Plato's concepts of epistemology and metaphysics are very closely related and are directly related to the way we learn things. What separates these two ideas is how each aspect deals with knowledge. There is an important difference between the one who knows and the one who is known. The knowledge aspect is central to epistemology, while the objects that can be known are central to Plato's metaphysics. The divided line allows us to clearly distinguish the two different disciplines. Plato's dualistic approach to metaphysics is composed of two different realms of existence. One area deals with the ever-changing physical world while the other, The Forms, deals with the unchanging world. Plato believed that these two areas could be further divided. The world of Forms is divided into two concepts, the concept of Mathematical Forms and the concept of Ethical Forms. The sensible world, the visible world, is divided into things and images. The concept of things represents the ordinary objects that we perceive, just as the concept of images represents the shadows, reflections and images that we perceive. As mentioned earlier, Plato's metaphysical argument has an epistemological counterpart. How we can know the objects of reality is very important to Plato. Much like his concept of metaphysics, Plato breaks down his concept of epistemology into two categories: knowledge and belief. According to Plato, knowledge is always true and justifiable, while belief can be true or false and can be based on persuasion. Plato uses his Allegory of the Cave to introduce these distinctions of knowledge and belief. The Platonic concept of the soul also takes a multi-pronged approach. Plato divides the human soul into three Meros... middle of paper... true human nature. It is in our nature to deviate from each other, to disagree, to have different beliefs. It’s also part of our nature to not be perfect. It seems almost impossible to imagine a scenario in which citizens are given certain roles and are consistently content with them. We have no way of determining what motivates a person, what their wants and desires are, until that person makes them known. It's this mystery of a person's true desires that makes it almost illogical to assign someone a role before their true personality has come to fruition. This repressive aristocracy does not allow a person's true potential to flourish, preventing them from being the best they can be in a field for which only they know they are suited. This is why, in a free society, people can achieve true happiness by living a life centered on their passions and talents..