Plato's Republic

casey212

Best book ever written, in my humble opinion. They knew all the tricks for running society, even back in those days.

Discuss.

Joe1919

I must say that I only read this book a few monthe ago and I was suprised at Plato's attitude towards the Gods and the Truth, which is in contrast with what I had expected from reading other dialogues such as the Apology and the Phaedo. But then Plato does not mind contradicting himself, as we see in the Parmedes, where he critises his own theory of the forms.
Certainly, from reading the Republic, It seems convincing that Religion is a deliberate construction of the ruling powers. Plato in a number of cases advocates telling "noble lies", moulding religion and myths and of course banishing the poets (censorship). But he does think it is all for the good.

DadaKopf

Plato in a number of cases advocates telling "noble lies", moulding religion and myths and of course banishing the poets (censorship). But he does think it is all for the good.

Yeah, casey212 would be all over that shizzle.

casey212

Joe1919 wrote: »

I must say that I only read this book a few months ago and I was suprised at Plato's attitude towards the Gods and the Truth, which is in contrast with what I had expected from reading other dialogues such as the Apology and the Phaedo. But then Plato does not mind contradicting himself, as we see in the Parmedes, where he critises his own theory of the forms.
Certainly, from reading the Republic, It seems convincing that Religion is a deliberate construction of the ruling powers. Plato in a number of cases advocates telling "noble lies", moulding religion and myths and of course banishing the poets (censorship). But he does think it is all for the good.

Yes I agree with a lot of that, however my one objection would be the last sentence. Plato is not speaking to the mass man, indeed the book itself was written for the ruling elite. The masses could nither read nor write in those days. In my interpretation Plato is modelling society to the benefit of the elite, and all rules therein are subject to this end.

Just read it last week for the first time, strangely enough I have previously read his other work before hand.

In the republic, his discourse on the relative benefits of the moral vs immoral man were excellent. No doubt many would have questions over the basic set up of his ideal society and the fact that basically everything is controlled by the hidden hand. The section on warped minds and warped societies provided unbelieveable insights into the workings of the human mind, its wants and needs, and how the ruling class can ultimately mould men as they choose.

The fact that man is basically a social being appears to be at the heart of the problem, individualism is thrown out as the masses are lead a merry dance, all the while thinking that they themselves shape their own future. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is not a long work, and I firmly believe that it goes a long way towards shattering the major myths existant in society today. As they say there is nothing new under the sun.

casey212

DadaKopf wrote: »

Yeah, casey212 would be all over that shizzle.

It is good to know the rules of the game, even if you are not going to enter it yourself.

DadaKopf

Of course, but in other threads, you've suggested they needn't be changed.

Always interesting how theories, themselves products of time and place, take on this aura of eternity. You think things today are the same as they were in Ancient Athens?

casey212

DadaKopf wrote: »

Of course, but in other threads, you've suggested they needn't be changed.

Always interesting how theories, themselves products of time and place, take on this aura of eternity. You think things today are the same as they were in Ancient Athens?

What do you mean by the first part of this?

Humans are the most studied species. Of course the world is a vastly different place than athens 300BC, however the forces ruling mens actions have never changed throughout history. The problem I see is that through genetic manipulation of food and indeed humans themselves this could change in the future.

Joe1919

Arthur Schopenhauer wrote an interesting dialogue on religion http://www.gutenberg.org/files/10833/10833-h/10833-h.htm that worth reading. Its argued that metaphysics needed to be diluted with myth and religion in order to make it digestable, in the same way as oxygen needs to be mixed with nitrogen for humans to respire properly. We are unable to breath pure oxygen. Humans may some day reach the stage where they can accept pure metaphysics without the trimmings of myth or religion (or non-stop news and advertisments.)

Plato ideal state does have a lot of similaraties with Stalins former Russia.

We still live in a world where the privilaged westerners live a life and consume much more than the third world population. So it could be argued that things are really no better than they were in Plato's time.
Remember the last century was probably the worst century ever for war. The Greeks usaully en-slaved their enemies after a war but did murder all the men on one occasion. In the second world war, no-one was spared on many occasions. Women and children died in the gas chambers and in the bombed cities.

casey212

Don't get me wrong. I see the book as a guide for the elite. I am not in this bracket, so therefore I see it as a guide to help avoid the various pitfalls identified. It has been said that the beehive is the perfect society.

Communism is the modern version of this ideal society. The many are ruled by the few, with three basic classes: rulers,authoritarians and workers. From a metaphysical standpoint, I think people are intentionally kept in the dark to a large extent, and one could argue that many prefer to lead their lives in this fashion.

Joe1919

Plato loved bees and ants. Plato believed that we were all imperfect copies of the ideal and absolute man, the ideal man being the "form of the man" that lived in his world of forms. If we understand this aspect of Plato's metaphysics, we can understand Plato's search for unchanging certainty, absolutism, order and uniformity.
However, man by his nature is not a bee or an ant. Man can also be like a lone wolf. For this reason, Plato was despised by Nietzsche, who saw man as different, diverse and unequal. Indeed, Darwinian evolution would not work if people were uniform or equal, because its diversity, difference and mutation that makes the advances. Historically, the greatest advances in Art and knowledge took place when society had the greatest differences such as in classical Greece and during the renaissance.
Unfortunately man then is destined to suffer, as the loan wolf part of him want to be unique and different, yet out of necessity he has to live in a community, like a bee in a hive.