Aristotle Versus Plato Essay

Abstract Plato and Aristotle argue that cheatisan (Demiurge) and poet imitate constitution, thus, a work of fraud is a reflection of nature. However, they type different views on the regions of imitation in art and literature. Plato believes in the existence of the ideal world, where exists a real form of both object lens found in nature. A work of art which reflects nature is twice far from the reality it represents. Aristotle, on the a nonher(prenominal) hand, does non deal with the ideal world, alternatively he analyses nature. He argues that a work of art does not imitate nature as it is, hardly as it should be.In this sense datum, an mechanic does not pillage the truth but reflects the reality. Key Words Imitation, art, literature, mimesis, etymology, ethic. Introduction Plato and Aristotle attribute different meanings to the condition mimesis Plato come acrosss mimesis in good and political consideration, Aristotle uses mimesis as an artistic phenomenon. The y both go that rhyme is mimetic but they have different idea about metrical composition and mimesis. The present paper aims first to define mimesis and explain the historical and linguistic background of the stipulation, then to analyze the concept of mimesis in Plato and Aristotle.In literature the word mimesis has two diverse applications it is used to define the nature of literature and other arts and to indicate the relation of one literary work, which att overthrow tos as a model. Plato and Aristotle take mimesis to define the nature of art, yet they ascribe different meanings and value to it. Plato and Aristotle consider the historical and etymological background of the term, on that pointfore, it is necessary to receipt about the linguistic and historical background of the term mimesis to understand what kinds of meaning and value they attribute to the concept.Linguistic everyy, the radix word is mimos mimesthia, mimesis, mimetes, mimetikos, and mimema atomic number 18 derived from mimos. Mimesthia denotes imitation, agency or portrayal mimos and mimetes designate the al just aboutbody who imitates or represents, whereby mimos originally refers to the recitation or dramatic performance in the circumstance of dramatic action. The mime, which is a kind of banquets given by wealthy man, is most probably derived from mimos The noun mimesis as well as corresponding verb mimeisthai refer to the re-enactment and dance by means of ritual and novel.In Athenian drama the re-enactment is equivalent to acting out the role of a mythical figure and mimesis in such a context connotes the imitation of the earlier re-enactment of the myth and rituals. Historically, the word mimesis as re-enactment first appears in such rituals, and the historical origin of the term, as located in Dionysian cultus drama, coincides this meaning in that mimesis in both cases refers to imitation, delegation and expression. It is argued that myth, and divine symbols of the rituals are transformed to tasteful-dramatic representation finished and through which it became possible to represent the divinity and gods in drama.Tragedy, for illustration is the transformation of the myth and rituals. In a different context mimesis whitethorn refer to identification. People identify themselves by means of their mimetic office when they match themselves in the other and perceive a state of mutual equality. In this sense, mimesis is distinct from mimicry, which implies only(prenominal) a physical, and no mental relation. That is, a soulfulness regards the new(prenominal) as equal and assumes the Other to be doing the same in reverse.Associated with the physical aspect of mimesis is its performative aspect, as an actualization, a presentation of what has been mimetically indicated. Thus, the term mimesis is combined with an action-oriented speaking. The term mimesis whitethorn withal refer the simile, similarity and representation it may refer to the symb olization of the world when we take it as a transformation of myth. Mimesis has also been cited since classical time in the exploration of relationships surrounded by art and reality. The meanings and applications of the term changes conformanceing to the context it is used.Therefore, Plato and Aristotle ascribes different meanings and value to mimesis with respect to the contexts they use it. The Concept of Imitation in Plato takes the term mimesis with several meanings and connotations in the dialogues and alters the meaning of the term checking to the context in which he uses it. He uses mimesis in the context of the education of the youth he discusses the hunt of mimesis as wantning oneself to another in speech and bodily behaviour and as addressing the lower part of mans soul he also refers to the epistemology and metaphysics of the concept.He takes the word mimesis with pedagogic attributes and uses it in educational and ethical context when he says guardians of an ideal state should be educated to imitate only what is attach. In the third book of the Republic, for instance, Plato provides further definitions of mimesis, centering on the relation between mimesis and poetry, mimesis and education and also poetry and education. Since youngish people learn essentially through imitation, it is significant to select the models.Mimesis suggests unfavourable effect on the part of the young people and poetry is one important source of the youths experience with examples and models therefore, if the world of models and examples ought to be cookled in the interest of education, poetry must be likewise subject to control. Plato argues the case in the Republic as conjoin The youth cannot distinguish what is allegorical from what is not, and the belief they acquire at the age are trying to expunge and usually remain unchanged. That is important that the first stories they come across should be well told and dispose them to virtue.The contents, forms, and representational modes of poetry play an important ethical role in the education of guardians and should, because of the personal effects they exercise through mimetic process, be based on ethical principles. Young people should only imitate brave, sober, pious and frightful men, which will increase their strength and will not infect them with weakness. In this sense, it is argued in the Republic that tragedy and comedy, as mimetic poetry, represent injustice among the gods in the assertion that gods are responsible for unhappiness among people.In the Platonic conception, gods cannot be evil heroes cannot be weak. The poets representation violates the truth and by representing the deficiencies of gods and heroes, has negative effect on the community and the education of youth. Mimetic poetry not only misrepresents gods and heroes and reach outs young people to im good behaviours but also appeals to and strengthens the lower, desiring part of the soul. According to Plato, poetry e ncourages short-term indulgence in our emotions when reason would keep their gratification because it is useless or harmful for the citizen who considers life as a whole.Reason is a subject that enables moral quality and authorities. Poetry is intuitive and stirs up a part of a citizen that ought to be kept quiet and fosters the lower part of the soul against the rule of higher part, reason Poetry becomes a trem hold onous rival to morality, which is able to corrupt even good man and is a very dangerous thing encouraging all the lower desires and making them hard to cope with suffering in the theatre, and taking pleasure in laughing at comedies tends to affect our attitudes in real life and make us distrustful and unserious.Sex, anger, and all desires, pleasure and pains are fostered by poetic imitation, thus, Homer and tragic poets are not true example for a citizen. Poetry, then, taking its written report as human emotion and human frailty, threatens to disturb the balance an d rational disposition of the individual for the individual, by way of his mimetic abilities, is infected through poetry. doctrine provides wisdom and truth in the education but poetry has a potential capacity to demoralize mind.For example, Homers poetry was drawn on for educational purposes as a collection of familiarity and wisdom and enter in to competition with philosophy, it should therefore, be censored. It is obvious that poetry endangers the ideal citizens who can control and manage their feelings and remain reasonable, thus should be censored. While being an aspect of misrepresentation and something used in a dangerous way for the education of young people, mimesis may also come to mean re-enactment in Platos dialogue when it refers to the imitation of a man in action in drama.In the Republic, Plato uses the term to refer to the behaviour of the philosopher As he looks upon and contemplates things that are ordered and ever the same, that do no wrong, are not wronged by, e ach other, being all in rational order. He imitates them and tries to become like them as he can A similar process occurs in tragedy, which is the artistic and dramatic re-enactment of ritual and myth and transformation of religion. Through tragedy it becomes possible for a man to represent the divinity and gods. For instance, the re-enactment, in Athenian drama, is equivalent to acting out the role of a mythical figure.Mimesis, in such a context, designates the imitation of earlier re-enactment, the instances of which is taken from myth and rituals. The nature of ritual is spiritual and pleasing and such primitive rituals serve communal interests, in that each member of community gets rid of self. A tragic play may lead to self alienation and may lead to identification with the fallen character and with the hero. The process of re-enactment, then, leads one to enter into anothers feelings and suffering. Plato insists that no one of truly noble character could suffer as a tragic her o does, since one whose soul is in a state ofharmony is not to be influenced and hurt. Therefore, he objects to the re-enactment of ritual. Mimetic behaviour should be avoided because it may lead to identification with fallen characters and with the hero. Plato in the Republic argues that or have you not observed that imitations, if conditioned, settle down youths life, and deflect into habits and become second nature in the body, the speech and the thought . Apart from this, people identify themselves by means of their mimetic ability when they see themselves in the other and perceive a state of mutual equality.In this sense mimesis is distinct from mimicry, which implies only a physical and no mental, relation a person regards the Other as equal and assumes the Other to be doing the same in reverse. In this respect, a person who imitates is doomed to self-control and lack of self-identity. Moreover, the process of mimetic identification becomes a source of pleasure in the form of tragedy, which correspondingly frames the myth or re-enacts to substitute the myth in the form of dramatic representation.In the seventh book of the Republic, which is about law, he states we are ourselves authors of tragedy, and that the finest and the best we notice how to make. In fact, our whole polity has been constructed as a dramatization (mimetic) of noble and perfect life that is what we hold to be truth in the most of real tragedies. However, in art, mimesis has a different function. Aesthetically, mimesis refers to misrepresentation. Reality and truth can only be understood through reason.The artist works with inspiration and imagination the two faculties striket give us the true image of reality, and the end of tragedy is a partial loss of moral identity. On the one hand, there is mimesis as a re-enactment of Dionysian rituals in the form of tragedy which leads to self-sacrifice and wrong identity and which addresses the lower part of the soul and corrupts the ethic al development of the youth. On the other hand, there is mimesis as an imitative, imperfect image of reality.In a sense, Platos resistance to mimesis is not only due to the fact that tragedy (mimetic art) may lead the audiences back to the ritual and irrational mode of primitive nightclub but also due to the fact that mimetic art is an imitation of objects (eidon), which are imitations themselves. He objects to mimesis for the fact there is no relationship between what is imitated and what is real. Mimesis designates the ability to create expression and representation on the part of poet, painter and actor, both in a general and specific sense.For example, the painter produces a relationship between an image he created and the object. If the relationship consists in the production of similarity, then, there arises a question of where the similarity between image and object lies. If the images he creates dont make a indication to reality and real object, and if the relationship bet ween object and image is on the level of similarity created by the poet through art, then, there appears a lack of link between true and false. But in Platos philosophy the relationship between objects and reality does not consist of comparison or similarity.According to Plato, Demiurge creates the idea and by beholding the idea Demiurge produces the object his ability is exalted in the imitation of the Idea. The poet, on the other hand, creates the images neither by seeing the idea nor from more(prenominal) substantive knowledge of the object since he produces vigour but phenomena by holding up a mirror. In this sense, the artist produces appearance and his work cannot provide us with true insight. Then, when a poet writes about the bed, for instance, it is not a bed manufactured by the armourer from the idea nor does it have any relation to the real bed it is only simulation and phenomena.There is also a difference between the knowledge of the poet and the knowledge of the cra ftsman. Man makes things and makes images. The craftsman makes the things following the original copy or model the poet follows the image of the model or copy therefore he gives only a balance wheel of reality. The proportion of knowledge and opinion, truth and falsity plays a courseing role in distinguishing imitation as proportion of being to appearance. Plato argues that to understand the image, one needs to know the reality and the path to reality is in philosophy and reason, not in poetry and emotion.Although Plato admits that every object in nature is a reflection of the Idea, he doesnt object to the reflection of object in nature. Plato uses mirror and water as constant metaphors to clarify the relationship between reality and the reflection of eidon. Plato argues that the poet holds up mirror to nature and in his work we see the reflection of nature not reality. He objects to the reflection of objects in the mirror, since things are divided into two separate visible and in telligible. The first of the visible things is the class of copies, which includes shadows and reflections in the mirror.The second class of visible things is that of which the previous is a likeliness or copy. Plato objects to the reflection of object in the mirror, since mirror (poet) imprisons and limits the image. And he also objects to the imitation, since the poet imitates without knowledge. Therefore, it is not its imitative character but its lack of truth and knowledge, which brings poetry to its low estate. Homer and all the poetic population are imitators of images of virtue and other things but they do not rely on truth. Poetry, after all, is a madness that seizes the soul when it contemplates in true knowledge of goods.Platos objection to mimesis may also interpreted as a reaction to the sophistic thinking that aims to produce images that the listener will regard as real, all of which take place in the world of phenomena. Image, thought, and opinion combine into a world of appearance characterized by nonbeing, a phenomenal nature and similarity. And as long as fondness and reality are not distinguished, science, ignorance, and appearance merge together. Within the concept of mimesis, then, Plato creates an independent sphere of the aesthetic consisting of appearance, image and illusion and excludes it from the domain of philosophy.He insists that there are no phenomena without being, no images without reality, no mimesis without a model. Yet reality and idea cannot be represented without knowledge and images are not part of reality. Plato, in the Republic, in Ion, and in Symposium uses the concept of mimesis with several meanings. He refers to the education of the young in Book X of the Republic in Ion he develops a metaphysical dis pass on the concept of imitation, and in Book III of the Republic he objects to imitation because mimesisaddresses and strengthens the lower part of the spirit.Plato refers to ethical aspects of mimesis whenever he re fers to the concept of imitation. That is, mimesis is an ethical matter in Platos dialogues. He is not interested in the aesthetic aspect of mimesis therefore, he does not buy off attention to the form and matter of mimesisand art. Plato deals with the value of mimesis. Aristotle is the first to deal with mimesis as a possibleness of art. He dwells on the concept of mimesis as an aesthetic theory of art and considers imitation in terms of the form in which it is embodied.By imitation, he means something like representation through which mimesis becomes the equivalent of artistic and aesthetic enterprise. Unlike Plato, Aristotle also argues that mimesis is not morally destructive since reason controls art. II. The Concept of Imitation in Aristotle Aristotle states that all human actions are mimetic and that men learn through imitation. In particular, mimesis is the distinguishing quality of an artist. He argues that public classifies all those who write in meter as poets and comple tely misses the point that the capacity to produce an imitation is the essential quality of the poet.The poet is distinguished from the rest of mankind with the essential ability to produce imitation. A poet may imitate in one of three styles in poetry he may use pure narrative, in which he speaks in his own person without imitation, as in the dithyrambs, or he may use mimetic narrative and speaks in the person of his characters, as in comedy and tragedy. A poet may use merge narrative, in which he speaks now in his own person and now in the person of his character, as in epic poetry. Mimetic poetry may also differ according to the object of imitation.In this respect, tragedy differs from comedy in that it makes its characters better rather than worse. Mimesis, particularly, becomes a central term when Aristotle discusses the nature and function of art. In the Poetics, he defines tragedy as as an imitation of human action that is serious, complete and of a certain magnitude in lang uage embellished with every kind of artistic ornament, the various kinds being found in different parts of the play it represents man in action rather than using narrative, through pathos and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotion.Aristotle is interested in the form of imitation and goes on to consider plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle and song as constituting elements of a ordinary tragedy. The action of plot must be complete in itself with a proper beginning, middle and an end. All parts of action must be as essential to the whole. Each part of the tragedy is imitation itself. Character in tragedy imitates the action of noble man who has to be a man of some social standing and personal reputation, but he has to be presented us in terms of his weaknesses because it is his weakness that will make his fall believable.Aristotle thinks that all types of art are mimetic but each may differ in the manner, means, and object of imitation. Music imitates in sound and rhythm, painting in color and poetry in action and word. Aristotles mimesis does not refer to the imitation of Idea and appearances, like that of Plato. He argues that each area of knowledge is imitation in the sense that as a human being we all learn through imitation. However, he carefully makes a distinction between different kinds of knowledge.For instance, he claims that art and philosophy deal with different kind of truth philosophy deals with concrete and absolute truth, whereas art deals with aesthetic and universal truth. The difference, for instance, between mimetic poetry and tale is stated as one writes about what has actually happened, while the other deals with what might happen. Art, unlike science, doesnt abstract universal form but imitates the form of individual things and unites the separate parts presenting what is universal and particular.Therefore, the function of poetry is not to portray what has happened but to portray what may have happened in accord w ith the principle of probability and necessity. Since poetry deals with universal truth, history considers only particular facts poetry is more philosophical and deserves more serious attention. In step-up, aesthetic representation of reality is not technical, factual, philosophical, and historical. Aristotle compares aesthetic process (mimesis) with the process that takes place in nature.While nature moves through internal principles, art moves through organic principles like plot, action, characters, diction, and there is a unity among them. In a sense, art imitates nature and the deficiencies of nature are supplemented in the process of imitation, and art follows the same method, as nature would have employed. Thus, if a house were natural product, it would pass through the same stages that in fact it passes through when it is produced by art, they would move along the same lines the natural process actually takes. Poets, like nature, are capable of creating matter and form.The origin of nature is nature itself and the origin of art is the artist and the defining characteristic of the artist is the ability to create, through imitation, as nature does. The artist constructs the plot as an organizing principle, character constitutes the relation and carries on the action and style gives pleasure. For instance, the plot of tragedy and Dionysian rituals display similar organization. The rituals begin with the spring, which is a salient(ip) and beautiful time of the year, and they represent the strength of gods and nature upon primitive society.Tragedy, like the image of spring, has a striking and fascinating beginning and, like ritual, a tragic play pervades and shapes the feelings of the audiences. Dionysian ritual is a sacrifice of human being for gods and nature in the try for for a better and peaceful beginning. Similarly, the tragic hero is symbolically sacrificed after which there appears a peace. Then, the poet takes tragedy, as a mimetic representat ion of myth, from the natural course of an event that takes place in nature and reorganizes it.In this sense, mimesis designates the imitation and the manner in which, as in nature, creation takes place. Mimesis, as Aristotle takes it, is an active aesthetic process. He argues that imitation is given us by nature and men are endowed with these gifts, gradually develop them and finally create the art of poetry. The poet does not imitate reality but brings reality into existence through mimesis. The poet recreates and reorganizes already known facts and presents them in a fresh and attractive way therefore, though audiences know the story of Sophocles Oedipus, they go and watch it.The reality as presented to us through mimesis is superior and universal not only because we are pleased to learn through imitation but also because such reality is better. Homer, for instance, depicts Achilles not only as a bad character but also depicts his goodness. Mimesis is thus copy and changing. The poet creates something that previously did not exist and for which there are no available models. Even in dealing with historical materials, the poet needs to fashion it in accord with his art rising to a higher level than is found in reality.Art is pretended but the mimetic and aesthetic nature of art pervades the fictitious deviation and a work of art forces the thing to appear as something more beautiful and better than that nature and human being posses in common, for it is perpetually writers duty to make world better. It can be argued that Aristotle defines and argues about art with respect to mimesis, and the concept of imitation in Aristotle is an aesthetic matter. Mimesis is not only origin of art but also a distinguishing quality of man, since imitation is natural to mankind from childhood on in addition all men find pleasure in imitation.He claims that there are things that distress us when we see them in reality, but the most accurate representation of these same thing s we view with pleasure. In this sense, catharsis is not a moral and psychological matter but a natural end of the aesthetic act as Salkaver discusses below Fear and pity are dangerous emotions painful and troubled feelings arise from the imagination of an close at hand(predicate) evil and cause destruction and pain. Pity, in particular, is a kind of pain upon seeing deadly or painful evil happening to one who does not deserve.However, in the representation of such feelings one feels empathy and gets rid of them. So, a work of art gives a man an opportunity to get rid of painful and troubled feelings arising from the imagination of an imminent evil that may cause destruction and pain on the part of the citizen. Aristotle develops a consistent theory of art upon the concept of imitation. He begins saying that all human actions are imitation, then, he focuses on poetry and other areas of studies like history and philosophy. Lastly, he dwells on the poet and the concept of imitation a s taken and estimable by playwrights.All his arguments upon mimesis are, both in general and in specific sense, have aesthetics quality, since he does not take imitation as social, moral or political phenomena but as an activity of the artist. CONCLUSION Platos main concern is with the public recitation of dramatic and epic poetry and in Plato there is emulation between philosophy and poetry. The poet influences the character of the young in every way and has corruptive impact upon the education of the young mind. In addition, poets dont have a true knowledge of the things.Plato suggests that the emotional appeal is a threat to reason, that mimetic art is remote from reality, that the poet is not serious and knows nothing about poetry and cannot give satisfactory information about his art. It is obvious that he resists the concept of imitation in the case of poetic composition. Tragedy, in particular, and poetry, in general are concerned with pleasure rather than instruction and si nce it is not possible to imitate a wise and quiet person in the play, since such a person does not fit the content of tragedy, mimesis is ethically distracting.Therefore, the function of various discussions of mimetic art in the Republic is ethical wherever he mentions art he discusses it in relation to education and ethics. Although Aristotle agrees with Plato that poetry has the power to stimulate emotions, he does not pay much attention to the ethical and epistemic aspects of mimesis. Yet he dwells on the pleasure that men take in learning and argues that tragedy discharges the feelings and spectators leave the play in a state of calm, rationalize of passions.He does not restrict art and poetry and the concept of mimesis. Aristotles mimesis is defined by mythos and praxis, which brings the concept close to areas of time and action- in contrast to Platonic mimesis, which is closer to image, imagination and imitation. He argues that tragedy is the imitation (mimesis) of a man in action. Aristotles mimesis is active and creative and he gives a high-power character to mimesis by introducing mythos and praxis, thus, defines art as mimesis and the artist as character.Plato worries about the moral effect of poetry, while Aristotle strikes to psychology and returns repeatedly to shuddering terror (phobos) and pity (eleos) that the tragedy is creating in the spectator, who therefore repeats or imitates what has already taken place on stage. Plato argues that there is a duality between art (mimesis and narrative art) and ethics. The more poetic the poems are the less suited are they to the ears of men. Artistically, the better the comedy is, the worst it is, since the more attractive and perfect the comedy is the more disastrous its effects are.For instance, Homer, in the Iliad tells us or narrates the story of cypresses, as he was himself a cypress. He tells the story as far as it makes the audience feel that not Homer is the speaker, but the priest, an old man. This manner of representation ( imitation), according to Plato, leads to the loss-of-self or transformation of identity and becomes a matter of moral destruction. Aristotle takes the same activity of impersonation in a different way.He praises Homer for not telling excessively in his own voice since, after a few words he immediately brings on stage a man or woman or some other characters that represent the action with larger perspective. As a conclusion, mimesis has since the antiquity been discussed to refer to the relation between reality and representation. The nature of discussion upon the concept of mimesis as a theory of art changes according to the person who discusses the term and the way he deals with the term.Auerbach, for instance, distinguishes the reality and mimesis in literature with respect to the narrative techniques and argues that Homeric epic is not mimetic but realistic since chronicle of the tales comprehends every detail and leaves no space for interpretatio n. Plato, on the other hand, agrees that reality cannot be represented therefore, mimesis is misrepresentation of truth. Aristotle becomes the defender of mimesis against Plato and develops a theory of art with reference to mimesis and claims that art (mimetic art) is superior to philosophy and histpry.