Plato's Imperfection Argument

Plato’s imperfection argument is concerned with the existence of forms and our possession of priori concepts that is knowledge that is not gained from empirical evidence but rather through deduction. Plato basis the argument on the imperfection of sensible objects and how we make judgments about them. He denotes the forms to being the perfect object and stresses that the sensible ones are only imperfectly approximate meaning although they seem holistic they are lacking. He focuses on the form of equality and our assumptions that we perceive objects to be equal, but because we are using our senses the object falls short of being the true from of equality. When we attempt to utilize our senses to explain the concept of equality the object becomes
We are reminded of the form of equality which is distinguishable from the imperfect approximate. We have an intrinsic understanding of what it means for something to be equal even through no two things we experience are perfectly equal. In order to grasp the form of equality we must be recollecting the immortal knowledge we had prior to birth. This implies 2 things such that the soul’s life extends beyond the body and that the soul must have existed prior to birth in order to recall this knowledge.
In Phadeo recollection is the epistemological mechanism and the forms are used to apply it. A form is an abstract object, the existence and nature of it is independent from our beliefs and judgments about them, they are unchangeable, eternal, uniform and always the same. The study of epistemology and metaphysics amounts to studying what the world is like and what we know about it. Topics of interest regarding epistemology in Plato’s case is in perception and knowledge. These notions generally are directed at something, knowledge has ideas that are known and perceptions require stimuli to be perceived. Knowledge is infallible whereas our beliefs are not, just as the forms are real, but the material objects
If knowledge is experienced rather than innately given it is not real knowledge. His idea that true knowledge is not from experience because our sense perceptions distort and confuse contradicts the theory that experience from a past life could have given us the knowledge of the forms or equality in this case. Seemingly when we see two relatively equal objects beside each other we know if they are equal or not because they will either be the same or different. Because the form of absolute equality does not exist physically that does not mean the idea can’t be constructed mentally and exist in the mind, so it could be argued that knowledge of the form equality is from the imagination not recollection. When a person is discussing a true form they could simply be stating their opinion and use it as justification as a definition of the thing itself, thus imagining their ideal standard of justice, beauty, equality. They can just as easily use a standard definition to understand the absolute and have no need to recollect. The existence of absolute forms therefore would not depend on the souls exit from the body but from imagination instead. The theory of recollection is one of learning but because it is not obvious about what it means to have a form in mind we do not really know who accomplishes it or what