I think true Platonism is at odds witch Christian theism as nothing eternal can be distinct from God. I actually think that Augustine and Aquinas together offer a more proper conception, namely, that the forms are actually the immutable ideas (thoughts) of God rather than in some other realm to which God must look for a pattern of creation (which I take to be Plato’s thesis). So if we take this Christianized view of the Forms then Plato may largely be right. But then there is no inherent contradiction between this view and that of Aristotle’s in my opinion. The forms may have an existence separate from particulars and matter but also be instantiated into particulars by the Creator. So then the Forms are in the mind of God eternal and also present by creation in the material world by participation.
Great analysis, Jacob! My final opinion on the "Plato/Aristiotle divide" is fairly aligned with yours, i.e. that the later Christian theologians and thinkers like Augustine and Aquinas gives us a truer picture of reality via something like a synthesis of the pagan positions. "Both/and" vs "either/or". I still think that most people will resonate more with one than the other, though.
Hi there Amy! Guess what-I’m a Platonist! That was a fun quiz but I am honestly quite the contemplative type. Thanks for the article, brilliant as always.
Great article! It is this exact question—Plato or Aristotle—that I am going to try to answer in 2025! I have Aristotle's Metaphysics and Plato's Republic (and other dialogues) queued up for 2025. Like you, I think I lean towards Plato at my current state. I've only read Nicomachean Ethics from Aristotle so I need to dive into his writings a bit more.
You know, while most of us probably naturally prefer one orientation over the other, I think we can all benefit from leaning into the tension that exists between them. If you’re an idealist like Plato, Aristotle will ground you in particularity. If you’re an Aristotelian, Plato can unleash your mythological imagination.
Lol, I'm a Platonist Amy. Go figure. Nice quiz! I'll have to share it with friends. Thank you for your insights and commendation. I think this might be the most fundamental question we need to ask ourselves, even before discussing more modern orientations such as post-Christian or post-modern. The next question after Plato and Aristotle, in my mind, is where we stand on Descartes who seems to be the most significant model after Thomas and the scholastics. Plato to Aristotle to Descartes represents a devolution in my mind as opposed to an evolution of thought. Then we have to get to Nietzsche and Heidegger and the entire issue of metaphysics itself. Great discussion Amy!
Thanks, Walter! 100% on everything you've said! I don't know how long it will take to get to Heidegger and Nietzsche in my current reading program. In 2 years, we've only gone from Homer to Aristotle (well, Cicero currently). At this rate, it could be 10-15 years or more until we get to the existentialists!
I am a Platonian. However, I agree with Mr. Allee's comments. The "forms" exist as an unachievable perfection. Indeed, we accept this in geometry when we study points, lines and planes. We also accept this on maps; roads and other symbols are not drawn to scale. We see perfect cakes in cookbooks and accept that we may get close, very close even, to that perfect cake, but we accept we won't always repeat it.
And, of course, we accept that all of us fall short of the Glory of God. Jesus was perfect and we try to be like him knowing we never can. God would not invent a universe without donutness, I don't care what you say.
I think true Platonism is at odds witch Christian theism as nothing eternal can be distinct from God. I actually think that Augustine and Aquinas together offer a more proper conception, namely, that the forms are actually the immutable ideas (thoughts) of God rather than in some other realm to which God must look for a pattern of creation (which I take to be Plato’s thesis). So if we take this Christianized view of the Forms then Plato may largely be right. But then there is no inherent contradiction between this view and that of Aristotle’s in my opinion. The forms may have an existence separate from particulars and matter but also be instantiated into particulars by the Creator. So then the Forms are in the mind of God eternal and also present by creation in the material world by participation.
Great analysis, Jacob! My final opinion on the "Plato/Aristiotle divide" is fairly aligned with yours, i.e. that the later Christian theologians and thinkers like Augustine and Aquinas gives us a truer picture of reality via something like a synthesis of the pagan positions. "Both/and" vs "either/or". I still think that most people will resonate more with one than the other, though.
You’re right. I am attracted to Plato’s beauty and Aristotles clarity.
Hi there Amy! Guess what-I’m a Platonist! That was a fun quiz but I am honestly quite the contemplative type. Thanks for the article, brilliant as always.
Me too, sister! :)
Great article! It is this exact question—Plato or Aristotle—that I am going to try to answer in 2025! I have Aristotle's Metaphysics and Plato's Republic (and other dialogues) queued up for 2025. Like you, I think I lean towards Plato at my current state. I've only read Nicomachean Ethics from Aristotle so I need to dive into his writings a bit more.
You know, while most of us probably naturally prefer one orientation over the other, I think we can all benefit from leaning into the tension that exists between them. If you’re an idealist like Plato, Aristotle will ground you in particularity. If you’re an Aristotelian, Plato can unleash your mythological imagination.
Well put!
Took the quiz, it came out Platonist. Go figure!
That "no donut" question has shaken me up too much to continue. I will do this tomorrow.
Why did you single out donuts? People have feelings, you know.
Lol, I'm a Platonist Amy. Go figure. Nice quiz! I'll have to share it with friends. Thank you for your insights and commendation. I think this might be the most fundamental question we need to ask ourselves, even before discussing more modern orientations such as post-Christian or post-modern. The next question after Plato and Aristotle, in my mind, is where we stand on Descartes who seems to be the most significant model after Thomas and the scholastics. Plato to Aristotle to Descartes represents a devolution in my mind as opposed to an evolution of thought. Then we have to get to Nietzsche and Heidegger and the entire issue of metaphysics itself. Great discussion Amy!
Thanks, Walter! 100% on everything you've said! I don't know how long it will take to get to Heidegger and Nietzsche in my current reading program. In 2 years, we've only gone from Homer to Aristotle (well, Cicero currently). At this rate, it could be 10-15 years or more until we get to the existentialists!
Fun quiz! Turns out I’m an Aristotelian. Probably due to years and years in the sciences.
Or maybe you ended up in the sciences because of an Aristotelian orientation. :)
I am a Platonian. However, I agree with Mr. Allee's comments. The "forms" exist as an unachievable perfection. Indeed, we accept this in geometry when we study points, lines and planes. We also accept this on maps; roads and other symbols are not drawn to scale. We see perfect cakes in cookbooks and accept that we may get close, very close even, to that perfect cake, but we accept we won't always repeat it.
And, of course, we accept that all of us fall short of the Glory of God. Jesus was perfect and we try to be like him knowing we never can. God would not invent a universe without donutness, I don't care what you say.
Will you post results, Amy?
I’m a Platonist (I’m Twilight; we have four writers in our Substack).