Plato - divided line

>>8694025

I dont now Platos reason for making the size of space between divisions different. It certainly is not precise. Unless... He was suggesting the final depicted intellectual realm, contains the first two divisions?

I first wanted to think the intellectual realm is larger, in the sense of, that which has separated humans from animals is for starters and at least, our ability to complexly think and perform ideas in our mind,

the visible realm is required for this, but, so, was he trying to suggest there is more information possible in the intellectual realm than the visible? I dont know how you would go about testing or thinking or quantifying that? Counting up the atoms on earth? Or sensible objects?

Then counting up the possible intellectual ideas?

Or if his line distinction was just to represent, this intellectual realm is bigly important, because it what allows us to be not just animals enslaved to only the visible realm.

I'm not sure what you're asking so explain your question like I'm a dog.

>>8694164
Visible Realm: Opinion - A. Eikasia - imagination / B. Pistis - In Greek mythology, Pistis was the personification of good faith, trust and reliability. Intellectual Realm: Knowledge - / C. Dianoia - a type of thinking, specifically about mathematical and technical subjects / D. Noesis - the exercise of reason, esp in the apprehension of universal forms.

OP asked of imagination (Eikasia) and the exercise of reason (Noesis), which belongs to the ideas and which belongs to the shadows.

I thought shapes are larger because its like all cows in the world with all individual appearences, while idea is just a "cow", you general idea of this animal in encyclopedia so its shorter. Is this what you ask?

>>8694025
>but on the internet people seem to do the opposite

Who? Link it

Your professor is wrong, the shorter end eikasia is where shadows should be.

Just think of the story, shadows are not the forms, they are fakes and Plato dislikes these compared to ideas, which are closer to knowledge and the forms.

The point of the story was to get out of the shadows and get towards the sun, the form of the good, which is closer to knowledge than opinion.

>>8694358
So you are suggesting the size difference between the lines, represents Platos belief in their importance/specialness?

Not in the quantity of information in reality?

Meaning, x amount of possible shadows, 2x quantity of information regarding objects, intellectual knowledge, 3x possible quantity of information

>>8694421
>represents Platos belief in their importance/specialness?

Just like "Guys, this is really important, so I made the space bigger, to show that you should want to care about knowledge more than caring about shadows"

Or did he mean. The shadows provide some knowledge, vision of the objects provide some knowledge, but it is the intellectual reasoning and consumption and use of information of higher concepts, which makes the most use of the empirical information?

Like cavemen could see the same rocks and trees and river and rain and air and oil fields and gold as dogs and we could just existing in the world as objects;

But it requires 'information' that exists beyond just the objects themselves, that all for the objects of the world, to be utilized in ways, to result in all the things we are familiar with in the modern world that cavemen are not

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-05 at 12.37.26 AM.png (1MB, 1568x1066px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1568x1066px

>>8694025
IIRC there is no definitive textual evidence from Republic to support either side, BUT there are fairly strong hints that Plato would disagree with your professor, and would assign the greater proportion of the line to understanding, and so would agree with the pic you posted:

>"Each shares in clarity to the degree that the subsection it is set over shares in truth." (511e)
>"As regards truth and untruth, the division is in this proportion: As the opinable is to the knowable, so the likeness is to the thing that it is like" (510)

You may also be interested in this short essay on the line, which supports that Plato probably intended, but never explicitly stated, the proportions mentioned above. It's too long to be pasted in a comment, but see pic related for the entire essay; the most relevant comment for this discussion is:

>The relative lengths of the different sec- tions are still debated. Plato first claims that the lengths of the line represent differ- ent degrees of clarity and obscurity (saphê- neia kai asapheia:509d9) and also truth and untruth (alêtheia te kai mê:510a9), which is compatible with the longer sections rep- resenting more of the positives but also with representing more of the negatives of these comparisons. See the debate between Proclus and Plutarch, as reported in Denyer (2007:293); Denyer himself thinks that the choice is ‘arbitrary’. In Plato’s conclud- ing remarks (at 511e3), however, only the positives are mentioned, so the proportions appear to indicate degrees of clarity and truth represented by each section of the line.

>>8694025
In my head I drew the difference even more radically, like the difference between cave and world. I agree with the others who are arguing that shadow is the smaller part.