Synopsis for Plato’s Republic Books 4-6 PDF

Preview

Summary

Synopsis for Plato’s Republic Books 4-6. Prof DePlato...

Description

Synopsis for Plato’s Republic Books 4-6 BOOK IV: this book begins by Socrates establishing that the goal of the city is not about equal happiness, but the greater good, so everybody has a little bit but not a lot of happiness. So than the whole city would be happy, but than wouldn’t nobody work because they’re already happy? So than they say that if each does their job than the whole city will be happy. The extremes of poverty and wealth either cause people to not do their job (out of wealthy laziness) or to do poorly at their job (out of lack of money to buy tools or maintain your health). Next Socrates discusses the defense of the city, saying that the guardians could fight up to 3x their number because they are trained warriors but their enemies are not. Next they address the idea of one city amassing all the wealth. Socrates says that not dangerous because that city would be big and as such would also would have multiple parts to it, and not be a single city as a whole. Lastly, unity not size matter for the good of a city. Education and upbringing are vital to the continuance of a city, and the children of people with good education will also be getting smarter. Apparently education went down hill somewhere because we are all really dumb, not geniuses according to the “will get smarter” theory (133). Next Socrates says you should raise a child up in lawfulness and they will be lawful. Than Socrates says that a bad government is basically a dictatorship the people kiss up to. There are also the intemperate men who constantly create new laws and they only think themselves politicians because the masses praise them as such (sound familiar?). a true lawgiver is not going to be constantly making new laws. Than Socrates defines good as wise, courageous, temperate and just. Socrates hypothetical city is prudent because of the wisdom of the guardians, not the skill of the people. So the smallest group (the rulers) make a whole city wise. The guardians, or only a small part, also make a city courageous. The guardians have this because they have been trained to understand what should and shouldn’t inspire terror. Temperance is whenever the naturally better part of the soul masters the worse. The intemperate appetites of the masses are controlled by the temperate guardians. Temperance is different from wisdom and courage because it runs throughout the whole creating harmony. Finally justice is defined as sticking to your naturally induced craft for the betterment of the city and not meddling with what is not your own. One of the injustices would be not adhering to the class system. Each of the 3 classes has their own job, just as a soul has 3 parts, each with their own job. Than Socrates proves that a soul could do the opposite action at the same time (the spinning top, 141). Than we discuss the desire of the soul, and how we only desire that which corresponds to our need and the specific desire is influenced by the environment. Each thing corresponds to another thing, each craft to their own craft. Knowledge is also influenced by environment like desire. So our soul sometimes drives us to do the opposite of what we want because of rational calculation. 2/3 parts of the soul are the rationally calculating element and the irrational and appetitive element. The third is at first said to be the spirited element, but is than also said to be an ally to the rational element. Unjust treatment cause the spirit to boil up the rational element, whereas natural desires come from the irrational element. Lastly, Socrates says that a man does mirror the city and as such the definition of just would be the same. The guardians=the rational element, the spirit=the warriors, and the untrained masses=the irrational element. Individuals also

have wisdom, courage, and temperance. Also, each part within a soul does its own job, just like in a city, making the individual just. Harmony among the three elements is justice. When there is no harmony, or when there is factions, than there is also injustice. The bodily elements in natural relation is justice, and ruling a being ruled contrary to nature is injustice. Than Socrates says that it is better for a man to be just because injustice is not profitable by being a vice to the soul and putting the inner self into turmoil. Socrates says there is one virtue (perhaps justice?) and many vices, at leas 5, the first one being kingship/aristocracy just depending on how many rulers emerge. BOOK V: next Socrates establishes how the rest of the city should be governed now that we have the guardians set up. He says the women and children should be shared. Socrates also professes his fear of being incorrect and misleading people. Women and men will be employed for the same tasks and as such will have equal education. This may seem strange, but at one time even the most traditional things seemed ridiculous. However, since men and women have different natures how can they manage to do the same jobs? This is answered by saying that all people have their own natural craft to pursue, but not necessarily divided by gender. So women’s nature is not so different from men’s, but everyone’s nature is individualized. However, each craft has a sex naturally better at it. Women have the natures to rule and fight, both have a vast array of natures. So it is agreed that equal education is necessary, but is it best? Yes, it is best to produce the best people in the city through equal training. Socrates than present the idea that no individual man and women should live together or raise their kids, but all should be shared. This is because the guardians cant own property (a wife) and they all live together and share everything anyways. They must track the guardians sex life to prevent unregulated orgies and maintain the “goodness” of the city. So now the rulers will have to use deception to practice their eugenics, how is lying to the people to produce the best sort of guardians just? Just like breeding animals, the best man would mate with the best women, how do you being this about naturally. You also don’t get to keep your kids, but a nurse raises them. What qualifies this nurse to be a better parent? They were obviously good enough to be allowed to have sex! Socrates even takes into account not letting oxytocin build up during the nursing of the babies. More sex laws include illegitimate kids if you have sex outside of your prime or your assigned mating partner, or if you commit incest, but you can have sex as a sibling pair, and old people can have sex, but their kid is illegitimate. The city will then be better united, sharing pleasure, pain, and family. Privatization of life affairs dissolves the unity of a city. And the city that comes closes to that of a single person, a single unit, is the best city. Instead all people will consider any child born around the same time as their child “family” and all will be united through those generations. They must also treat each other as a family since they are sharing and feeling each other’s pain. This is the most beneficial way to run the city. Because than they will be free from faction and live in harmony. Violence will be allowed to release aggression and exercise, however fear and shame will prevent bad violence from happening. (What if they don’t feel fear and shame? 158). They live happy lives because of the victory of the whole city. And despite that they have nothing those rewards will content them. Once Socrates establishes that this system is most beneficial he asks if it is possible. It would require children going to war to learn their craft, though they will take precautions to keep the children safe to

avoid losing the guardian class altogether. The good guardians get awesome rewards and can hook up with whoever in order to produce more kids. Socrates than discusses that the people should unite by race (Greek) not city in wars. Also, no stealing from the dead in war. He says its better to have factions with the Greeks not wars, and to show your superiority as a city but to also hope for reconciliation one day. So all the Greek city states should get along and only have disciplinary factions, but not destructive wars. It would make a city rich and unbeatable, but is it possible? So it may not be possible but our hypothetical city is still the true image of justice. It is possible to have an imperfect city close to the hypothetical one though. Next Socrates approaches the idea of the philosopher king. It is possible to have both qualities of philosopher and ruler. This is because if you love something you will find any excuse to indulge in it. So a philosopher will want to indulge in all studies of wisdom, not just parts of it. True philosophers are “the lover of seeing the truth” (165). The true philosopher believes in the beautiful itself and not the parts or participants of the beautiful. Than Socrates says that “since knowledge deals with what is, ignorance must deal with what is not” which really confuses me. How can one deal with that which does not exist? With power or ruler-ship, you can only judge based of what it deals with and what it does. So there’s is knowledge and than there is belief, which are different, and the knowledge is the one that gives the power. We can know with knowledge but only believe as though it was just a reflection of the image with belief. So there are 2 extremes, knowledge and ignorance, and belief is the middle ground between them. Belief is one thing that maintains 2 opposing qualities (ignorance and knowledge) at once. The masses use belief but the philosopher use knowledge, hence why they would make good kings. Philosophers use knowledge and so focus on the thing itself, but the masses use belief and focus on the idea of it. BOOK VI: philosophers should be the leaders of the city because they can “grasp what is always the same in all respects.” Because of their knowledge philosophers should be king, but non-philosophers are blind because they lack true knowledge. Philosophers must have 2 qualities: loving to learn and loving to learn all things without being narrow-minded. Because philosophers love learning truth they love it for itself too. True philosophers get pleasure out of learning but not physical pleasure because they’ve pursued wisdom their whole lives. The good philosopher could practice eugenics without a qualm. They are also just and gentle from the beginning, yet care not about life or death. They must be a quick learner and a graceful/musical person. So the best philosopher and the qualities of a good philosopher king are on pg 171. But in reality is this true? Reality shows that philosophers are useless or cranks. This is because politicians will force there way into ruling, even though they know nothing about it, but the ignorant masses still praise it. But the philosopher, who has knowledge, is seen as useless by the ignorant politicians. A good ruler will be asked to rule, but how does this work since no person is going to as to be ruled? Philosophers turn out bad because of the very qualities that make them good because the good qualities get corrupted. This is because of the environment they are raised in, nurture can hurt the good philosopher by causing him to be prideful. So when the good philosopher gets corrupted and abandons philosophy other amateurs start practicing it, but they do not posses all the good qualities, and so shame her reputation. Also,

people who pursue philosophy because its better than their craft or people who are uneducated also hurt philosophy’s image. The wise philosopher knows he can not change the masses and so becomes useless. The true philosophic nature could not mix/function with any of the current constitutions or city of that time. They hypothetical city is nearly the right one to mix with philosophy. Socrates philosophy should get the most attention when you’re old, but should be pursued throughout your whole life. The philosopher king (matched with virtue in word and deed and had power of a city) does not exist. It is possible, it just has never been heard of. there is even hope to convince the masses that a philosopher king is a good idea. However, a philosopher king couldn’t look down at human affairs since his mind is directed upwards, would this really be admirable in a ruler? A philosopher king would refuse to make laws unless he had a clean slate, he would start everything over instead of adding to the madness. Basically, they would rewrite the constitution. Was Socrates just arrogant? Of course he praises the philosophers, he was one! Only one philosopher king is needed, because once he’s persuaded the people and re-written the constitution than the masses can be tamed and will carry them out. Also, philosophers must be tested like the guardians were tested. The must be quick yet stable and possess opposing qualities, so their existence will be rare. So the philosopher is tested in labors, fears and pleasures and the most important subjects (181). The guardian/philosopher kings are definitely not incomplete. Knowing or having good is beneficial, without it all else is useless. People seek what is good, however the masses find pleasure “good” and the wise find knowledge “good”. Socrates says that beliefs without knowledge are shameful, so is that basically like an opinion? Next we talk about what comes from good (not whether good comes from knowledge r pleasure). Hearing is done individual of a third power, but sight requires a third power: the sun. the sun is not sight, but empowers sight and is seen by sight itself. So the sun of the soul is truth. When we focus on the truth it is clear, but when we focus on the mixed and obscure it is dim. So truth and knowledge are good, but neither of them are the good, but good enables the soul to see them. The good also nourishes knowledge like the sun nourishes the plants. 85 gets a little cryptic, best I can make out is that its like looking in a reflection. It is just an image of the real thing and we believe it. However to actually see the real thing is to know the real thing, which is better than believing it. So the masses create reflections to examine and than draw the real thing from the reflection. Its like they must work backwards from a hypothesis that is not proven but relied on as truth. Than they develop it into a law, than work backwards back to the hypothesis to revise it into what they have discovered in the process is the truth. Four qualities lead to clarity in the hypothesis and the watery reflection: understanding, thought, belief, and imagination. PROMPT: If there was no god and no death, how would you order your actions than? Consider ideas such as men are only just because of fear of punishment and we are driven by the need to self preserve. I would have no order. I would do whatever pleases me most, whether that was partying, learning and studying, bumming out in front of the TV, whatever made me happy at that moment would be my only action of order. However to do all those things I would still needs life necessities, which only come by having money. Even without a god and death, society would still command that goods not be free and as such I would have to work for my goods and pleasures. Unless we

considered ourselves better than working, in which case, society would be ordered completely differently than it is now. However there would still be some order. Think about the immortal mythological gods. They had some form of ranking system, but chaos still ensued and the gods were fickle beings, constantly disagreeing with each other, changing their minds, wrecking havoc and then pouring down blessings. So we would eventually have some kind of order, but it would be chaotic and imperfect. It would be hard to use methods of fear and shame to control society since our immortality would lessen those emotions. Also, we would no longer worry about our preservation or the preservation of others since now no one is going to die. We would be reckless, and live recklessly. It would definitely be a fun life, but it would be madness. We would be slaves to our “insane masters” for all of eternity. I don’t know how much I would like that. But it would really depend on how the culture grew and what society trained me to think as I grew up. IN CLASS: So in book 4 he talks about how we should train our guardian so that we can get a good guardian. So he talks about how too much wealth or being too poor can corrupt a good ruler. Money corrupts, distracting you from your craft. That’s why he strips guardians of all wealth and possession (even women and children). AIDEMANTUS: he says that there is no man who would rule to help the people. People only want to rule for the power. He says if they strip the joys of life from the guardians no one will want to be a guardian. Plato’s says that the pleasure of the guardians is looking down at the rich masses and seeing his successes. Like a doctor’s joy at seeing all his healed patients. The old time president used to just be producers, but than presidents started getting cool toys, and that destroys the system, makes the ruler a guardian for the sake of being rich or narcissistic perhaps. Justice is the having and doing of one’s own. Giving and receiving as one should is justice. Collective justice is specialization, and individual justice comes from knowing that the work of your craft has caused another to feel happy gives you success. But when you include money in this than the pleasure comes from exploiting people. When the exploiter gets caught they expect some sort of free pass, but society doesn’t work that way. Out minds do not work like that (like I’m happy cause I produced the best and made you happy) instead its about getting the best for yourself as quick as possible. Man never wants to be equitable, you don’t want to divide the wealth unequally, you want to have it all, because we are all unjust. Individual justice is about inner harmony, stopping and thinking and balancing the 3 elements of your soul. People don’t see any personal responsibilities to society. But they demand other to be responsible. Plato says the just society would be when people think of their part in the wheel and be happy to fulfill their part, to think before they act. It may be a structured or conformist but you should be in this society because it is just. if you fall into hardships it is because of your own irrational decision, but if you are perfectly rational you shouldn’t have any of these problems. The law should make you rational. If you get screwed from society, than that is injustice.

So people have desires, and there is a rational and irrational way to quench these desires. Society appeals to one of your rationales in order to get you to give into one of your irrational desires. This is so that the producers can get rich off the consumers. Society teases you to be unjust. Than the one day you decide to do it, than the law goes and punishes you. The law only punishes not prevents. Can you be civilized and intellectual in an insane asylum? BOOK V: this has a lot to do with sharing of the wives and children and the weird Eugenic trip. The communal family leads to loyalty to the city, to everybody. The motives of the rulers would definitely be pure, but there is a problem with it. Over time women want to raise their kid cause its theirs, people want to care for what is theirs. There is an undeniable bond between mother and child, but could it change? Its in your interest to get the best for your family even at the cost to the community. having a child is extreme sacrifice so there must be some kind of affinity for that child in order to motivate us to do it. So what is the affinity? What is a child’s value? This guy is also the first feminist, he lets women be equal to men when it comes to guardianship. The biological need to find your offspring it could be the trump card that breaks your loyalty to the city. The children will be taken to war to see their craft. The paradoxical statement is on page 164 about the philosopher king. The philosopher must be king because they have less personal motive or sinister intention. No interest in material worth, they see past the temporal and find true value and worth. The philosophers can see the truth, love the truth and know the whole truth. He ...