Page 21 - GALIET METAPOIESIS AND TRUTH IV+

Galiet & Galiet
understanding.63 Heidegger’s notion, differing from Plato’s, endorses, in a way, Aristotle’s notion that the Ideas are immanent to tangible beings. It can be sustained that for Heidegger the original meaning of Idea, implicitly, takes the form of phusis: the aspect of the thing contemplated is the enigmatic rose in itself unfolding in presence and absence, in appearance and concealment, in this reality whose openness of the open always partially discloses, always partially conceals.
For Plato, Heidegger’s unfolding rose is an appearance, a particular, removed from its true state, roseness. It is true that for Plato things in their true state never belong to sensible realities, but to intelligible, unchanging ones. For Plato, the One (or unity of the multiple or many) is παρα τα πολλα, something separated from the multiple while for Aristotle it is something united to the multiple, κατα τον πολλον. In other words, Aristotle negates that the Ideas exist in an intelligible realm separated from sensible things and experience. For him the ideas, just as phusis is for Heidegger, are immanent to sensible things. It is not necessary to admit the existence of Ideas, or the One juxtaposed to the Multiple.64 The One, instead, is immanent in the Multiple.65
Heidegger also claims that the ascent of the prisoner out of the cave is a progressive ‘correction’ of his vision, of his idea and the entity whose idea it is. In Plato, this is true. The genuine liberation of the prisoner from the cave’s dark to primordial light to progressively see the true realities of tangible things in themselves until becoming used to seeing the models of such images and the sun-in-itself, represents, too, for Plato, the Divided Line’s third segment: hypothesis and Dianoia.66 In this section, Plato posits, the soul takes as a point of departure, the original models of objects67 and through hypothesis, it is directed towards conclusions. Hypothesis is only a point of support to ascend to the first principle, which no longer needs the hypothesis. It prepares one, paideia, for supreme knowledge: νοεσις. It is similar to releasing a ladder once ascension is made. It is related to Dianoia, which dwells between opinion and pure understanding. It is the discursive and deductive knowledge of mathematicians and complementary sciences, that is, formal science, which is more rigorous, exact and more perfect than former ones: that of visible things. Once the leap is made from Dianoia to noesis, the Sun- in-itself is seen as parallel to seeing the Good-in-itself. That is, just as the sun in visible world, by
63 Plato. Phaedo. 65b-d. Plato. Complete Works. Phaedo. Ed. John M. Cooper. Indianapolis, Hackett Publishing, 1997.
64 Aristotle. Posterior Analytics. A, 11, 77. Aristotle. The Basic Works of Aristotle. Posterior Analytics. Ed. Richard McKeon. New York: The Modern Library, 2001.
65 Aristotle. Metaphysics. A9, 990 b13 and also Met. A, 6, 987 b8. Aristotle. The Basic Works of Aristotle. Metaphysics. Ed. Richard McKeon. New York: The Modern Library, 2001.
66 This means discourse, rigorous, exact, precise thought. It is related to paideia, preparation for supreme, insightful knowledge: noesis, the last segment of Plato’s Divided Line.
67 These are the objects in the second segment of the first half of the line, that is, the originating models (eidolos).
•21•