Both Plato and Aristotle believed that there is a world of true knowledge, the ultimate reality of the world that has been created perfectly by God (or the equivalent concept of God). What did each of the two philosophers propose as the route or method to obtaining that true knowledge? Because of their particular theory about the search for true knowledge, what would be each of their views on the nature/nurture debate? Which of the two views is superior to the other? Why?

To Begin with... Both Plato and Aristotle were major contributors to how "Almost every philosopher, and most psychologist, can be evaluated in terms of their agreement or disagreement with the views of Plato or Aristotle." (Hergenhahn, 2005,09) Even though they may have made some mistakes and errors in their assessments in plotting out some of their theories, that is exactly what theories entail. This is what we understand; based on the results of our current findings according to that knowledge available at this present time, and what every empirical researcher is to build upon or make radical changes as time occurs, as did Aristotle with some of Plato's assessments.

Both Plato and Aristotle, believed that there is a world of true knowledge, and each of those philosophers chose different methods in evaluating and determining that hypothesis. Plato thought that all knowledge could be known through sensory experience and his resolutions were majorly predisposed by his Pythagorean beliefs of the immortality of the soul and he thought that prior to the soul inhabitation into the human body that pure and complete knowledge dwell within that soul. Therefore Plato also thought that true knowledge could be acquired through inspiration by the "reminiscence theory of knowledge, all knowledge is innate and can be attained only through introspection, which is searching of one's inner experiences. At most, sensory experience can only remind one of what was already known. Therefore, for Plato, all knowledge comes from reminiscence, from remembering the experiences the soul had before entering the body." (Hergenhahn, 2005,09)

"Aristotle is perhaps best known today as a logician. He created a system of thought based on fundamental assumptions that one cannot doubt—the famous a priori truths. Whereas Plato believed that one must accomplish knowledge of truth by means of reason and intuition, Aristotle believed that the philosopher must observe particular phenomena to arrive at an understanding of reality, a scientific technique known as induction. Once truth is known through induction from the particular to the universal, the philosopher can engage in the process of deduction from the basis of the universal to arrive at other particular truths. Aristotle’s system of logic is known as syllogism. For example, assume the following:

Each human can know things; each human is a knower (A).What humans collectively know (A) we call knowledge (B). Knowledge (B) is synonymous to reality, the truth (C). Therefore, each individual human can know what is, = the truth. If A═B and B═C, then A═C." (Aristotle, 2004)

"For Plato, first principles were arrived at by pure thought; for Aristotle, they were attained by examining nature directly. For Plato, all knowledge existed independently of nature; for Aristotle, nature and knowledge were inseparable. In Aristotle's view, therefore, the body was not a hindrance in the search for knowledge, as it was for Plato and the Pythagoreans." (Hergenhahn, 2005,09) Therefore my answer for "WHY" would be that Aristotle method would be superior to Plato's because Aristotle did a more complete research, in that he started with that of his teacher Plato, understood his concepts and even went further to prefect them, however found them insubstantial, and then ventured forward in rethinking his assessed findings, structuring a final encompassment, viewing us at the head of the animal chain, aligned with God's

creational order of things being connected to the associations of nature related in conjunction with that God Ordained Order. "Because Aristotle sought to explain several psychological phenomena in biological terms, he can be considered the first physiological psychologist" (Hergenhahn, 2005,09) Knowing this particular point Aristotle's teachable findings in this area are still being carried on and followed through today.

From Plato, Aristotle learned of the universal truth, which Socrates termed “the Good.” Plato and his teacher Socrates believed that the Good and other transcendent ideals such as Justice and Beauty cannot be known or seen but rather are beyond human conception—what we call the good, justice, and beauty are mere shadows of the truth. Aristotle, however, questioned whether such truths are beyond human comprehension—perhaps they are every bit a part of human experience. Plato taught his students at the Academy that the best means to approach an understanding of truth were through reason, the study of mathematics and music, intuition, and intense and deep contemplation. Aristotle, less the mystical and more the pragmatic thinker, broke from his teacher by adopting the scientific approach to human behavior, natural philosophy, natural science, ethics, and metaphysics. Aristotle also learned from Plato of being (ousia), the divine essence, from which all things derive. Aristotle did not abandon this religious interpretation of the ultimate reality but brought science to bear to discover and to understand it. For Aristotle, then, science is a pious act to discover the nature of goodness, justice, virtue, and being. Human experience is an essential matter for study, since the better sort of human beings echo being itself." (Aristotle, 2004)

References:

Aristotle. (2004). In Science in the Ancient World: An Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://library.gcu.edu:2048/login?qurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.credoreference.com/entry/abcsciaw/aristotle

Hergenhahn, 2005,09). An introduction to the history of psychology SIXTH EDITION. Cengage Learning, Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Mason, Ohio