So, the analogy of the line is at the end
of book 6 of Plato's Republic, and I'm
going to use this representation of it
to talk a little bit about what is going
on within the analogy. Incidentally, it's
preceded in the text by the analogy of
the Sun, and following the analogy of the
line is the allegory of the cave, at the
beginning of book 7 of Plato's Republic.
So Plato suggests that we take a line -
and so in this case this is the main
line that I've drawn vertically - and then
he says, divide that line unevenly. And so
here I've attempted to follow his
instructions, and then he says now look
at the resulting two sections: So here's
the bottom section, and then up here is
the top section, and he says, divide each
of those in the same proportion as you
divided the original entire line: and so
here what I've tried to do is divide the
original line in about 1/3 above and 2/3
below, and then the lower line I've
divided again 1/3 above and 2/3 below,
and then at the top ,1/3 above and 2/3 of
that section of the line below, and so we
have, we could say, A-B-C-D-E, although I won't refer to those letters.
I'll just talk through the various
sections of the line. Now the line
represents reality [on the left]. It is a common misinterpretation of Plato to
think that because he divides a line up into
sections, that he's talking about
"different realities," but that is not the
case.
Reality is unified. But it turns out that
reality admits of degrees; that is to say,
some things are less real than others,
and those things that are more real are
marked by their relative permanence. So
the left side of the line depicts
metaphysical reality, and it includes all
sections on the left side of the line.
The right side of the line is
epistemological in nature, or it
represents the various cognitive states
into which Plato thinks we find ourselves
as we make contact with that which is
real. And so working from the bottom on
the epistemological side, we have
imagining, or "conjecturing" is sometimes
the way this is translated, the Greek
word being "eikeisia."
Moving up to the second section, we have
belief. Belief is an epistemic state that
admits of more certainty: it marks a
certain kind of maturity that goes
beyond mere imagining. The third section
on the right side - the epistemological
side - of the line is episteme, or
knowledge, and as we'll see shortly, that
is quite an attainment. And then finally
at the top part of the line, we have
noesis, or intelligence. Now this can be
viewed either diachronically or
synchronically, and what I mean by that
is, let's start with synchronic:
synchronic simply means - or to summarize, it
means - "all at once." So we can view this
all at once - in a flash - and all of it is
in fact, on the left side, a
depiction of that which is real. And on
the right side, it consists of various
cognitive states with which we are able
to access various levels of reality. It
is significant that reality admits of
levels - that it has levels - and that our
cognitive engagement with it also can be
characterized as having levels. OK, so,
I said we can view this either
synchronically or diachronically: It's
more natural, conversationally, to think
of it diachronically, and what I mean
by "diachronic" is: "across time." To view,
that is to say, this illustration as
something that applies to human beings
over the course of time, as they develop.
And Plato thinks that he's giving us a
representation of the natural
development of an individual. And so down
here at the bottom of reality, we have
the many shadows, images, et cetera. Now when you
think about this for a moment, you can
think of a newborn child, and the newborn
child immediately sees shadows and
images and is unable to distinguish
certain of them from the others. And it's
a natural born, instinctual matter for
the infant to want to begin to discern
more distinctively the various things
that it sees down here at the bottom
level of the line, and as it does so, it
eventually acquires beliefs, and those
beliefs respond to physical
objects, sounds, and things of this nature.
Now we can pause even here to notice a
couple of things. One is that this is painful.
it's not easy to develop. As children we
all are in the process of growing, and
that is painful - a lot of tears are shed;
a lot of misunderstanding occurs; a lot
of stumbling occurs. Now if you look at
the bottom half of the line, you can see
that over here I've written
"Heraclitus," and then on the top half of the
line I've written over here, "Parmenides."
And the reason for this is because Plato,
who read his predecessors, is actually
taking the thesis - if you will - of
Parmenides - that change is impossible -and
the antithesis of Heraclitus, namely that
flux or change is the one constant in
all things, and he is synthesizing them.
Plato is taking a thesis and an antithesis
and is creating a synthesis: he's bringing them together to say, look, I'm going to take
my predecessors seriously. There is
something somewhat right in the things
that Heraclitus said; however, there's
also some profound insight to be found
in Parmenides, and so I'm going to take
these and show how it is different parts
of reality that we are able to get in
touch with, or rather, by utilizing
the insights of Heraclitus; and OTHER
parts of reality that we're able to
access if we think in Parmenides's
terms. So the child eventually
understands that shadows are just that:
they are signs or indicators of some
thing that is more permanent than a
shadow, and that is that they are the
physical objects to which the shadows
give rise. Now even as adults, we know
that there are many more shadows of a
thing - of a physical object - than there
are physical objects. So you might think
of this area down in the bottom left - the
metaphysical bottom: shadows, images, etc., - as containing a multitude of
possibilities. Just think about your
selfies, for example, or shadows that you
have cast. There are literally thousands
of those things that would not exist
were it not for the reality of one thing,
namely, you. And so you have a kind - as a
physical object - you have a kind of
permanence of unchangeability that is
robust when compared with the shadows
that you cast, or the images of you that may
appear repeatedly on anybody's computer.
So there is a sense in which your
relative permanence both accounts for
the existence of all the selfies of you, and
all the shadows that you cast, and so it
is your permanence - the fact that
you are more permanent - that makes you
more real than your shadows, images, etc.
Now what happens between the second
level - of physical objects - and the third
level, well, here's where it gets
interesting.
Most of us, Plato contends, for spending
the majority of our existence down here
in this these lower two parts of reality.
However, you notice that you are in an
institution of what? Higher education.  You are now in
a position to be abstracting from the
particulars. These here are the
particulars, and you want to abstract
from those and understand their general
significance. So the only way - or rather,
the best way - I know to proceed here is
to say that...let's say that in high
school, you got really interested in the
physical body, and in particular maybe
you were interested in football injuries,
and you wanted to understand the human
brain. So not any particular human brain,
but the human brain as such. And so you
made plans to go to college, and then to
med school, and so you are now operating
in the realm of the intelligible world
rather than the sensible world: that is
to say, you want to abstract from any
particular brain and you want to think
about brain structure as such. It is as
though in medical books, what you're
being given is the blueprint, right?
Something that is more stable than any
particular brain, and furthermore, the
blueprint of the human brain will still
exist even when any particular person
passes away. That does not cause the
blueprint for the human brain to
suddenly alter. It has a kind of
permanence - we might think of these in
the third level, as TEMPLATES, but not
physical templates, but rather
abstractions. So to take another kind of
example, I drive a Volvo 740. It was first
produced by the Swedish company
in 1990, and the blueprint for that is
contained in a Chilton manual that
I have right above the desk from
which I'm recording this, and the manual
contains all the details, all the
particulars, that are required to
assemble and maintain my 1990 Volvo 740.
So there is a sense in which the year
2050 could roll around, and if somebody
got hold of this template, they could
reconstruct - newly fabricate - this object
that first made an appearance down here
in the physical world back in 1990, and I
selfishly wished that they would do so
because I think they're wonderful cars,
and I'd like to see them be around again
even after I'm not.
And so this permanence, this template-
like nature, because it's abstract and
cannot be identified with any physical
object, but rather is a kind of idea -
Plato refers to these as the lower forms -
and the lower forms down here are pretty
much what we engage with when we come to
understand principles of mathematics and
of science - so when you think about it,
what differentiates an actual doctor
from a person who is not a medical
doctor, is that the medical doctor walks
around with the lower forms of the human
body of no particular human being in their
mind, and so when they come to look at a
particular human being, what they're
really concerned with is what they can
do to take a physical object and make it
better approximate the form. To
continue with our example, the human
brain - the unchanging permanent template
of what a human brain is like -
and this is abstract; this is higher and
it is also difficult to get in touch
with - these lower forms. Now I'm gonna be
even briefer with the higher forms. The
higher forms are the kinds of forms that
we might normally associate with
axiology. So the higher forms demand even
more maturity. On Plato's account, you
have to pass through mathematics and
scientific understanding before you are
in a good position to contemplate the
higher forms: justice, wisdom, courage,
self-control - perhaps we would add things
like integrity, love, and even justice in
the sense of equitable distribution - all
of these are best contemplated only by
those who have weathered the
difficulties of these lower levels of
the line. And so it is at this point that
one goes beyond what we might term
knowledge, to the contemplation of,
strictly speaking, physical ideas - I'm
sorry: PHILOSOPHICAL ideas. Now what is
the role of this line
within the Republic of Plato? Well, as you
know, or as you'll recall, the city was to
be ruled by guardians, and the guardians'
distinctive feature would be that they
would possess wisdom, and so education
becomes of paramount importance in
ensuring that the city actually has wise
individuals. And so it is that Plato
outlines a course of Education that can
enable us to aspire towards higher
education, so that we can see things as they really
are. You'll notice that when we get away
from shadows, we see more clearly the
physical objects that are the basis for
the shadows having any existence
whatsoever, and so likewise Plato claims
that when we are involved in higher
education at the third level, we
understand the basis for physical
objects and why they are thought to be
well structured when they have a
particular structure. That is what the
lower forms reveal, and so in the same
way, the higher forms will enable wise
ones - philosophers - to be able to
understand how society itself ought to
be arranged. And then if we let go of the
analogy of the line and think for a
moment again about the analogy of the
Sun, we will realize that the highest
form of all is the form of the Good,
because it is from the form of the Good -
otherwise analogized as the Sun - that all
things are visible, all things are
possible objects of contemplation, and
furthermore, the Sun is the source of all
that falls below it. So there is a
note of profound optimism within Plato:
that education serves the goal of
enabling its practitioners to actually
behold that which is good, and to
communicate it down through institutions,
into society. And among these
institutions, are institutions of higher
education. Now I hope you can appreciate
why we call colleges institutions of
higher learning.
