Thread: Argument for the existence of Platonic forms

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Imagine a scenario where there are only ten (for simplicities sake) people left on earth. Civilization has collapsed and humans are scavengers, cannibals, etc. Out of the ten people not one of them has knowledge of the concept "good" or behave in any manner that can be deemed as "good". Does the quality of "goodness" still exist?

Even though the universal(good) is not inherent in any particulars(survivors) the possibility of good still exists therefore a universal can be abstracted from a particular and still exist even though it is not represented by any particulars.

Interesting thread here! I think your question of "goodness" existing or not is a matter of how it is existing, because as you say, it is universally "not inherent in any particulars." Despite the unrealistic number of ten people surviving (for simplicities sake?), I'd argue that the "goodness" does exist from the perspective of human history, and that is to say that humanity has slowly become more "good" since having evolved from animals! Have they not? Was it really always present since the beginning of man or was it developed as a concept in later evolution? I think the reality of "goodness" shares both; the concept and quality simply emerged from a hidden trait of consciousness, in such a way being universal. So on one level the potential for goodness does still exist, but it is not actually present in the current survivors through their attitudes, beliefs, etc.

Originally Posted by Mario92

If there are humans, such as us, capable of perceiving purple light, but such light does not exist, then not only do they not perceive it, but that light still does not exist. Again, they might one day create purple light, or that light might come into existence through random chance. But it does not exist. Just like we might one day perceive a skyscraper or new mountain (which can derive from steel, concrete, and the slow tectonic forces of the earth). We are capable of perceiving it, but that capability does not mean such things exist (yet).

By stormcrow's definition, existence means "to have actual being". So we can expand on the above points and say that while purple light may not exist at one time, the color purple still can. While things cannot be perceived externally, such things can still be present and exist intangibly as ideas or imagination. Even in after-image phenomena or from something as simple as having rubbed your eyes for too long, colors emerge that are not directly related to external stimuli.

How do you think skyscrapers and mountains can exist, furthermore how do they come into being? Skyscrapers exist out of a collection of ideas. We then could say that the skyscraper exists, but in a different form. Because it is abstract, it can apply both ways: can you picture that a small building is a fraction of a skyscraper? Furthermore, in speaking of ideas and their structure, including relationships with the external world, I suppose is much like what Xei said about the interaction and inter-relationships of words.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Yes I suppose if I did not exist in this hypothetical world then my concept of "good" would count for nothing because I do not exist.

I don't think so, and from what you've stated about the scenario, that sounds a little extraneous. Because no hypothetical scenarios have actual reality, you could say that you exist in none of them because none are real, or you exist in all of them because you made them up! Otherwise how would you learn from your hypothesis?

I would say good is the human defined quality that the instances of the following all have in common: Helping an old lady cross the street, saving someone from a fire, speaking the truth. Overall “good” like “exist” is a really vague word I don’t quite know how to express it in a way that does it justice.

If your imaginary human beings are capable of these traits, then the answer would simply be yes. I implied this in my first paragraph.