Plato vs. Plotinus: Ideas vs. Art

David Richter's "Introduction to the critical tradition states that Plato and Plotinus disagreed on the importance of art. Plato, as an idealist, believed that art made mere copies of useful ojects (4). Art did not do justice to the ideas that objects represent. Plotinus, on the other hand, believed that art held greater value than artisanship. He believed that art did not copy objects; instead, art represented the very ideas of useful objects. This disagreement makes me wonder: What exactly is their disagreement about?

Neither Plato nor Plotinus downplay the importance of ideas. Ideas seem to be the determining factor in both of their arguments. Their disagreement, it seems to me, is in fact the definition of art, not the importance of it. When Plato thinks of art, he thinks of copies. And so, when Plato thinks of art, he must think of accurate representations. He does not account for creativity. When Plotinus thinks of art, on the other hand, he sees a more abstract version of an actual idea, not an object. Richter explains, "The Idea of Beauty resides within the artist, shaping his conceptions as it shapes all beauty in nature" (4). To Plotonius, art strips away everything that is not the idea of an object. And so, I see more similarities in their philosophies than I do differences.

I wish in this essay Richter had included more about what Plato and Plotinus would have said about the definition of art. Or perhaps I wish that Plato and Plotinus would have thought to include that question in their discussion. Further explanation of their individual views or even tastes of art would have clarified this disagreement for me.