My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Platon, The allegory of the cave.

bashkim

Registered User
I studied in Greece and one of the most beautiful subjects that were teached in high school was Philosophical writtings from ancient Greece (my favourite subject). Professors teached us the interpretation of this allegory but i dont know if it was 100% right. What are your thoughts upon this ancient Greek allegory?
 

Elexir

Registered User
I studied in Greece and one of the most beautiful subjects that were teached in high school was Philosophical writtings from ancient Greece (my favourite subject). Professors teached us the interpretation of this allegory but i dont know if it was 100% right. What are your thoughts upon this ancient Greek allegory?

In Short summary: There is more to life then what we see of we actully take the step and try to look in another way then we usally do.
 

Brother JC

Moderating Staff
Staff Member
A New Mexican version; you watch amazing sunsets from your favourite perch day after day. One day you think to look behind you and discover all the beauty you’ve been missing.
 

coachn

Coach John S. Nagy
Premium Member
Serioulsy? I was asking an honest question. I'd not heard that comparison before, and I wanted to know more. You don't have to be a jerk....
You used a jerky word* and call me a jerk for using it back? Yes, seriously not a friendly start Bro.

If you are serious, perhaps using less derogatory language would provide a friendlier response next time.

As for your honest question, here's a starter link for you to consider. The Matrix comparison starts at slide 21...

https://www.slideshare.net/abhinaviitg/allegory-of-the-cave-and-the-matrix

* Specious - superficially plausible, but actually wrong.
 

Brother_Steve

Premium Member
The allegory of the cave has many meanings.

You do not observe the world around you with a primary sense. Everything you experience is secondary.

IE you do not see the brown table. The table has properties that reflects light in such a way that your eyes capture it. Your eyes have rods and cones that transmit the image to your brain which is then converted into something for you to build the world around you. Hence you see the shadow of everything and not the actual thing.

We can never "look out" at something. We can only see what is given to us. Hence seeing the shadow of figures and not the actual figures. Even if you could see behind the veil, you'd be seeing the light reflected off the figures, not the figures themselves.

Another fun fact to ponder. Light travels through space. We can calculate how fast it travels based on the distance between it's origin and terminus. Why? Because speed equals distance divided by time. However, from light's perspective, the time experienced from origin to terminus is instantaneous. There is no time involved. Contemplate that while looking into the depths of space... Sorry, observing space

But I digress...
 
Last edited:

coachn

Coach John S. Nagy
Premium Member
I like the way you break it down. I've done similarly and continue to do so in my travels. I've found deconstruction that doesn't take into consideration any target's synergy is no longer evaluating the target.

Here are some thoughts on your evaluations and conclusions...

The allegory of the cave has many meanings.
Agreed!
You do not observe the world around you with a primary sense. Everything you experience is secondary.
Everything? Can one never, ever, have a primary experience of anything based upon your model?
IE you do not see the brown table. The table has properties that reflects light in such a way that your eyes capture it. Your eyes have rods and cones that transmit the image to your brain which is then converted into something for you to build the world around you.
Isn't that what we call "seeing"?
Hence you see the shadow of everything and not the actual thing.
Are we seeing shadows or are we "seeing" a visual representation of what our eyes sense?
We can never "look out" at something.
Primary logical fallacy. Are you not redefining terms and then, based upon your new definition, exerting a leading premise to support your conclusions.
We can only see what is given to us.
But you already, by your definitions, claimed "We can never 'look out' at something." How can we then "see what is given to us"?
Hence seeing the shadow of figures and not the actual figures.
And based upon your model, we cannot even see the shadows of these figures since shadows are something we cannot "see".
Even if you could see behind the veil, you'd be seeing the light reflected off the figures, not the figures themselves.
The problems one faces with applying deconstructionism is the method never recognizes, acknowledges and accounts for the synergism of the evaluated systems.

It never addresses the question: At what point does one's deconstruction efforts leave the synergistic reality created by the system and moves into a straw man reality where what is being discussed has nothing to do with the primary system being evaluated?

Case in point: The Zeno Paradoxes are only paradoxes because of the Trivial methods used to evaluate what is offered. All these paradoxes go away once the Quadrivium is applied. It was used by Zeno to evaluate his students to see if they had mastered the skills developed by Quadrivium studies.
 
Last edited:
Top