In his philosophy, Plato used the Divided Line to demonstrate the ones who were called true scientific politicians, unlike practical politicians who used a completely different methodology and another kind of knowledge. To explain what he meant, Plato arranged the four degrees of the clarity of mind along the common line (Riley 2-4). Eiaskia, the first degree, involves a certain kind of thinking by pictures, that is, knowledge that appears to be no more than just a play of imagination and narration. The second one called pistis signifies faith and trust, and is chosen to contrast with the incredibility of guesses. Platos' choice regarding this title makes us think that practical knowledge bears a completely different degree of clarity reliability rather than a guess. Dianoia, the third degree, excels pistis in terms of clarity and reliability, since it represents not simply the knowledge of how things function, but also the knowledge of their inwardness. However, Plato decided to place an even higher degree of called noesis above dianoia. Hence, the difference between what-knowledge and why-knowledge is the difference between the knowledge of one set of universal rules and the rules of a specific field, since these specific rules shape into a coherent whole.
Unlike Plato, Aristotle moves from the fact of changes in knowledge and correlating movements to the existence of pure actualities, or unmoved movers. These essential creatures are able to affect other living-beings. Therefore, they move the potential change so that it becomes the actualized one. In Aristotle's cosmology, he postulates numbers of unmoved movers, but in the final analysis, there exist only heavens and one God, since only material essences can be distinguished. Therefore, neither Plato's Demiurgos nor Aristotle's unmoved mover are not identical with the absolutely complete essence of theism, and these underlying causes also do not appear to be infinite. So, Greeks considered only shapeless and indefinite essences as the infinite ones.
Works Cited
Riley, Michael W. Plato's Cratylus: Argument, Form, and Structure. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005. 2-4. Print.
