P brass and Aristotle are probably the two thinkers who have most influenced Western culture . Even today, a good part of our way of thinking, whether we have studied philosophy in schools and universities or not, has its reason for being in the works that these two inhabitants of Ancient Greece developed between the 5th and 4th centuries BC.

In fact, they are considered to be primarily responsible for the consolidation of Western philosophy.

However, these two philosophers did not agree on everything. The differences in the thinking of Plato and his pupil Aristotle became profound and very relevant, even though Aristotle was greatly influenced by his Athenian master. Below is an overview of what these points of disagreement were.

Differences in the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle

In many subjects, these two philosophers held opposite intellectual positions , even though, whenever Aristotle went out of his master’s way, he tried to formulate his explanations based on Platonic thought.

These main differences between their understanding of the world that they both defended are the following.

1. The position on essentialism

Plato is well known for establishing a fundamental separation between the world of sensitive impressions and that of ideas. The former is composed of everything that can be experienced through the senses and is false and deceptive, while the latter is only accessible through the intellect and allows one to arrive at absolute truth.

That means that for Plato the essence of things is found in a plane of reality independent of objects and bodies , and that the latter are a mere imperfect reflection of the former. That essence, moreover, is eternal and cannot be altered by what happens in the physical world: the absolute idea of what a wolf is remains despite the fact that this species is extinct or totally dissolved in hybridization with domestic dogs.

  • You can read more about Plato’s Theory of Ideas in this article: “Plato’s theory of ideas”

For Aristotle, however, the essence of the bodies (living or inert) is found in themselves , not in another plane of reality. This philosopher rejected the idea that everything true is found outside of that which is composed of matter.

2. Belief or not in eternal life

Plato defended the idea that there is life after death, since bodies degrade and disappear but the souls, which form the true core of people’s identity, are eternal, just as universally true ideas are (the mathematical laws, for example).

Aristotle, on the other hand, had a conception of death more similar to that of the tradition based on the myths of Homer. He believed that in human beings there are souls, but these disappear when the physical body is degraded , so the possibility of existing after death is ruled out.

3. Different theories of ethics

In Plato’s philosophy, knowledge and ethics are elements that are totally linked to each other. For him, good and moral perfection are reached through a progressive approach to truth, so that being ignorant is equated with evil and progressing through wisdom makes us more good.

This idea may seem strange at first, but there is a certain logic in it if we consider the importance this philosopher gave to the existence of absolute ideas: all those decisions we take on the fringes of truth are erratic and irresponsible.

Aristotle, on the other hand, puts the focus of ethics on the goal of achieving happiness. Consistent with this idea, for him the good can only be something that is exercised through our acts and that does not exist beyond them. This idea makes sense, since it eliminates from the equation the existence of absolute and timeless truths and, therefore, we must realize the good in the here and now with the resources we have.

4. Tabula rasa or innatism

Another of the great differences between Plato and Aristotle has to do with the way they conceived the creation of knowledge.

According to Plato, learning is, in fact, remembering ideas that have always existed (because they are universally valid) and our soul, which is the motor of intellectual activity, has already been in contact with them in the world of the non-material. This process of recognizing truth is called anamnesis, and it goes from the abstract to the specific: we apply true ideas to the sensible world to see how they fit together.

For Aristotle, knowledge is created from experience and observation of the concrete and, from there, he goes on to create abstract ideas that explain the universal. Unlike his Athenian master, did not believe that perfect ideas and totally true ideas exist within us, but rather that we create an image of them from our interaction with the environment. We explore the environment trying to distinguish the false from the true through empiricism.

This model was known as “tabula rasa” centuries later, and has been defended by many other philosophers, such as John Locke.