Halago, Precilla U Reaction Paper #1

HALAGO, PRECILLA U.
April 28, 2021

1st Year - PhDEM
Reaction Paper # 1
The Idealist and the Realist
Discussions
Plato and Aristotle are two of the great philosophers in history. Although they grow together in
a teacher-student relationship, their ideology differed.
Plato was the teacher of Aristotle in the Academy. His founding ideas were those of his teacher,
Socrates. We know Socrates in his Socratic method of conveying ideas, thus, we already have an
overview of how Plato deliver his. He was an idealist. Meaning that he saw reality as a summation
of ideas and ideals. This formed the fundamental of his concepts. According to Plato knowledge
can only be achieved through the study of ideas and reasoning. For him, to reason rather than to
observe, things can be discovered. He also described the ideal state, the “we’ not the “I”
philosophy. Thus selfishness was viewed by Plato as the hindering factor for growth and claiming
of knowledge and properties.
Aristotle, however, was a realist. Meaning he saw reality as concrete and not abstract. Aristotle
made pioneering contributions to all fields of philosophy and sciences. For him, using our senses
and our reason, we understand what makes a form. In his observation and pursuit of the truth,
he invented formal logic and the scientific disciplines. His philosophy was a contrast to Plato’s
ideology. As basic roots in his argument, human selfishness is who we are as individuals, which a
motive that works in favor of society, family, self, and an essential component to survival.
Therefore, a working government entity should exist, mitigating and upholding selfishness.
Their similarities and differences can be seen in the painting above, Plato's Academy of Raphael.
In the picture, both philosophers were holding a book, which represents the knowledge.
However, their hands are pointing to different direction. Plato is pointing up, hence the
knowledge is our own idea. Aristotle on the other hand is pointing towards the earth, thus
knowledge can be understood and it is visible through our senses.
The good life as described by both Plato and Aristotle was found to have significant common
ground. It can be analyzed within the context of the system known as eudaimonism. It is within
this philosophy that we have learned the fundamental components and precepts of a moral.
Plato and Aristotle within a system defined good, bad, morality, social and individual obligation.
Plato and Aristotle presumed justice and integrity equating to personal happiness, fulfillment,
and defining purpose and identity.
After researching Plato and Aristotle’s beliefs about God, summarized findings will state that they
both believe in God, an eternal supernatural being. Plato’s beliefs were more abstract, imaginary,
aligned with Greek mythologies suggesting the existence of god. Plato’s pursuit of god was
developed through his intellectual determinations as opposed to belief. His view of gods gave
birth in his idealist philosophical approach.
Aristotle’s surprisingly, as a realist believed in God who dwells in heaven based on his line in
metaphysics,” The rule of many is not good; one ruler let there be.”
Reflections, Critique, Reactions
Studying the life and philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, made me realized the pursuit of our own
goals in life. It also reflects how we should treat life.
First, allow me to commend their behavior towards their teacher. Plato and Aristotle are
exemplars of students having good manners towards their teachers even if they both have
common or opposite ideas.
Second, Plato is correct that we will arrive a knowledge if only we can reason well. In this line,
many philosophers will be born. Because to have a philosophy you must find reasons, for what
caused you to make certain lines. However, to disregard senses as the key in finding the idea is
not what I agree with. I still agree that through observation (using your senses) you will be
directed to what is real. Thus, you will not just rely on what you think is right, but you need to
prove it so you will say this is true.
Although in some instances, Plato is correct that ideas are already there. In our case today, ideas
are now written in books, posted on the web, heard, and seen on radio and television. Our role
now is to study ad verify the correctness of the data. We need to weigh the truthfulness of what
we read, see and hear. Thus, we reason yet we evaluate information.
Third, Aristotle on the other hand has a similar understanding with another philosopher, John
Locke. That a child at first is a blank slate. John Locke described it as a tabula rasa. Thus, the
experiences we are offering today to our children will give contributions to what they will be
tomorrow. We can offer opportunities for children for them to be able to learn and acquire good
values. Moreover, we cannot give what we do not have, thus to be capacitated will equipped
teachers to give something for their clientele, the students.
Lastly, Plato is also correct that the government or state has the power to eliminate selfishness,
or in our case today, the unlawful acts of the society. The laws promulgated by the state are a big
deal towards peace. In the school setting, school policy should be set to have guidelines in all the
school activities. We should set policy in accordance also with the general guidelines of the
Department of Education. What is good here is that school can formulate policy according to
their setting or localization, or may opt to adopt the guidelines. It is best to manage a peaceful
school having children who are learning while building good characters.
Conclusion
“Educating the mind without educating the heart is no
education at all.” This quote is from Aristotle. Plato and
Aristotle both aim to acquire knowledge and ideas in
different ways, reasoning and using senses and
observations. There are various techniques in acquiring
concepts and so the techniques in teaching children how to
formulate their own ideas. Whatever technique it is, if we
are serious about letting them learn, you have touched not
only their minds but also their hearts. Whether or not you
use Plato’s way or Aristotle’s, it will not matter to them
when you teach passionately.
However, we must not rely on this, we still need to grow professionally and allow ourselves to be
equipped with things our learners need. After all, education is continuous. We are also keeping
abreast at times. And by doing this we are idealists and realists in our own way.

Halago, Precilla U Reaction Paper #1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Halago, Precilla U Reaction Paper #1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Halago, Precilla U Reaction Paper #1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HALAGO, PRECILLA U.

April 28, 2021

Reflections, Critique, Reactions

You might also like