According to Plato, true knowledge originates in the realm of Forms, or universal, eternal, constant, and absolute truths that only the mind can access, such as the Form of the Good or the Form of the Right. Forms are not part of the visible world, they are abstract and immaterial ideas that have the task of making things what they are; justice and all just things are so only because of the Form of the Just. Plato essentially invents the theory of Forms and introduces it into the Republic to continue his defense of the philosophers. In the Republic, in particular, Plato uses the Forms not only to once again attempt to separate Socrates from another group of philosophers, specifically the aesthetic philosophers, but also this time to give more power to the philosopher in the City-State. In the Republic, Plato takes a radically new step and gives political power to philosophers, or philosopher-kings, and states that political power and philosophy are better off becoming one (Republic, 473c-d). However, the theory of Forms is just an invention, a clever excuse that Plato tries to use to promote the position of philosophers or philosophy itself, which fails to be convincing for two reasons: (1) the Forms may not be at all true knowledge, although this is debatable, and (2) even if the Forms are true knowledge, there is no explanation of how the philosopher-kings are the only ones who have access to the Forms. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Plato claims that only the Forms are the true, universal and immutable knowledge in the world. However, it is radical to claim that only these abstract representations of perfection amount to true knowledge. If one can know beauty and recognize beauty in another, then one must possess some knowledge about what beauty is. Although an individual's beauty is a matter of opinion and standard, the fact that one can know that another is beautiful must mean that he knows what beauty is in the first place. Furthermore, one can just as easily know that another is beautiful and at the same time not beautiful, that is, one can know exactly in what way one is beautiful and in what way one is not beautiful. If the Form of Beauty exists, and is the ideal of all that is beautiful in the world, if one comes to recognize this beauty then one must be informed about what beauty is or is not, or both. But, on the contrary, if true knowledge is truly universal and stable over time, then simply knowing that one is beautiful is not knowledge. Beauty is an object of judgement, you can be beautiful and not beautiful at the same time, and beauty depends on time. The Form of the Beautiful on the other hand is eternal and immutable, and since knowledge is limited to eternal, immutable and absolute truths, only the Form of the Beautiful and the Forms as a whole are true knowledge. Whether or not the Forms are, as Plato claims, the only true and complete knowledge is certainly uncertain, but either way, Plato's theory lacks an important explanation that justifies the new political power of the philosopher-kings. Socrates divides knowledge claims into three distinct categories; “that which is completely is completely knowable, that which is not at all is completely unknowable” (477a), and “that which is completely and in no way completely knowable is unknowable” (478d). This essentially translates to mean that “that which is complete” is true knowledge or knowledge of the Forms, “that which is in no way complete” is ignorance, and “that which is complete and in no way” is belief or opinion. Regardless of whether or not the Forms are true knowledge, Plato claims that only philosophers have access to the.