't talk about that part. I thought about it, but I thought it tended to distract from his exposition of the Forms and his account of knowledge and existence. Plato is a great thinker, but he has a lot to learn about how to treat other people. For all his virtues, he was also an elitist and did not think highly of those who were not philosophers. I suppose this is a way to go. Humans of all kinds have found ways to denigrate, devalue, and despise other humans all the while recognizing (while not willing to admit) that we also DEPEND on other humans. I tend to think this is a problem and not something to be admired.
Good video.
My problem with this analogy is that is assumes that the world perceived by the prisoner who was freed is somehow more true than the world perceived by the other prisoners. It reflects the vanity of Plato and of intellectuals throughout time. They assign a greater significance to their conceptions and label alternative views as delusional. This tendency is demonstrated in Thomas Sowell's "Intellectuals and Society". Great read. I also talk about this issue at more length in my blog; 99morequestionsthananswers.wordpress.com/2016/06/22/the-cave-analogy-revisited/Do you think my criticism are valid? Is it really a mistake to assume that we can know that one particular understanding is more true?
Thanks for the thoughtful response and taking the time to look at my writing.
I would first like to clear up a misconception. You say " You think your theory is true" but I have not claimed that my ideas are true. You might think it is reasonable to assume that each person believes in the truth of his own conception, but I do not. I attempt to collect ideas that have utility in the context of my life, but I recognize that the same ideas in another context may be misguided, and that the idea I utilize can be improved to better achieve the ends I desire.
I think your criticism that I have simplified Plato's work is fair. I did not mean to suggest that Plato, or other thinkers with whom I am at odds, have no arguments. I just think it is worth recognizing that arguments are not proof.
An example; Plenty of evidence and reasoning was presented to support the conclusion that stress caused people to develop ulcers. In the 1980's, new medical research convinced many people that this had been a mistake, and that bacteria was actually responsible.
Now that there is a new consensus (at least as I understand, not being a doctor) in the medical community, should we be confident that we now have the "truth"?
I would not suggest that their new consensus is arrogant and therefore incorrect, I only challenge the level of confidence I hear among so many. It is that confidence that drives people to feel justified in forcing their judgment on other people. I believe in the freedom of conscience in personal matters.
I do not mean to suggest that you are against freedom of conscience, but I share this to let you in on why I regard the distinction between reason and knowledge as so significant.
I appreciate the suggestion, but I would feel obnoxious if I was constantly prefacing every statement with "I'm not sure, but it seems to me..." Instead, it will just have to be understood that my opinions are opinions. When I said that I believe in freedom of conscience, I did not mean to say that I know that there is some thing, in "reality", that is called the freedom of conscience. I meant that I am currently convinced in the utility of accepting freedom of conscience as a social norm.
Good point it is vein, but that's the world this is. Being passive is like allowing yourself to be in the cave.
i think this is what Roger Penrose and Leonard Susskind says about the universe being a hologram.
guys please understand also that colour sound taste touch and smell are created inside the brain. they don't exist outside.
the colour illusion is a great example of this. no "stuff" exists outside of you. Try to think more along the lines of a matrix within a matrix within a matrix within a matrix going on forever
Awesome video! Maybe get a better mic though?
+Christopher Haugen ahh haha well then! You can probably cut out the hissing and whatnot with some free plug-ins :)
+Christopher Haugen Hmm I'm not sure what iMovie offers but I believe HitFilm 3 Express, Blendr, and LightRoom are free!
Now i understand. We read this but its in another language
This guys logic is ridiculously flawed.
Plato's?
Plato lived thousands of years ago and even he knew to give an argument and not just contradict. If it is flawed explain why otherwise you just seem silly.
Sorry, no, not Plato. Mr. Haugens presentation of the cave scenario involves circular arguments not useful to understanding Platos allegory. NIce try though.
Man: Is this the right room for an argument?
Other Man:(John Cleese) I've told you once.
Man: No you haven't!
Other Man: Yes I have.
M: When?
O: Just now.
M: No you didn't!
O: Yes I did!
M: You didn't!
O: I did!
M: You didn't!
O: I'm telling you, I did!
M: You did not!
O: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?