ARCHIVE - PLATO'S REPUBLIC - No Spoilers, Please - MAIN DISCUSSION

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Pamela - very interesting - please make sure to post on this thread:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Probably better there because it is the overview thread for the philosophy folder but you can leave it here too. But do make a copy of the post above and post it there as well.

Thank you.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Here is the Seventh Letter by Plato (written 360 B.C.E.)

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/seventh...

Professor Smith references this letter as one of the reasons that Plato wrote The Republic.

This is not in spoiler html because it is not referencing the work specifically.

I would read it to start to understand Plato and what he was thinking.

Excerpts:

He says the following in the second paragraph:

"In my youth I went through the same experience as many other men. I fancied that if, early in life, I became my own master, I should at once embark on a political career. And I found myself confronted with the following occurrences in the public affairs of my own city. The existing constitution being generally condemned, a revolution took place, and fifty-one men came to the front as rulers of the revolutionary government, namely eleven in the city and ten in the Peiraeus-each of these bodies being in charge of the market and municipal matters-while thirty were appointed rulers with full powers over public affairs as a whole. Some of these were relatives and acquaintances of mine, and they at once invited me to share in their doings, as something to which I had a claim. The effect on me was not surprising in the case of a young man. I considered that they would, of course, so manage the State as to bring men out of a bad way of life into a good one. So I watched them very closely to see what they would do".

Another powerful section:

"The result was that, though at first I had been full of a strong impulse towards political life, as I looked at the course of affairs and saw them being swept in all directions by contending currents, my head finally began to swim; and, though I did not stop looking to see if there was any likelihood of improvement in these symptoms and in the general course of public life, I postponed action till a suitable opportunity should arise. Finally, it became clear to me, with regard to all existing cornmunities, that they were one and all misgoverned. For their laws have got into a state that is almost incurable, except by some extraordinary reform with good luck to support it. And I was forced to say, when praising true philosophy that it is by this that men are enabled to see what justice in public and private life really is. Therefore, I said, there will be no cessation of evils for the sons of men, till either those who are pursuing a right and true philosophy receive sovereign power in the States, or those in power in the States by some dispensation of providence become true philosophers".

His impression of young men

"My own opinion, so far as the young men were concerned, and the probable line which their conduct would take, was full of apprehension-for young men are quick in forming desires, which often take directions conflicting with one another."

Interesting about the role of advisor

"He who advises a sick man, whose manner of life is prejudicial to health, is clearly bound first of all to change his patient's manner of life, and if the patient is willing to obey him, he may go on to give him other advice. But if he is not willing, I shall consider one who declines to advise such a patient to be a man and a physician, and one who gives in to him to be unmanly and unprofessional. In the same way with regard to a State, whether it be under a single ruler or more than one, if, while the government is being carried on methodically and in a right course, it asks advice about any details of policy, it is the part of a wise man to advise such people. But when men are traveling altogether outside the path of right government and flatly refuse to move in the right path, and start by giving notice to their adviser that he must leave the government alone and make no change in it under penalty of death-if such men should order their counsellors to pander to their wishes and desires and to advise them in what way their object may most readily and easily be once for all accomplished, I should consider as unmanly one who accepts the duty of giving such forms of advice, and one who refuses it to be a true man. "

Interesting view:

"Dion's aspiration however was the same that I should say my own or that of any other right-minded man ought to be. With regard to his own power, his friends and his country the ideal of such a man would be to win the greatest power and honour by rendering the greatest services. And this end is not attained if a man gets riches for himself, his supporters and his country, by forming plots and getting together conspirators, being all the while a poor creature, not master of himself, overcome by the cowardice which fears to fight against pleasures; nor is it attained if he goes on to kill the men of substance, whom he speaks of as the enemy, and to plunder their possessions, and invites his confederates and supporters to do the same, with the object that no one shall say that it is his fault, if he complains of being poor. The same is true if anyone renders services of this kind to the State and receives honours from her for distributing by decrees the property of the few among the many-or if, being in charge the affairs of a great State which rules over many small ones, he unjustly appropriates to his own State the possessions of the small ones. For neither a Dion nor any other man will, with his eyes open, make his way by steps like these to a power which will be fraught with destruction to himself and his descendants for all time; but he will advance towards constitutional government and the framing of the justest and best laws, reaching these ends without executions and murders even on the smallest scale.

This course Dion actually followed, thinking it preferable to suffer iniquitous deeds rather than to do them; but, while taking precautions against them, he nevertheless, when he had reached the climax of victory over his enemies, took a false step and fell, a catastrophe not at all surprising. For a man of piety, temperance and wisdom, when dealing with the impious, would not be entirely blind to the character of such men, but it would perhaps not be surprising if he suffered the catastrophe that might befall a good ship's captain, who would not be entirely unaware of the approach of a storm, but might be unaware of its extraordinary and startling violence, and might therefore be overwhelmed by its force. The same thing caused Dion's downfall. For he was not unaware that his assailants were thoroughly bad men, but he was unaware how high a pitch of infatuation and of general wickedness and greed they had reached. This was the cause of his downfall, which has involved Sicily in countless sorrows. "

More: http://kentzendo.org/welton/PlatoSeve...
http://hfc-worldwide.org/blog/2015/01...

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

The following is in a spoiler - this spoiler discusses some of the major questions in The Republic and why Plato wrote The Republic

(view spoiler)[Some of the major questions in The Republic is What is Justice? What is Morality? What is traditional society? Why is the Figure of the Philosopher? What is metaphysics? What is Epistemology?

The first question we come across in Book One is “what is justice?” Socrates addresses this question both in terms of political communities and in terms of the individual person or soul. He does this to address the second and driving question of the dialogue: “is the just person happier than the unjust person?” or “what is the relation of justice to happiness?”

It was Plato's aim to realize the social and political stability on a foundation of moral and spiritual absolutes by which every man may live.

Remember the Thirty Tyrants (an oligarchy) ruled Athens for eight months after the Peloponnesian War and tried to enlist both Plato and Socrates. Plato could not make up his mind but Socraties openly refused so he became tagged unfairly with being anti-democratic which was an extremely dangerous tag to get at that time. Socrates was the most idealistic and genuine man who would not fall victim to entreaties by the Thirty Tyrants. Because of this he was executed by the restored Athenian democracy - they said that Socrates had corrupted the youth, had introduced new gods, that he was an atheist, had unusual religious practices - all of these pointless accusations disillusioned Plato.

Seeing an innocent and good man accused this way - Plato left Athens to travel - did not want to become a politician and knew he could no longer serve that state.

So why The Republic? Was it a rectification of the fate of Socrates? Socrates who was a just man killed by an unjust State?

The Seventh Letter written when Plato was at least 60 but more likely in his mid-seventies seems to make that point. He does say that Socrates death changed his goal from statesmanship to helping to develop a society that would be based upon the ideas of truth, goodness and justice. Plato never held office but he was into politics and his longest work - Laws _ is devoted to enlightened social and political views.

Plato just did not want to become a martyr or participate in a hopeless situation as he described in the Seventh Letter. He certainly did not want to have the same fate as Socrates. (hide spoiler)]


Statue of Socrates in front of the Academy of Athens, 19th Centure. HFC


Statue of Plato in front of the Academy of Athens, 19th century. The statues of Socrates and Plato flank the main entrance to the Academy. HFC.

[Marren]

I began my reading today and I realize after I read, I needed an audio reading to help me process. Yes I am slow amd I have touch any Philosophy material for a few years. I am not sure how I can go ahead to discuss such concepts or if I will be able to at all but I will definitely be reading along ( a week or two behind)

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

That is no problem whatsoever Noirfifre - we are all here to help you.

And we are all learning from each other.

That is why we are using the spoiler html so that nothing is spoiled for those people reading behind us on their own schedule.

Just try to do a cursory reading and listen and pick up as much as you can as you go along. This is a work that you could read ten times and come up with other ideas each time.

There is a free Libravox audio available so that you can listen and read along at the same time.

Go to message three on this thread and the link is there. Hope this helps you.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Folks for those of you who would like to drill down in depth on the idea of justice - I have set up a spoiler CONCEPT thread. No html needs to be used on the spoiler thread whereas this one is the single thread discussion of the entire work and we need to use html for the people reading after us.

This is the LINK FOR THE SPOILER discussion thread on the concept of Justice

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[[deleted user]]

Bentley wrote: "Here is the Seventh Letter by Plato (written 360 B.C.E.)

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/seventh...

Professor Smith references this letter as one of the reasons that Plato wrote The Republ..."

Thank you.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Everyone, for the week of May 23th - May 29nd, we are reading Book Three and Book Four of Plato's The Republic.

My edition - by Plato translated by W.H.D. Rouse

The second week’s reading assignment is:

Week Two - May 23rd - May 29th
Book Three: The Arts in Education - pages 207 - 251 and Book Four: Wealth, Poverty, and Virtue - pages 251 - 287

Chapter Overview(s) and Summary

Book Three - The Arts in Education
(view spoiler)[
Socrates goes into more detail about how stories should be told to children. He prefers narrative to drama, because if you act something out and have to portray a bad character, you might pick up some of the bad qualities of the character. And even the form of music which goes along with the story is important.

Physical training, gymnastics, is just as important as literature and music. There must be a balance, because too much gymnastics can make a person too aggressive and too much training in the arts will make him effeminate.

There must be tests to determine the correct sphere of life for each man, which ones are to be the guardians and which the craftsmen. And we need a myth which all will believe, that some people are “golden” and are born to rule, some are “silver” and are destined to help the rulers, and the rest are “iron” or “bronze” and will be the workers. And mostly the children of each class will be like their parents, but if a “silver” child is born to a “golden” parent, he must be put into the lower class, and vice versa. Finally, the rulers will not be allowed to have possessions or money but will live communally. Only the class of craftsmen will be allowed their own houses and possessions. This will prevent envy and strife between the classes.
(hide spoiler)]
Book Four - Wealth, Poverty, and Virtue
(view spoiler)[
Adeimantus says that it doesn’t seem that the Guardians of the city will be happy, having all the responsibility and no houses or money. But, Socrates says, our object is not to make the rulers happy, but to make the community as a whole happy. Also we must make sure that the craftsmen are neither too rich nor too poor. If they are rich, they probably won’t do their jobs and if they’re poor, they won’t be able to afford tools and materials. In either case, the city would be deprived of their products. Finally, Socrates believes that the city will need few laws, since the citizens have had such an excellent education.

Since we now have described the perfect city, we need to know where to find the four great virtues: wisdom, courage, discipline and justice. Obviously wisdom must be the purview of the rulers. And courage is necessarily to be found in the auxiliary/soldier class. The third virtue, discipline, also called temperance, is the quality of mastery over yourself, of not giving into your desires if they would ultimately harm you. In the instance of our city, this means that the wiser class governs the less wise, who in turn agree that this arrangement is best for everyone. Socrates now sees that the final virtue, justice, is the very principle we founded the city on, that each person should have one job, the one he’s most suited for, and not interfere with other people doing their jobs, and that each class as a whole performs its job correctly.

Now we can look at a man and see if he has something analogous to these three classes. For example, if he wants to drink a lot but realizes he shouldn’t, we see his desire contesting with his reason. Another type of mental conflict might be his curiosity to inspect a corpse warring with his innate disgust. In the first case, his reason is like the ruling class and his desire like the craftsman class. In the second one, curiosity is like a desire for experience and disgust is a strong emotion. We might compare emotions, which include anger, with the auxiliaries. Since in our city justice is a balance of the three classes, so in man, justice is harmony between reason, emotion and desire, with reason always in control.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Questions for Week 2

Book 3
(view spoiler)[
1. Do actors really take into their personalities the characteristics of the parts they play?

2. What would it be like to live in this ideal city? How would it be determined what the role of each person would be from childhood?

3. If the Guardians must live communally, how do they form family units?

(hide spoiler)]
Book 4
(view spoiler)[
1. Why does Socrates think his city will need few laws?

2. The assignment of the virtue Wisdom to the Guardians seems obvious as does assigning Courage to the soldiers. But does it make sense to give Discipline to the relationship of the classes to each other?

3. Once you've assigned Wisdom, Courage and Discipline, why is what's left over Justice? Are these four the only virtues there are?
(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Some great questions Vicki

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Response to Question One in Book Three

(view spoiler)[Do actors really take into their personalities the characteristics of the parts they play?

I think sometimes they do - many actors study their subjects and try to immerse themselves into the role and some actors have complained that their wives did not like the after affects and it took a while to shake the role and the persona. (hide spoiler)]

[[deleted user]]

Book III, thoughts and response to Question #1

(view spoiler)[

It certainly seems to me that Socrates is a It’s-good-when-I-want-it-to-be-good and It’s-bad-when-I-want-to-deem-it-bad kind of guy.

We’ve seen him argue against the position of Thrasymachus. (Thrasymachus had argued that what is “right” is what the rulers want.) Now here in his ideal city, he is going to use force and power and “noble lies” to MAKE the people live as they should…ie…his way. He will force justice on them.


And here…Socrates says he wants to banish most poetry---yes, even the time-honored classics. Yet he also says regarding his education plan “We shall find it difficult to improve on the time-honored distinction between the physical training we give to the body and the education we give to the mind and character” (Book III, 376c).

So…if “time-honored” isn’t enough to justify the poets, logically, it should not be enough to justify the distinction between physical and mind/character education. Socrates should have to supply actual reasons. He doesn’t bother.

So often, Socrates contradicts himself. I don’t know what he intends for me to infer from that. Is The Republic one of those “fiction/propaganda” books of which Socrates speaks? The ones that “are, in general, fiction, though they contain some truth”… ? The ones we tell children “before we start them on physical training” …? (Book III, 377a).

And then, Look! LOL. Socrates goes on to disclaim about “representation.” Using the Iliad as an example (Book III, 393b), Socrates says that at first “the poet is speaking in his own person, and does not attempt to persuade us that the speaker is anyone but himself.” Ha ha. Throughout this entire book, Plato is “representing” himself as Socrates. Yes?




OK. 1. Do actors really take into their personalities the characteristics of the parts they play?


I think Socrates may have a point.

His first law here, remember, was to have only up-lifting stories and literature for the children… good role models that they could emulate. And we as parents are likewise careful in what we read to our children and what we allow them to watch on TV, because we want to instill good (i.e., “our”) values in them.

The Guardians (Hollywood executives ;-)…) used to take care of the TV shows for us… putting on only shows with “good messages” or those in which “the bad guys” lost [John Wayne movies] … “good family shows”… now…. We have to make our own decisions as to what is acceptable.

Socrates---it seems to me---tries to confuse on with “logic” that is ALMOST logical… He tries to confuse our thinking. Still… He may have a point.

OK. Mmmm. OK. There’s the saying “The clothes make the man.” Meaning, (lol, I googled) that if the man is well-dressed we tend to assume he’s a gentleman, etc. And if a man is dressed in rags, we tend to assume he’s perhaps, well… not a gentleman. In putting on clothes and in putting on a “character” from a play…. While --- perhaps… see below --- not REALLY altering who we are, can change how others perceive us.

Socrates wants the Guardians to be the rulers, right? And in his city the rulers are the “golden” ones. Looked up to. If others see a Guardian “acting as a bad man” or “acting as a fool” … those people of the city might start to be able to imagine the Guardians as not perfect. And if the Guardian were to play a fool, and the people watching laughed at him… well, laughing and ridicule tend to diminish the respect one has for people. {One of the reasons people on both sides of the political aisle mock those two people running for president. If we laugh at people, it usually influences us to not respect them as much.} {Socrates had warned against too much laughter, Book III, 388e}

And there’s that saying, “Fake it ‘til you make it.” Act like you’re confident until you ARE confident. Act like you are social until you become social. Etc.

An actor’s job IS to act. He/she has experience in professionally putting on the character and portraying the emotions of another. But a Guardian, raised from youth with only “good” role models, w/ no experience in acting… If this Guardian “pretends”/acts the role of some despicable person, experience the feeling of being bad, not being a professional actor… How might that indeed affect him?


Mmmm. It occurs to me. So… The rulers tell the “golden lie”/”the noble lie” to the others, right? And we’re really supposed to be talking about the soul, right? MAYBE Socrates is saying that we all lie to ourselves… That we SAY we are acting nobly, etc…. but we are lying to ourselves. What do you think?

And MAYBE… what with Socrates and Polemarchus and everyone breaking the rules when it’s in their own interest…. MAYBE Socrates/Plato is showing us that that is what all people do. We “let” ourselves break our rules, we “let” ourselves go against what we have said are our own principles because… because we want to, it’s in our interest, and we can rationalize it… the noble lie: “I personally am doing it for a good reason.”

Thanks Vicki, for a question that engaged me.





(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Folks an overview of some of the questions that you might find discussed in Plato's Republic and this is just a small sampling - I will add more so that you are on the lookout for them and can ponder what you think Plato through Socrates and the Socratic Dialogues are discussing and asking you to think about.

(view spoiler)[Plato The Republic was probably written around 380 B.C.E.

This was the first great work in the Western Civilization that concerned itself with political philosophy and the most influential - it could be the most influential in philosophy in general - many of the topics are political - but they move into the realm of major philosophical interest areas.

This is therefore considered for many the first great work in the area of political philosophy - and the Socratic Dialogues with Plato talking through Socrates and others tries to discuss and respond to these questions?

1. What is Justice?
2. What is Education?
3. What is the Role that Education should play in a political system?
4. What is the best life that a human being can lead?
5. Is censorship of music and literature ever justified?
6. What sort of person should rule the state?
7. Is it ever permissible for a ruler to lie to its citizens?
8. Should citizens be allowed complete freedom when it comes to private property and sexual relationships?
9. Are all citizens equal before the law?
10. Should women have equal rights as men?
11. Should all citizens have equal access to healthcare?
12. Why should you be good?

The above is a small sample of the questions that are discussed. I will add others periodically so that you can reflect on them as we go along.


Albert Einstein's Opinion

(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

A Structural Roadmap

For those folks who are starting out and trying to understand how this work is set up - I am going to try to outline it for you - how all of the Ten Books which could also be termed chapters are structured so that you have an idea as to how these books are organized.

One could take these Ten Books or you might call them large chapters and organize them into four distinct sections.

Section One

Book One is the Prologue and it introduces the cast of characters - it presents the most basic issue that we will pursue in the entire reading - namely what is justice.

And it presents the follow up question to that which is why is a life of justice superior to a life of injustice.

Section Two

We then move to Book Two, Book Three and Book Four - this next stage is like a construction project - the speakers will develop or mentally build a structure for an ideal city - a city which they will claim in their own arguments is a city that is in fact “just”.

Section Three

The next section is constituted by Books Five, Six and Seven - here we will find a great digression. We will find Plato talking to us not only about political philosophy but also philosophy in general. These central books are referred to as just that - the philosophical books of the dialogue.

Section Four

The last stage of the Republic is constituted by Books Eight, Nine and Ten. Here we will find the characters returning to the theme of real world politics.

Plato has made Socrates the hero of the dialogue and he will discuss regimes which are unjust and very familiar to us today - remember that Plato wrote The Republic- but has others debate and discuss his ideas.

Note: This is a Roadmap and does not need to be in spoiler html

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

For those of you who would like to read the text but listen to it being read in the background at the same time -

Here is a link: (you can download this audio and listen to it in your car or walking about or jogging or in your home) - Sometimes it is helpful to have the audio going when you are reading. You seem to understand the cadence of the writing better that way.

https://youtu.be/xGPT24dlXJs

Note: This is a reading aide and does not need to be in spoiler html

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Response to Bentley re Question One in Book Three, message 61

(view spoiler)[
I wonder why Plato put in this admonition against dramatizing stories. Was that even a teaching method in those days? And was he against drama in general?
(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Response to Vicki regarding Question One in Book Three - message 66

(view spoiler)[Maybe he did not see drama or dramatization as "truth". I read somewhere that they felt that folks who dealt in the arts as their talent/hobby/work were deemed the troublemakers in society (lol).

Maybe he felt that it lulled the senses into forgetting the real concerns of life and the pondering of virtue. Possibly he did not view these folks as being in the upper echelon of society or fulfilling their roles adequately to make the ideal city hum - I am sure that we will learn more.

Why do you think he admonished drama or those who dramatized?

I think at some level he might have been (against drama in general).

Remember he wanted all of us to be full on with our senses meaning he was not for drinking and carrying on either. Maybe he felt that this element of folks did that sort of thing - maybe he was right??

Maybe he thought that these things dull the senses. I personally love beautiful art, the arts in general (museums, plays, theater, opera, etc) - I find it very relaxing and awe inspiring.

I am not so sure that he was against the art itself if it were edifying - but maybe against the type of lifestyle an artist or a person in those fields might lead - I am sure that we will find out more. They had many beautiful sculptures and paintings in those days - so I guess we will learn as we read and find out.

Again what is your take and don't forget that Plato is obviously describing a "utopian" existence. Which I should add will be disturbing to many. But look for the kernels of truth and the format for discussion and getting into a good Socratic discussion where nobody is calling you out or trying to do a gotcha. This kind of discussion can be inspiring even though we may not agree with Plato's take on the ideal city or guardians for example. (hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Response to Adelle re Question One in Book Three, message 62

(view spoiler)[You have very interesting comments, Adelle.

Regarding this one -
But a Guardian, raised from youth with only “good” role models, w/ no experience in acting… If this Guardian “pretends”/acts the role of some despicable person, experience the feeling of being bad, not being a professional actor… How might that indeed affect him?
... makes me wonder if the Guardians are intended to be the teachers of the young. Seems like they'd be pretty busy, running the city, being an example to the citizens and teaching kids.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Comment on Book III

(view spoiler)[
Although I didn't include it in the summary, Plato talks about music right after showing how drama is damaging to actors. It seems that ancient Greek music was pretty formalized and rather rigid in its construction, with certain scales being considered relaxing and other more warlike.

Here's an article about Ancient Greek music.
(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Very interesting Vicki - thank you. (view spoiler)[Being that he lived during the 5th century - I think events of that period influenced him but I guess what he said during that time period might be likened to the violence on television and the internet that folks are worried about today. (hide spoiler)]

I will post some comments briefly on the events of that period.

Note: General comment - some of this does not need to be in spoiler html - the remainder does.

I thought this might bring a smile:

[[deleted user]]

respose to Vicki at 68


(view spoiler)[

Thank you, Vicki..... I just thought I'd try to struggle my way through...maybe find some understanding...in any case, even when going down a "wrong " path, having an enjoyable experience. ;-)

Vicki wrote: makes me wonder if the Guardians are intended to be the teachers of the young. Seems like they'd be pretty busy, running being an example to the citizens and teaching kids.

I realize that the Guardians were given a fuller knowledge than the rest of the people, but didn't you wonder how REALLY life would be like in this city.... since no one has ever been allowed to have opportunities to learn to understand people? Ok, maybe the Guardians have had courses in Human Behavior 101, but what about the worker people? Those workers have neighbors and people they have to work with. I think the worker people can be indoctrinated all day long as to how "good" people behave. ...but....real human nature is going to come into play. Or so I would think. As the Jeff Goldbloom character in Jurassic Park said when it was discovered that the dinosaurs were somehow breeding in the wild: Life finds a way.

And then.... these worker people won't be well-equipped to deal with human-to-human frustrations because they've been educated to believe such behavior doesn't exist.

I know....the Guardians represent the Rational Mind controlling the workers who represent the passions and such. But....the analogy here doesn't really work for me. The workers WON'T simply agree and the passions won't simply DO as the rational mind wants them to.

Or is that the point? That the city won't work? That people can desire to be well-balanced...? But in the end, in reality, it's unattainable?

Just thinking out loud. ;-)

(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Adelle at 71

(view spoiler)[
You raise a good point about the workers. Were they not to have an education like the guardians/soldiers? It seems like everyone would need a bit of education. And somewhere in here Socrates says his city won't need many laws, presumably because people will just know how to act. Doesn't seem realistic.
(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Who are the Characters in Plato's Republic:

The Characters:

(view spoiler)[Glaucon and Adeimantus are both older brothers of Plato

Of course Socrates has been executed already but Plato uses Socrates as a mouthpiece for Plato.

Plato is absent from the dialogue.

At the time that Plato is placing Socrates in this dialogue - Plato would not have been more than a teen. Remember that Plato was much much much older when he wrote The Republic - he is just placing the dialogue as happening when Socrates was alive and he was a teen. It of course was not written then.

The conversation is supposed to have taken place a dozen years before Socrates death in 399 BC

Socrates first interlocutor when the dialogue begins in earnest at 328c is Cephalus who is the father of Polemarchus
who is the next interlocutor (331 d - 336 a).

Cephalus was also the father of the orator Lysias.

Thrasymachus who continues the conversation with Socrates from 336a - appears to be one of the “sophists”

Socrates main interlocutors however are Glaucon and Adeimantus.

In an interesting manner they alternate in the task of talking with Socrates (hide spoiler)]

I would strongly recommend a companion reader to help you along - this is one that is not bad.

by Nicholas P. White (no photo)

Source: Nicholas P. White on Google

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

It does not make any difference what Plato's The Republic edition you are using - you do not have to be using Vicki's - you can quote any lines of passages using Stephanus numbers:

Quoting Plato: Stephanus Numbers

The figures and letters used almost universally to quote Plato refer to a Renaissance edition of his works published in Geneva in 1578 by a famed printer and humanist of the time named Henri Estienne (1528-1598), also known by the Latinized version of his name: Stephanus.

This complete edition of Plato's works was in three volumes, whose pages were continuously numbered from the beginning to the end of each volume. Each page of this edition is split into two columns, the right one providing the Greek text and the left one a Latin translation (by Jean de Serres). In between the two columns are printed letters from a to e dividing the column into five sections.

Based on this, a quotation of Plato includes the name of the dialogue and the page number in the Stephanus edition followed by the letter of the section that includes the first word of the quotation.

Thus, quotations take the form Crito 52c or Republic 343d .

Quotations are usually given with reference to the start and end point of the quoted section. If the end point is on the same page as the start point, only the end section letter is added, and the quotation takes the form Crito 51 d-e. If the end point is on a different page, the end page number and section letter are provided too, and the quotation takes the form Crito 50e-51b.

Another Sample:

Standard paging system:
For example, 521 a - refers to page 521 (that is Stephanus page 521)

And "a" refers to a paragraph or a series of lines

Vicki - please refer to only Stephanus page numbers because most folks will have varying texts and translations.

(Excerpt from a text by Bernard Suzanne)

What the heck are stephanus numbers?

Stephanus pagination is a system of reference and organization used in modern editions and translations of Plato (and less famously, Plutarch) based on the 1578 edition [1] of Plato's complete works translated by Joannes Serranus (Jean de Serres) and published by Henricus Stephanus (Henri Estienne) in Geneva. Plato's (and Plutarch's) works are divided into numbers, and each number is divided into equal sections: a, b, c, d, and e. This system is often used to reference Plato. For example, 'Symposium 172a' refers to a specific passage of Plato's Symposium. Stephanus numbers refer to page numbers in the various volumes of Estienne's edition of 1578. No Platonic work spans more than one volume so there are no multiple occurrences of the same page number for a single work. Since Estienne published three volumes, however, the numbers need to be used in conjunction with a Platonic title to identify a unique text. For example, '172a' by itself could refer to a passage in any one of three dialogues, but Symposium 172a refers only to one passage.

More specific citations may add line numbers, e.g. Symposium 209a5–9, but these generally refer to the lines in John Burnet's Oxford Classical Text, not to Estienne's line divisions.

There are some peculiarities in the Stephanus page numbers. The length of each page and each paragraph can vary if extra commentary appears on the page of the 1578 edition. Thus Stephanus pages are not all of the same length. Some pages do not have all the paragraphs a through e. There are also gaps in the sequence of Stephanus page numbers for Plato's Republic and Laws. The reason is that the editors added separate introductions to each 'book' of these longer works, and thus the page numbers of these introductions are not used to refer to pages in Plato's dialogues.

The spurious dialogue Halcyon was included in the corpus of Lucian's works and does not have Stephanus numbers.

Becker numbers are a comparable system for the works of Aristotle.

Source(s): Bernard Suzanne and Wikipedia

Suzanne, Bernard (year unknown), Quoting Plato: Stephanus Numbers (accessed 25/02/2010)
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/lithum/wo...

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Question 1 Book 4

(view spoiler)[
I don't really see how this ideal city can get along with few laws. Socrates seems to think that laws about contracts, harbor rules, finding juries, etc. are totally unnecessary, perhaps because everyone has been educated perfectly. It's as though the problems of dealing with other people are not worth his concern.
(hide spoiler)]

[Christopher]

Sorry I'm late to the party. I've been pretty busy with two new jobs and I've only just now found time to start in on The Republic. These are my answers to the questions for books I and II:

Book I
(view spoiler)[
1. What do you think of Cephalus' idea of justice - never to lie and to pay back what you owe? And what of Polemarchus' definition - to do good to your friends and hurt your enemies?

I think these are attributes of just people, but they are not a definition of justice. For example, one of the attributes of a clean person could be that they use shampoo in their hair every day. Not only that, but Jesus Christ in the Bible points out that even bad people do good things to others (Matthew 5:46-47). So, doing good things is not a definition of justice, just one of its attributes.

2. Thrasymachus, understood by most scholars to represent Sophists, claims that justice is whatever the strong leader says it is. How relevant is this view today?

In some ways it is still relevant. Indeed, it can be argued that it is the excuse of tyrants and strongmen running countries across the world today just as it was true of tyrants and strongmen in Plato's day. And yet, just like Sophocles in this dialogue and some of the other participants, this is not a sound argument.

3. Here we get a good idea of the Socratic method, questions and answers. How do you like this method?

I like this method as it allows for one to truly get straight to the heart of their argument and exposes any faults therein. I would say though that the questioning can take on a hostile tone in the wrong hands. However, I think Sophocles in this dialogue is modeling how gentle moderation of a debate can and should be done.
(hide spoiler)]
Book II
(view spoiler)[
1. What do you think of Socrates' ideal city-state? Is such a situation possible?

I remember reading Utopia by Thomas More in college and being rather exasperated with the whole thing. Socrates' ideal city-state reminds me of this because it is the first utopian society concocted by a philosopher in order to make an argument. Yet, Socrates' city-state seems more plausible because it seems like what we have today. Many people do specialize in only one type of job, although that may not be true of those with lower incomes and levels of education. We also do have a class of guardians who defend the country and many of them, but especially the officers, have an incredible amount of schooling compared to what citizen-soldiers in Plato's day had or even soldiers in America had even at the beginning of World War II. In some ways, we are living in Plato's ideal city-state today.

2. Regarding education, how can you leave out stories where gods or heroes do bad things? It seems to me most myths would be disqualified.

I think this is one of those things that got philosophers like Sophocles into trouble and can be seen even today in philosophy departments. There is a large segment of philosophers who just don't believe that God or the gods exist and would prefer to ignore myths in favor of instilling certain moral principles in their students. I think both Sophocles in this dialogue and philosophers are not giving their students enough credit, no matter how young they are. With the right teacher or parent, even some of the most difficult myths or tales from biblical scriptures can be used as example of what is good and what is bad. Just because a kid hears a tale about Zeus raping another young mortal girl doesn't mean that they will grow up to be rapists themselves.
(hide spoiler)]

by Anonymous(no photo)
Thomas More

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Christopher wrote: "Sorry I'm late to the party. I've been pretty busy with two new jobs and I've only just now found time to start in on The Republic."

Christopher, it's never too late to join in on the discussion. We're glad to have you here.

Book I
(view spoiler)[
1. I like your idea of certain actions being attributes of justice. So being a good person is not equivalent to being a just one.
2. I wonder if even Thrasymachus thinks that whatever the tyrant does is justice, or if he's just dismissing the whole idea of justice.
3. To tell the truth, sometimes I get tired of the back and forth in the dialogs, and just wish Plato/Socrates would come to the point. But it is useful to examine your own assumptions. (hide spoiler)]

Book II
(view spoiler)[
1. I'm not sure Plato would agree that we're living in his ideal state. I get the feeling he's not comfortable with democracy, that he doesn't really trust the common man to act in the best interest of society.
2. I think you're right about this, that you don't have to sanitize stories in order to raise moral people. It would seem to be instructive to have a story where a hero does something wrong, then realizes his mistake and goes on to live a better life.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Folks, next week we will be talking about Books 5 and 6. Week Three - May 30th - June 5th.

Book Five: On Matrimony and Philosophy - pages 287 – 328, Stephanus 449-483
and Book Six: The Philosophy of Government - pages 328 – 365, Stephanus 484-513

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

I find that my enjoyment in reading Plato is very dependent on the translation. A few months ago when we started planning to read The Republic, I got The Republic, translated by Tom Griffith, from the library and liked the contemporary phrasing. But by the time we really started on the discussion, both copies in my library were checked out (I only got it today) and I bought Great Dialogues of Plato, translated by W.H.D. Rouse, at my local bookstore. To tell the truth, I didn't really enjoy reading this edition.

Here's a comparison from early in Book 1 -

329a:
Tom Griffith version :
Cephalus: I'll tell you exactly how it strikes me, Socrates. There's a group of us who meet fairly often. We're all about the same age, so we're following the words of the old proverb.

W.H.D. Rouse version:
Cephalus: "Well, my dear Socrates," he said, "I will tell you how I feel. We often meet, a few of much the same age, like to like as the old proverb says."

I realize they're saying the same thing, but I just feel more comfortable with the more modern language. Also, the Griffith version has the Stephanus numbers and the other one doesn't.

I wonder if anyone else has thoughts about the translations.

by Plato
by Plato

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Comments on Book 4, Question 3

(view spoiler)[
Socrates and the others seem to take as given that there are four cardinal virtues.

'The cardinal virtues comprise a quartet set of virtues recognized in the writings of Classical Antiquity and, along with the theological virtues, also in Christian tradition. They consist of the following qualities:

Prudence (φρόνησις, phronēsis; Latin: prudentia): also described as wisdom, the ability to judge between actions with regard to appropriate actions at a given time.
Justice (δικαιοσύνη, dikaiosynē; Latin: iustitia): also considered as fairness, the most extensive and most important virtue; the Greek word also having the meaning righteousness.
Temperance (σωφροσύνη, sōphrosynē; Latin: temperantia): also known as restraint, the practice of self-control, abstention, discretion, and moderation tempering the appetition; especially sexually, hence the meaning chastity.
Courage (ἀνδρεία, andreia; Latin: fortitudo): also termed fortitude, forbearance, strength, endurance, and the ability to confront fear, uncertainty, and intimidation.

These virtues derive initially from Plato's scheme, discussed in Republic Book IV, 426-435 (and see Protagoras 330b, which also includes piety (hosiotes)). Cicero expanded on them, and Saint Ambrose, Augustine of Hippo, and Thomas Aquinas adapted them.

The term "cardinal" comes from the Latin cardo (hinge); the cardinal virtues are so called because they are regarded as the basic virtues required for a virtuous life. They also relate to the Quadrivium.

The four cardinal virtues appear as a group (sometimes included in larger lists) long before they are later given this title.

Plato identified the four cardinal virtues with the classes of the city described in The Republic, and with the faculties of man. Plato narrates a discussion of the character of a good city where the following is agreed upon. “Clearly, then, it will be wise, brave, temperate [literally: healthy-minded], and just.” (427e; see also 435b) Temperance was common to all classes, but primarily associated with the producing classes, the farmers and craftsmen, and with the animal appetites, to whom no special virtue was assigned; fortitude was assigned to the warrior class and to the spirited element in man; prudence to the rulers and to reason. Justice stands outside the class system and divisions of man, and rules the proper relationship among the three of them.

In Aristotle's Rhetoric we read: “The forms of Virtue are justice, courage, temperance, magnificence, magnanimity, liberality, gentleness, prudence, wisdom.” (Rhetoric 1366b1)

The Roman philosopher and statesman Cicero (106-43 BC), like Plato, limits the list to four virtues:

“Virtue may be defined as a habit of mind (animi) in harmony with reason and the order of nature. It has four parts: wisdom (prudentiam), justice, courage, temperance.” (De Inventione, II, LIII )
Cicero discusses these further in De Officiis (I, V and following).

The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius discusses these in Book V:12 of Meditations and views them as the "goods" that a person should identify in one's own mind, as opposed to "wealth or things which conduce to luxury or prestige."

The cardinal virtues are listed in the Bible. The deuterocanonical book Wisdom of Solomon 8:7 reads, "She [Wisdom] teaches temperance, and prudence, and justice, and fortitude, which are such things as men can have nothing more profitable in life."

They are also found in the Biblical apocrypha. 4 Maccabees 1:18-19 relates: “Now the kinds of wisdom are right judgment, justice, courage, and self-control. Right judgment is supreme over all of these since by means of it reason rules over the emotions.”

Catholic moral philosophy drew from all of these sources when developing its reflections on the virtues.'

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardina...

I wonder if the Greeks and the Hebrews came up with the same list independently.

I also wonder where virtues like kindness, charity and self-sacrifice come in.
(hide spoiler)]

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Supposedly the Ivies and Professor Smith use the Bloom translation - I think sometimes it is a personal thing. Some folks like a modern hip translation and others want a more authentic original translation much as if when Plato wrote everything.

[Christopher]

Again, sorry that I am late to discussing books III and IV. After today I will be on track with the rest of the discussion. Here are my answers to the questions for books III and IV:

Book III
(view spoiler)[
1. Do actors really take into their personalities the characteristics of the parts they play?

I think actors sometimes do sometimes. Have you heard some of the stunts Jared Leto pulled as the Joker during the filming for the upcoming DC Comics movie Suicide Squad? However, I will say that this is not a healthy thing for actors to do. If you allow a character you are playing to overwhelm or consume your own personality, I would argue that you had a weak personality to begin with. I think great actors are one who not only can become the character, but can then walk away from it when the play is over.

2. What would it be like to live in this ideal city? How would it be determined what the role of each person would be from childhood?

I believe either in the translator's introduction or in the the translator's notes of my edition he compared living in this ideal city-state to be similar to Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, where your occupation is determined for you. Sadly, I've never read Brave New World, but it did remind me of the Krypton we see in the recent Superman movie, Man of Steel, where artificial population controls were put in place and each Kryptonian was given a specific role in society to fulfill (politician, scientist, etc.). Quite frankly, the thought of someone choosing for me what I will do for the rest of my life is unnerving. Must we always sacrifice individual freedom for the good of society as a whole? Can not individual freedom itself be a good in and of itself for society as a whole? My gut tells me that yes, individual freedom can be.

3. If the Guardians must live communally, how do they form family units?

That's a good question. Seeing as how Plato admires the Spartans' system of government so much, it could be similar to how the Spartans started families. As I recall, and correct me if I am wrong, Spartan men lived in common barracks until they reached a certain age. They could only have a family by sneaking out of their barracks at night and returning before sunrise. If this is what Plato envisioned for his ideal city-state, it's a pretty rough way to have a family at all.
(hide spoiler)]
Book IV
(view spoiler)[
1. Why does Socrates think his city will need few laws?

It's because of the education that his ideal citizens will have had as described in books III and IV. Sophocles believes that the moral and physical education they will receive will make them into good citizens who will not need an abundance of laws to govern themselves.

2. The assignment of the virtue Wisdom to the Guardians seems obvious as does assigning Courage to the soldiers. But does it make sense to give Discipline to the relationship of the classes to each other?

Discipline in and of itself is a good thing for everyone to have whether it is discipline within society or self-discipline. However, color me skeptical, but I don't think discipline is always a good thing. What if the Guardians or the soldiers decide to abuse their powers? Should the other classes just sit back and take it? Forcing a society to obey rigid discipline in all matters only leads to greater social upheaval down the road.

3. Once you've assigned Wisdom, Courage and Discipline, why is what's left over Justice? Are these four the only virtues there are?

Because, in Plato's definition, justice in the individual "is produced by establishing in the mind a... natural relation of control and subordination among its constituents...." (IV.444.d). Thus, justice is what is left for the rest of society to take on as its defining virtue. However, I believe that there are other virtues that could be adopted not just by the auxiliary classes, but by the ideal society as a whole. As the Apostle Paul wrote in his epistle to the Galatians: "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law." (5:22-23).
(hide spoiler)]
by Aldous Huxley

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Everyone, for the week of May 30th - June 5th, we are reading Book Five and Book Six of Plato's The Republic.

My edition - by Plato translated by W.H.D. Rouse

The third week’s reading assignment is:

Week Three - May 30th - June 5th
Book Five: On Matrimony and Philosophy - 449a-480, pages 287 - 328 and Book Six: The Philosophy of Government - 484a-511c, pages 328 - 365

Chapter Overview(s) and Summary

Book Five - On Matrimony and Philosophy

(view spoiler)[
Adeimantus and Polemarchus want more detail on the place of women and children in the city. Socrates says that each person, including women, will perform the function each is best suited for, so a woman as well as a man could be a physician. And women might also be of the Guardian type and so should receive the same education as men and should mate with male Guardians. But these couplings must not be permanent. All children should be raised together, not knowing who is their mother or father. Having no personal family and no private property will prevent jealousy and envy within the ruling class.

Glaucon wonders how such a city could be created, and Socrates admits that it would be very difficult. But it is useful for discovering the nature of justice. He now introduces the concept of philosopher-king, for only with such a ruler could the society provide the greatest happiness for all. He then introduces the abstract concept of Forms, such as the idea of Beauty, in contrast to individual beautiful things which can change to ugly ones.
(hide spoiler)]

Book Six - The Philosophy of Government

(view spoiler)[
Philosophers are the obvious choice to rule the city because they love knowledge and truth and have the cardinal virtues of wisdom, courage, discipline and justice. But Adeimantus objects that most of the philosophers currently in Athens are either ineffective or corrupt. Socrates counters that a young man may start out with the proper mindset to be a good philosopher, but can be corrupted by those around him. And if other philosophers appear useless, it’s probably because people don’t respect knowledge or wisdom and so won’t follow the advice of the good philosophers. Perhaps one day a true philosopher will gain political power and show the people how to behave, or maybe a ruler will become a philosopher.

Our prospective rulers must be given a proper education and have the right temperament. They must strive toward knowing Goodness. Just as the sun illuminates things so we can see them, the Form of the Good makes Knowledge understandable to humans. Socrates proposes the Divided Line, split into four sections – images and objects (i.e. the real world) and thoughts and ideals (the world of the mind).
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Questions for Week 3

Book 5
(view spoiler)[
1. Socrates seems quite modern in his idea that women could perform the same jobs as men, even becoming Guardians. How would this idea go over in his time?

2. The proposals of no permanent couplings for Guardians and raising children communally almost sound like a sci-fi plot. Could this work in real life?

3. The idea of a philosopher-king (or a group of them) to rule the city is attractive, but is it practical?

(hide spoiler)]

Book 6
(view spoiler)[
1. Given Socrates' analogy of current society to a ship cast adrift with everyone fighting, how could a true philosopher get enough political power to run the state correctly?

2. The Divided Line is an interesting way to compare the physical world to the intellectual one. What do you think of the divisions within it?

(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Christopher, Book III question 2

(view spoiler)[
I was thinking the same thing about Brave New World. I'm sure Huxley studied The Republic during his upper-class British education (Eton College and Balliol College, Oxford). On the one hand, it seems soothing that everyone knows his place and is doing what he's best suited for, but it also seems a bit (perhaps more than a bit) stifling.
by Aldous Huxley
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Christopher, Book IV question 2

(view spoiler)[
It does seem that discipline is something that is imposed from above, and saying that it's an attribute of the relationship among the classes is just to say that the lower class, the craftsmen, agree to be ruled by the guardians and military. Again, it's a matter of everyone knowing their place and acting accordingly.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

I have some general comments about the Socratic dialog which apply to the whole book, so I'm not enclosing them in spoilers.

Once we get beyond Book I, most of the question and answer conversation seems pretty much like a monologue. Socrates makes a statement or question and Glaucon or Adeimantus or whoever says a version of "Yes, Socrates, that's exactly right." Or in some cases, "I don't really understand what you said about (something). Can you clarify?" There's very little push-back or real dialog going on. Maybe you have a different feeling about this.

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Comments on Book III, question 1

(view spoiler)[
Socrates' assertion that women are as capable of becoming guardians as men (451c-457c) is really quite surprising, given the society he lived in, where women's freedoms were severely restricted. Perhaps he thought all women needed was the correct education. Apparently Socrates' own wife Xanthippe was reputed to be quite a shrew. The blog Classical Wisdom Weekly has an amusing entry called Five Reasons Why Socrates Was A Terrible Husband.
(hide spoiler)]

[Pamela]

Book V
(view spoiler)[
1. The position of women in Socrates' time was basically limited to the bearing and care of children and except for prostitutes, priestesses, and slaves they were kept in seclusion within the home. Even in the home, they were not present at gatherings of their husbands' or fathers' friends. The idea that they could be equal to men whould have been an unbelievable idea. I've always thought this was odd given that a large portion of the pantheon of Gods were very active and powerful females.
Even Plato with his advocacy of female equality, occassionally disparages women.

2. I doubt it. Only if the community was very, very small and very, very dedicated.

3. Given Plato's assumptions in his argument, yes. Everyone is being educated to accept this as the goal and it's supposed to follow as a result of the education and breeding ideas. In reality, no. However, The Republic also should be looked at as an investigation and argument for a moral and spiritual inner life, the aspiration of a complete human being. I don't know that Plato ever meant it as a real life city plan except in the sense that if all these precepts were followed, the perfect City-State should result. (hide spoiler)]

[Christopher]

Okay, I'm back on track, so I won't have to be playing catch-up again. Here are my responses to the questions for books V and VI.

Book V
(view spoiler)[
1. Socrates seems quite modern in his idea that women could perform the same jobs as men, even becoming Guardians. How would this idea go over in his time?

Not well. Women in the Mediterranean world from Ancient Rome through Ancient Greece and Ancient Israel, even in the time of Christ, were not well respected. For example, the testimony of women to a crime would be considered less valuable than that of a slave's in certain cultures of the time. Rome was relatively progressive in terms of women's issues during this time, but that isn't saying much. Plato's ideas on women's rights would not have ben well received by others in Athens.

2. The proposals of no permanent couplings for Guardians and raising children communally almost sound like a sci-fi plot. Could this work in real life?

No. There is a genuine desire for people to find permanent coupling in this world and the idea of allowing others to raise your children is repugnant to any responsible parent.

3. The idea of a philosopher-king (or a group of them) to rule the city is attractive, but is it practical?

Not only is it attractive, but I would argue that it is practical. Indeed, that was the general idea behind monarchies and aristocracies of the past, that a relative few with enough wealth and knowledge would be best suited to rule a country. Sadly, it didn't always work in practice. Think about the kings of England. Their track record was not always great. I would also argue that it is not ideal either. Living in a democracy, we are accustomed to the idea that the people, not a select few, are better able to choose the direction of a country. Still, the philosopher-king is the ideal that our public school systems strive for. It's easy to see how this book has influenced our ideas of public education.
(hide spoiler)]

Book VI
(view spoiler)[
1. Given Socrates' analogy of current society to a ship cast adrift with everyone fighting, how could a true philosopher get enough political power to run the state correctly?

Again, this is where my love of democracy conflicts with Plato's view (although, to be fair, the democracy of Athens killed his mentor, Socrates). Our system of regulated competition and elections allows us, the voters, to assess the different candidates and choose the best one. Admittedly, we don't always choose the best candidate, but it's better than leaving it to the chance of genetics.

2. The Divided Line is an interesting way to compare the physical world to the intellectual one. What do you think of the divisions within it?

Honestly, Plato's analogy here went over my head. However, his simile of the Sun was fascinating. The idea that, like how the sun illuminates visible world, so The Good illuminates the intelligible world, reminded of that quote from C.S. Lewis when he was asked about why he believes in Christianity: "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen. Not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Pamela, Book V (message 89)

(view spoiler)[
1. The place of women in Greek society was so restricted; I would have hated living there. It was surprising that there was so little argument from the others about Socrates wanting to include women even as guardians, not to mention as warriors.

3. Yes, we have to separate Socrates' ideal city as a theoretical construct from what could really happen. I suppose it might be possible if somehow a thoughtful ruler, like Marcus Aurelius, could institute an educational scheme like the one prescribed here. (hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Christopher (message 90)

Book V
(view spoiler)[
1. Yes, women didn't fare well in the ancient world, although apparently Spartan women had more freedom than their Athenian counterparts.

2. The communal raising of children reminded me of a similar arrangement on Israeli kibbutzes, although it's not done like that anymore. Not to be able to be part of a couple would be contrary to people's happiness. I don't see how you're going to stop people from falling in love.

3. Interesting comments about kings and aristocracies, but I don't really think they were set up with the idea that those at the top were selected because they would rule the best, rather that they were the ones with the power.
(hide spoiler)]

Book VI
(view spoiler)[
1. I'm guessing that Athenian democracy was much more chaotic than ours, with all citizens voting directly on just about everything. Our representative democracy seems much more "normal." It's possible that some towns have direct democracy, but it's hard to imagine how it would work.

2. The Divided Line is pretty abstract, and I'm not sure I get it either. He later places so much emphasis on math, that he seems to want to measure parts of knowledge. But I don't really know why the same proportions are applied to splitting the whole line of human knowledge into the visible and the intellectual, and splitting each of those parts into upper and lower levels.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Everyone, next week we will be talking about Books 7 and 8. Week Four - June 6th - June 12th.

Book Seven: On Shadows and Realities in Education – 514a-541b, pages 365 - 401
and Book Eight: Four Forms of Government – 543a-569c, pages 401 - 436

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Comments on Book VI

(view spoiler)[
There's a lot of theoretical talk here about how a philosopher is best suited to rule, but I wonder how such a person was actually supposed to get into that position. Given Socrates'/Plato's view of democracy, it doesn't seem likely that such a person would be elected. Or if he were, that he would be able to impose the ideal conditions Socrates proposes on society. I guess it's possible that a philosopher or group of philosophers could educate a good many men and influence their votes.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Everyone, for the week of June 6th - June 12th, we are reading Book Seven and Book Eight of Plato's The Republic.

My edition - by Plato translated by W.H.D. Rouse

The fourth week’s reading assignment is:

Week Four - June 6th - June 12th
Book Seven : On Shadows and Realities in Education – 514a-541b, pages 365 - 401
and Book Eight : Four Forms of Government – 543a-569c, pages 401 - 436

Chapter Overview(s) and Summary

Book Seven - On Shadows and Realities in Education
(view spoiler)[
Here is Plato’s famous allegory of the cave. Suppose everyone is held for all their life in a cave, held immobile and facing a wall on which are projected shadows of statues illuminated by a fire. Everyone would think these shadows were the real things. Now suppose one person is released from his bonds and taken out of the cave into the sunshine. He would be disturbed and frightened at first, but would eventually realize that this is reality and would understand what the shadows in the cave are. He would now have to go back into the cave and try to convince the others what their world is really like.

Relating the elements of the allegory to Socrates’ construct of reality, the cave represents the realm of belief, with the shadows being reflections and images and the fire and the statues being ordinary visible objects. But the daylight world is the realm of knowledge, with real shadows and reflections corresponding to mathematical objects, real items like trees and mountains being the Forms, and the sun, which illuminates everything, being the Form of Goodness, which is the source of all truth.

The overarching goal of our city must be to correctly educate people with the right natures so that they can understand the Form of the Good and educate others in turn. In order to be able to think abstractly, people must study mathematics, starting with numbers, then going on to plane geometry, then solid geometry, followed by astronomy and harmonics. Finally, in order to be able to argue logically, they must study dialectic. This means questioning all assumptions and getting at the root of whatever we are investigating. Finally Socrates lays out a detailed schedule for the training, with some students being removed from the course of study at each stage, so that at the end only the best will remain (at age 50) to become philosopher-kings.
(hide spoiler)]

Book Eight - Wealth, Poverty, and Virtue
(view spoiler)[
Socrates calls the ideal government he has constructed Aristocracy. He says there are four kinds of unjust governments: Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy and Tyranny. Each of these types is created when the higher form degenerates. Because some of our philosophers may not be perfect, they may want to accumulate property and wealth. The rulers will compete with each other and will value courage, honor and ambition over wisdom. If they win out, the result will be a Timocracy, where the rulers will have everything and the craftsmen will be serfs.

As love of wealth increases, soon the only requirement for ruling will be how rich you are. This is an Oligarchy. Since power is based on wealth, the rulers aren’t even fit to rule – they have no thought for society as a whole, just for themselves. They can’t even fight a war, because they would have to arm some from the lower classes, who might turn on them.

As divisions between the classes get worse, the lower classes finally revolt and throw out the rich, taking all their wealth and dividing power equally among themselves. This is Democracy. Government positions are handed out at random; everyone can do as he likes, having to answer to no one. While Oligarchy was defined by an overpowering greed for wealth, Democracy comes from an overpowering desire for freedom, with no respect for authority.

Finally, the city is more or less falling apart since the best people aren’t in charge, so the poor will hate those a bit better off and a charismatic leader will convince most of the people to give him all the power. This is Tyranny, the worst of the unjust societies.

He also describes the type of man associated with each level of society and how he came to be that way, usually by reacting to the character of his father.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Questions for Week 4

Book 7
(view spoiler)[
1. What do you think of the allegory of the cave? Does thinking of reality in this way help us live better lives?

2. Once the philosopher has made it out of the cave into the sunlight, doesn’t it seem cruel to make him go back down and struggle to free the others from the cave?

3. Since I got my BA is math, I was pleased to see Socrates’ emphasis on math in his course of education for future guardians. But don’t people need to also study literature and history?

(hide spoiler)]

Book 8
(view spoiler)[
1. Socrates says that the ideal state, aristocracy, degenerates first into timocracy and then into oligarchy. I don’t see much difference, do you?

2. Socrates seems to have a really bad view of democracy. Is that how it really was in Athens at the time?

(hide spoiler)]

[Pamela]

Re: Questions for Book 7

(view spoiler)[
1. What do you think of the allegory of the cave? Does thinking of reality in this way help us live better lives?

I know the cave metaphor is supposed to be one of the most important in literature but I much prefer the explanatory passages about the cave. Plato, through Socrates, makes some very elegant arguments here about goodness, becoming, and being. I like the idea of a journey of the soul into light. Book 7 also contains my favorite quote of The Republic:

"But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual..."

2. Once the philosopher has made it out of the cave into the sunlight, doesn’t it seem cruel to make him go back down and struggle to free the others from the cave?

No, I don't think so. As Socrates says, "You have again forgotten, my friend, I said, the intention of the legislator, who did not aim at making any one class in the State happy above the rest; the happiness was to be in the whole State.." So, they have a moral obligation to help the others. Also, I think they go back because they realize that if the rest can only see shadows, then they must return and be those shadows on the cave wall if others are to achieve being.

3.Since I got my BA is math, I was pleased to see Socrates’ emphasis on math in his course of education for future guardians. But don’t people need to also study literature and history?

Well, I certainly think so but Plato didn't. (hide spoiler)]

[Pamela]

Re: Questions for Book 8

(view spoiler)[
1. Socrates says that the ideal state, aristocracy, degenerates first into timocracy and then into oligarchy. I don’t see much difference, do you?

Timocracy, I think, is supposed to be kind of a combination of both with the difference being the leader. In a timocracy, he's pretty much a good fellow, although not necessarily intellectual, not too concerned with money. He is corrupted as he ages by a desire to retain his goods and money. In an Oligarchy, a group of the wealthy rule and are more concerned with maintaining their own status than in serving the majority.

2. Socrates seems to have a really bad view of democracy. Is that how it really was in Athens at the time?

Well, Socrates did not have a very good opinion of democracy because he felt it didn't insist on particular merits in a leader and since it treated everybody's opinion with equal weight tended not to make good decisions on policy. On the other hand, Plato had such a strong dislike because the Democratic government of Athens had killed Socrates so he was a tad bit prejudiced. He does tend to make democracy sound like a collection of ditherers and fly-by-nights. Actually, democracy in Athens worked fairly well considering it was open to any male citizen of 18+. They met in the Assembly and talked over all issues and then voted - on everything. Sounds unwieldy but it worked. Women had citizenship rights but couldn't vote and slaves and strangers (male)could at least discuss in the Assembly. I don't know if they could vote. Probably not. (hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Pamela Re: Questions for Book 7

(view spoiler)[
1. Thanks for your comments, Pamela. Personally, I like the cave metaphor because it seems so relatable. You think you know what you are seeing, but something causes you to look at it in a different light, and it changes everything.

2. True enough, going back to help the others is the only thing a real philosopher would want to do, even though it's hard.

3. Regarding the study of history, students today like to joke that in olden times they didn't have as much history to study as we do.
(hide spoiler)]

[Vicki, Assisting Moderator - Ancient Roman History]

Reply to Pamela Re: Questions for Book 8

(view spoiler)[
1. I was confused by this definition of timocracy because I always thought it meant that qualification for political office was dependent on wealth. But Dictionary.com has that as the second meaning and the Republic's definition, "a form of government in which love of honor is the dominant motive of the rulers" as the primary one.

2. I'm not sure I'd like total direct democracy either, with everyone voting on everything. Although Athens made it work for a while; perhaps Pericles was close to a philosopher-king.
(hide spoiler)]