Metaphysics
According to Fine (2012), giving a definition to the term “metaphysics” is difficult due to its varying meaning depending on when it is used – whether it may be in its ordinary English usage or its Philosophy definition. However, if one depicts its philosophical trait, metaphysics discusses and argues about the nature of reality. Unlike other sciences or branches of philosophy, metaphysics mostly utilizes methods that constitute generality of the questions it tries to understand – namely “what is there?” or “what is it like?” Those who study this branch of philosophy often attempt to understand and clear out any notion on how the world revolves for people. This includes discussing the existence of life, objects, space, time, and even the ideas on “possibility” One also can note that metaphysic is distinguished by its transparency as it does not allow itself to be bound by any gap between the concept in question and what the concept is utilized for . In this paper, I will argue for the view that metaphysics, in its philosophical sense, indeed presents arguments that constitute to how one can understand the world and its nature in various degrees as depicted from Raphael’s “School of Athens.” I believe that metaphysics presents various plausible understandings on how the world can be understood because Raphael presented two principal arguments from Aristotle and Plato in his work, signaling the possibility that nature can either be unchangeable (Plato) and constantly changing (Aristotle).
One of the most notable works when it comes to metaphysics is the work of Raphael entitled “School of Athens”. According to Kleinbub (2011) the painting depicts Plato and Aristotle debating, while surrounded by other Greek philosophers. It is noted in research that Raphael gotten the inspiration to create the renowned painting due to the aid of Egidio da Viterbo, general of the Augustinians, and Tommaso Inghirami, the papal librarian. Both are known to be Neoplatonic supporters, and shared to Raphael some of their views of the metaphysical aspect of philosophy that was not held positively in Italy around the period. Raphael’s piece showcased the symbolism of the veduta that depicts the physical world is seen defined by bodily sight. It suggests that philosophers tend to perceive the physical aspects of any given concept before undermining the metaphysical context. Taking into consideration the remaining images in the painting, the School of Athens’ main protagonist showcases that they are near the end of their peripatetic debate. Given the position of the philosophers’ feet, the debate itself is not over. Aristotle’s position in the painting depicts that his argument is over by planting his feet firmly in the group while his hand is outstretched. For Plato, his left foot is taking a small step on tiptoe, reflecting his more spiritual argument with his hands pointing in the heavens. Raphael, in this end, executed the painting by visualizing operations of thought and how the philosophers discuss the Disputa. Raphael also noted that the hand gestures of both Greek philosophers present two ways on how to discuss metaphysics. Both Plato and Aristotle are also holding the two books that represent their arguments: Plato is holding the book entitled “Timaeus” which discusses his celestial and abstract dialogues over the nature of reality. In his end, Aristotle is holding the terrestrial dialogues written in Nichomachean Ethics .
The painting depicts the metaphysical perceptions of both Aristotle and Plato with regards to nature, reality and existence. For Plato, as noted by Solomon (2004), he argues for his theory on forms. According to his theory, forms are ideas which are mostly notions on presenting perfection such as the idea of perfect beauty or perfect examples. Plato also argues that forms are unchanging, the perfect example of the ultimate reality. Plato also supports his argument by identifying two works – world of being (home of the forms) and the world of becoming (home of the present man). Humans can only access the world of the being by the use of reasoning and intellectual thought. The world of being is also considered the real world due to the existence of eternity and need. The world of becoming is not real in the eyes of Plato as noted in his “The Myth of the Cave” due to the lack of eternity or necessity. In the story, Plato denotes:
Our world is like a set of shadows of the real world. It is not an illusion but it is a mere imitation of the bright originals. One way to think of the Forms is to think of them as definitions. For example, two horses have in common the Form horse, and you recognize them each as a horse, because they share the Form of horse. Each individual horse "participates" in the Form of horse. The Form kind of acts like a definition, it allows you to recognize a horse, no matter what its individual characteristics are.
Plato’s theory on Forms enables him to explain the reason as to why people know things despite the lack of experience. One plausible example is how people perceive animals. Forms also present a definition for things, including the image of the being defined or determined. It is also noted that Plato’s belief introduces a reality that is immaterial in nature.
In his case, Aristotle first divided the sciences into three branches – theoretical (seeks knowledge to compensate for the desire to learn), practical (seeks knowledge to achieve perfection) and the poietic or productive sciences (seeks knowledge to create a medium to achieve the goal). The term “metaphysics” is not used by Aristotle when he discussed his theories over nature. Instead, he used the expression “first philosophy” to expound in his arguments regarding his perception of the realities. Aristotelian metaphysics also covers the sciences that transcend the physical sciences and concentrate mostly on the transphysical or superphysical state of nature. It is notable that metaphysics is mostly based from Aristotle’s perceptions and work. Nonetheless, Aristotle attributed four definitions in defining his metaphysics: metaphysics inquiries into the “first and supreme causes and principles”, metaphysics inquiries into “being qua being”, metaphysics inquiries into substance, and finally, metaphysics inquiries into God and supersensible substance. He also argues that metaphysics is born from the amazement man feels under the presence of the supernatural; which increases one’s need to understand what man’s very being entails. Metaphysics also covers every advantage that knowledge can acquire for any man who requires such knowledge. Metaphysics is then a science that attempts to satiate human’s need for more knowledge about the things around him. In addition to Aristotle’s idea of knowledge and metaphysics, he also perceives that metaphysical science is divine. Even in the early period, God is perceived to have the infinite access to knowledge. He is also the being that cannot be moved, given the perfect life he controls.
Aristotle also argues that there are universal truths that can identify the realities of all existence. He also defends the laws of contradiction and even argued against the beliefs of Heraclitus and Pythagoras when it comes to their arguments regarding this law. Aristotle questions “what is meant by the real or true substance?” In terms of understanding the concept of “Forms”, Aristotle believes that it is something that is concrete. However, his theory over form and substance is inconsistent as seen in his work “Categories”. The book details the nominalist stance of substances. In addition to his position, Aristotle also offers additional explanations over the idea on substances.
1. Substances are beings or things that must be referred through the use of a noun.
2. Substances serve as the foundation of change of beings.
3. Substances are essential factors of every being.
Another argument presented by Aristotle is the idea that the universe itself and everything that is found in the universe have their own specific purpose. He called this argument “teleology”. Aristotle denotes in his arguments that every being or substance is given its own characteristic, different from the other, and they have the capacity to contribute to the world. Teleology contrasts with causality, which is currently the sentiments of the modern sciences. For Aristotle, four types of causes can explain the position of a being in a particular time: the material cause which comprises matter, the formal cause that covers principle on how a being is made, the efficient cause that makes something happen, and finally, the final clause that gives the purpose of being. Everything has a person, even the inanimate object. While everything has a purpose, Aristotle notes that this cycle is not infinite. There is still the idea of an end for this purpose .
However, Aristotle and Plato had argued on several ideals regarding their perceptions over their theories. In the case of the theory of “forms”, Aristotle claimed that Plato did not sustain the theory on forms as he did not explain the relationship of forms with other things. There is also the lack of understanding the nature of reality in the Theory of Forms. Aristotle also rejected Plato’s “forms” as forms that could be sorted out from things. Aristotle also noted that metaphysics, in its entirety, is the study of one’s person and nature. In addition to his rejection of Plato’s teachings, Aristotle also argued against the idea on substance. In his case, substance stands alone and is independent of any other being. One example that proves this point is that a horse and a human are all substances that can stand alone. These beings could then be classified as primary substances. There are also the secondary substances that constitute the “species” or the “genus”, which includes beings that are less real. Aristotle also claims that forms are indeed real; however, they cannot stand on its own due to the presence of other substances.
Given the arguments presented by both Aristotle and Plato, it is evident that metaphysics present to conflicting and yet similar understandings of the nature of reality. On the one hand, Aristotle presents a world that constantly changes as man tries to perceive all the information he can acquire to understand the world around him. For Plato, he presented a world that is flawed and is unmoved despite the constant strive of man in understanding ideas and skills. Both arguments regarding metaphysics have some realities in consideration on how they both see nature. I believe that like the School of Athens' portrayal of the arguments by both Plato and Aristotle is still far from over in identifying the background of reality. While Plato indeed noted that the world is flawed due to the imperfections of living beings, Aristotle’s argument that the world constantly changes is true. Metaphysics provides readers and experts two plausible worlds on how the world can indeed be understood as both sides present realities that are visible in the arguments presented by both Greek philosophers.
References
Fine, K. (2012). What is Metaphysics? In T. E. Tahko, Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics (pp. 8-25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kleinbub, C. (2011). Vision and the Visionary in Raphael. Louisville: Peen State Press.
Solomon, R. (2004). Introducing Philosophy: A Text with Integrated Readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
