1. I think one of the most important ideas that Plato expresses comes from Book VII of the Republic, in the Allegory of the Cave. It is an idea that states that the extent of our knowledge will usually only cover topics that we’ve had exposure in. Today, society’s access to information is abundant, but not everyone makes the decision to find that information. Thus, as a person grows up with the scope of their perception isolated in a certain environment (village, city, state, country, etc.), they may not be able to pull a good variety of influence and knowledge from areas outside their scope. As a result, you end up with an individual with their own political beliefs and personal ideals, that have been restrained to a certain state of mind …show more content…
In a perfect world, the philosopher would become society’s greatest ruler. If we look at Socrates’ definition of the ideal philosopher, it would turn out that the philosopher has everything we look for in a leader. The philosopher has spent most of their lives exploring outside of the cave. They would be able to see the truth with clarity, and lead society through the most stable paths to ensure an ideal future. There would be no quarrels, as all of society’s trust is placed onto the capable philosopher’s shoulders. Unfortunately, with the way our society is now, it would be impossible to adopt this idealistic idea. Socrates refutes this idea through his parable of the ship, as well as through his identification of unwanted traits found in society. Although a true navigator exists on the ship (the philosopher), the crew will scramble over each other in a desperate grab for power (parts of society) while ignoring the navigator. Today, the philosopher’s biggest weakness as a ruler would be the inability to keep a strong grasp on their position while gaining the support of their society. Like Socrates says, the philosopher is not at fault, but rather it is the fault of people. An idea like this would never fly in our own country, because like many of us know, you simply cannot get everyone to agree to one
Throughout the last five weeks, I have read three of Plato’s dialogues: the cave allegory, Euthyphro, and the Apology. While reading them, I was able to see Plato’s view of a philosophical life. To live philosophically is to question appearances and look at an issue/object from a new perspective. In this essay, I will explain Plato’s cave allegory, Socrates’ discussion with Euthyphro, and the oracle story in the Apology.
In a post-apocalyptic American society, we need a government based in democracy that will work to make America stronger. This government must be about the people, not politicians or money. The form of governance that should be used, is a democracy based on bettering our population and quality of life without hurting other societies, heavily based on the ideas of these individuals. Plato and Rose Wilder Lane both have very interesting views of how the government should be and I think they could work together well to create a government. Plato believed that everyone has their own talents and should do what they’re good at.
Plato's Republic is centered on one simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? This is something that Socrates addresses both in terms of political communities and the individual person. Plato argues that being just is advantageous to the individual independent of any societal benefits that the individual may incur in virtue of being just. I feel as if Plato’s argument is problematic. There are not enough compelling reasons to make this argument.
In addition, the virtue of Plato’s view on the worldly existence is that it is very optimistic. He stresses the importance of education (of the soul), which is a good thing. Also, he wants people to live in harmony with each other. Nevertheless, I’m afraid that people aren’t capable of having so much solidarity by sharing their knowledge with others, after they have escaped the cave. I think that it would result in a group of elite, who have more knowledge than others, and instead of sharing their knowledge, they would keep it to themselves, and inequality will
Through becoming a teacher of the young men who followed him in Athens, Socrates effectively began to enter the public life. He was able to influence others through sharing his conclusions of justice, self-examination, and piety, and by asking relentless questions. Socrates effectively showed that an individual can live a private and a public life, even if Socrates was not directly involved in the policy-making in Athens. An individual can combine these two aspects of life in a productive way allowing her/him to live a full existence. These individuals can become teachers, politicians, and activists who use their focus on justice and piety in their private lives to advocate and create laws that promote true justice for the rest of the
1) In the allegory of the cave, Plato’s main goal is to illustrate his view of knowledge. A group of prisoners have been chained in a cave their whole lives and all they have ever been exposed to were shadows on the wall and voices of people walking by. The prisoners in the cave represent humans who only pay attention to the physical aspects of the world (sight and sound). Once one of them escapes and sees the blinding light, all he wants is to retreat back to the cave and return to his prior way of living. This shows that Plato believes enlightenment and education are painful, but the pain is necessary for enlightenment and it is worth it.
In the beginning of book VI, Socrates makes a point by saying that philosophers have always been able to see things as they are versus people who see things as they vary and so he asks, who should rule? (484b) Socrates then launches into how philosophers are the ones who love the truth and want nothing and will not stand for anything, but the truth. (485c) It is because of that they should rule and so Socrates is asking for a philosopher-king who will seek nothing but the truth through knowledge and wisdom. This is the most important and boldest claim Plato makes in the defense of philosophy.
Plato believed that most people were “in the dark” and that everyone needs someone of a superior status to look up to. I do believe that most people could be considered “in the dark”. However, I do not believe that each of us needs someone of superior standard to guide us through life, I believe that everyone has one person that they look to automatically. I do not believe with Plato’s idea that we can ever achieve a superior status. “In the dark” is a symbol of being oblivious to the world around you.
He uses the example of ruling a city, where a government would change the rules and laws to best suit them, and as the rules are followed by those who act justly, the just would be acting in the favour of the stronger. Socrates objects to this and claims that humans will make mistake, as that is part of being human, and may
A metaphor from Plato's Republic helps define this idea of the good. Imagine there is a ship with several people living on it. The ship's owner has little knowledge of sailing, so he allows his other crew members to sail it for him. Though nearly everyone else on board has zero experience in sailing, they all try to persuade him that they will be able to guide the ship best, in order to gain control. The only person who actually has any understanding of sailing is ridiculed, the stargazer, because from their stance, he seems to be a madman who wastes his time daydreaming and looking up at the sky rather than paying attention to where they actually are: the boat.
Socrates’s allegory of the cave in Plato’s Republic Book VII is an accurate depiction of how people can be blinded by what they are only allowed to see. The allegory does have relevance to our modern world. In fact, all of us as a species are still in the “cave” no matter how intelligent or enlightened we think we have become. In Plato’s Republic Book VII, Socrates depicts the scenario in a cave where there are prisoners who are fixed only being able to look at the shadows on the wall which are projections of things passing between them and the light source.
Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.
What is justice? This is the crucial question that Plato attempts to answer in his dialogue, The Republic. He conjures up an allegory that justice can be found in a person, and a person can represent a city. Thus, his entire dialogue focuses on this ‘just’ city and the mechanics of how the city would operate. His dialogue covers a myriad of topics about justice in addition to the human soul, politics, goodness and truth.
Arguments On the other hand, objections against the government of philosopher-rulers can be made. However strong the foundation of the strengths of his idea of a philosopher king may be, there are also a lot of flaws and weaknesses and misconceptions that can be found in it. While in truth that his arguments with regard to them as the ones who are more suitable and capable of giving better judgments than those of the normal men, it is still not persuasive enough to capture the minds of the other philosophers that time into taking into action the idea of the philosopher king. And while his altercation may be valid enough to stand in solid ground, it is still not contemporary with the realistic perception of the world and as well as to the modern
Joseph Daunis Three Classes and the Soul In Book IV of Plato’s The Republic, Socrates draws a comparison between the classes evident in their fictional city to the human soul. Socrates clearly defines the three forms he finds in the city as being the appetites of mankind, or in other words, all human desires, such as pleasure, comforts, and physical satisfaction. The second form discussed by Socrates is the spirit or the component of the soul which deals with anger and perceptions of injustice. The third and final form is the mind or reason, which analyzes and rationally weighs options and solutions to problems. Socrates compares these three forms of the soul to the three classes in the city: producers, auxiliaries, and guardians.