Okay, this question might be a little confusing, but I tried. tell me if I need to clear it up.

Now for instance, Plato's theory is that we are living in a world of non-reality. That everything we see and eveything that we concieve to be real are mere shadows and forms of actual real things; a reality that we cannot realize with our senses because our senses decieve us, and we can only experience this reality by blocking out all senses and using reason or thinking (philoshophy). And that we also go to this place of reality when we die (like a heaven)


Anyway, this is my question. Do philosophical theories such as this that tell us we are not living in actual reality have actual merit or substance, or are they simply theories, only made and believed in by people who are dissatisfied with the world?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,

This theory may have merit, some scientists believe we may be living in a shadow world reflection of another universe in imaginary time. But whether our world is real or imagined is a matter of individual choice, for in the end, it makes no difference.

For an in-depth discussion of the intellect and Plato's forms, I suggest reading this Question in St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica:

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/108400.htm

St. Thomas Aquinas, along with Aristotle, concludes that there is no such thing as these ideas that exist separately from ourselves. I'm not sure, though, that Plato was completely wrong.

Plato understood that the intellect and the body must be separate, though he went too far into separating them completely. Instead, we can say the intellect and body are mixed, inasmuch as the intellect needs the body to sense in order for the intellect to be able to makes judgments about sensible things.