The Disagreement on Human nature among the Greatest Philosophers Article

The Disagreement on Human nature among the Greatest Philosophers - Article Example Plato gave his Allegory of the Cave explaining this habitual nature (Soccio 141). A man lives all his life in a cave, he considers his environment as the only reality as if nothing exists outside of it. On exposing him to the sunlight, this person thinks he is dreaming, that the fresh air, green grass, and the singing birds are hallucinations. The habitual nature of human is Plato’s version. Aristotle and Kant, on the other hand, focused more on how humans should behave; the maxim behind every action. Aristotle gave two levels of human behavior the one where he only acts like a man and the other where he acts as if there is a divine spirit within him, thus achieving a life higher than mere human nature (Aristotle 191). This is very different from Plato’s narrative because Kant implies that man by nature is evil or corrupt therefore he has to conform to the moral law in order to live a better life. He is not simply a product of its environment, he is inherently corrupt. It is hard to pick one theory and reject the other. It will also be negating the introduction that there is no absolute truth or knowledge. In Kant’s theory, there is space for spirituality. There must be divine authority overseeing man’s activities. Plato, on the other hand, is more supportive of nurture as opposed to nature. Kant considers human nature as a composition of feelings, one relation and cognition, and these aspects are governed by a priory prescribed by a â€Å"higher cognitive power† (Frierson 13) Descartes is also in agreement with Kant that there is a divine authority. And hence man has a defined nature. Renà © Descartes's held anti-elitist and egalitarian views on human nature (Lopston 24). It also implies that considering this premise one has to accept that humans have been created as part of a grand design.