Plato\'s Platonism and J.S. Mill\'s

¶ … Plato's Platonism and J.S. Mill's Utilitarianism

Understanding the prevalence of different philosophies that existed in the history of humanity can be achieved by looking into the core arguments that sets apart one philosophy from another. Among the most influential philosophers in the history of humanity are Plato and John Stuart Mill, celebrated philosophers during the periods 5th century B.C. And 19th century, respectively.

Plato became well-known for his elucidation of knowledge acquisition, which assumed the radical proposition that knowledge can only be attained through the development of pure forms within the mind of the individual, putting supreme importance on the individual's capacity for thought processing rather than knowledge acquisition through knowledge. Mill, meanwhile, promoted the pursuit of happiness through the philosophy of utilitarianism. In this philosophical thought, Mill promoted the idea of experiential knowledge in pursuit of one's happiness; this process, in effect, brings forth the process of rationalization within the individual -- and ideally, in human society as a whole.

The discussion contained herein probes into these two philosophical thoughts. Discussing Plato's and Mill's philosophies, a comparative analysis will be conducted, wherein the merits and criticisms of each philosophical thought is provided. This paper, however, posits that between the two philosophies discussed, it is JS Mill's utilitarian thought that is considered most appropriate and responsive to today's human society, primarily because utilitarianism is more in touch with the experiences and realities of human life, as compared to Plato's purely abstract notion of human knowledge.

Plato's philosophical thought, popularly termed as Platonism, holds the core argument that humanity can achieve knowledge only through himself/herself -- specifically, through one's mind and thoughts generated from it. Knowledge derived from the external environment, or through experience, is not considered knowledge at all, but simply a transmission of already existing knowledge, from the environment to the experiencing individual. It is only by these pure ideas and thoughts, which he called forms, that an individual can truly achieve knowledge. This elucidation is put into analogy through his narrative, the allegory of the cave, wherein he compared the generation of human knowledge as a struggle that humans have to go through -- indeed, the ultimate purpose of humanity in life.

Rubinstein (2006) discussed this form of philosophy prescribed by Plato, which he illustrated as, "the nearer we come to the sacred, the less we can describe it." This illustration is an exact explication of the kind of philosophy that Plato helped propagate in human society during his time, and still gained prominence and status as contending philosophies, to other philosophies of latter centuries. Rubinstein further stressed that Platonism thrives on the idea that human knowledge only becomes pure when it is more abstract; hence, knowledge explicated through concrete terms are considered as transmitted knowledge only, and is not considered the knowledge that humans will truly aspire for, and pursue as a purpose in life.

Criticisms against Platonism abound because of its inappropriateness and lack of responsiveness to the realities of human life and experience. Indeed, people cannot strongly subsist to the thought that knowledge in the most abstract form, because knowledge not utilized defeats the very purpose on why knowledge are generated, found, and developed -- to be used for human progress and self-development.

These criticisms against Platonism served as the starting point why utilitarianism became a popular and most subsisted to philosophical thought in the 19th century, and until today. First developed by JS Mill, utilitarianism subsisted to the belief that more than just experiential knowledge, humanity's pursuit for knowledge is actually an attempt to achieve happiness in life -- which Mill interpreted as humanity's way of achieving rationalization, in effect.