loo Science Religion and Reality 



the world of nature as a whole, but seeking the universal in these 

 ethical matters. It was he who fixed thought for the first time 

 on definitions. Plato accepted his teaching but held that the problem 

 applied not to anything perceived by the senses but to something 

 of another sort. His reason was that the common definition could 

 not be a definition of things perceived by the senses, because they 

 were always changing. Things of this other sort he called Ideas 

 and things perceived by the senses, he said, were different from 

 these (Ideas) and were all called after them." (Aristotle's 

 " Metaphysics," i. § 6.) 



Thus concepts became for Plato something very concrete, 

 while our impressions of the material universe, percepts, became 

 something very vague. Such a theory, it is evident, could easily 

 ally itself with religious teaching which deals with concepts. 

 Historically the great religions have not been backward in profiting 

 by the mighty assistance which the greatest of all philosophers 

 could lend. It is not, however, our concern here to follow that 

 development of his influence. To scientific advance, on the 

 other hand, his attitude was by no means helpful. 



Plato expresses a great admiration for mathematical principles 

 and he regards mathematics as exhibiting that type of certitude 

 and exactness to which other studies should conform. Now 

 mathematics relies for the material on which it works upon some- 

 thing of the nature of Plato's Ideas. It therefore might be 

 expected that mathematics would appeal to him. Many of Plato's 

 thoughts assume a mathematical guise and he exhibits at certain 

 times a view which seems to approach that of Pythagoras (sixth 

 century B.C.), who had attached a moral and spiritual value to 

 numbers. 



The general attitude of Plato was, however, much less favour- 

 able to the physical sciences. He naturally could not regard with 

 aught than scorn the material theories of such writers as Democritus. 

 Nevertheless he speaks with respect of Hippocrates, the very type 

 of scientific investigator in antiquity, Plato's respect in this 

 matter was, however, quite devoid of any inclination to follow in 

 his footsteps Nor is this to be wondered at, for, apart from the 

 relative unimportance of the place that he assigned to phenomena, 

 Plato was in fact quite without those qualities which lend themselves 

 to patient inductive observation. Nevertheless the great philosopher 

 could not refrain from producing something in the way of a cosmic 



