Knowledge or Ignorance?

There is some kind of peace of being oblivious to the surroundings and once people learn about the life and become "enlightened" that sort of peace suddenly disappears. I know I'm basically describing childhood to adulthood dependent. But, do people really want to hear the last minutes of the watergate videos? Sometimes ignorance is preferred to knowledge because people have to think whether the information does more harm than good. Us guys do it all the time, we tell girls that they don't look fat and that they look fine because we don't want to deal with the fallout. Do girls really want to know what we think in those instances or do they prefer the sugar cookie we offer them? I believe there is a balance between knowledge and ignorance: too much knowledge make people sad and aware of how unjust the world is and too much ignorance hinders the mind from growing so that it can take care of people and ultimately keep the circle of life.

I commented on Tyler Cofields' "I'm not a puppet... I'm a real boy."

I'm not a puppet...I'm a real boy!

In Plato's The Republic, the story of "The Cave" provides a glimpse of the deceptive methods used to influence people.  As the puppet master controls what the other individuals in the cave are able to see, a parallel comparison can be made with the government in the United States.  I have just completed the Cashflow Quadrant, which is Robert Kiyosaki's book that outlines the simple steps necessary to become wealthy.  His primary argument is that the United States seeks to retain more ignorant citizens as opposed to enlightened individuals.  By deceiving Americans in regards to personal assets, liabilities, taxes, salaries, and security, the government is able to absorb more income.  This increase in income is gained directly from the expenses of the lower and middle classes of ignorant American citizens.  The ironic comparison to "The Cave" becomes even more interesting after examining the individual that escaped from the puppet master's prison.  He became known as a philosopher after he experienced true reality; however, when he returned to release his companions, they believed him to be crazy.  Similarly in Kiyosaki's book, enlightened American citizens are perceived to be crazy because they combat the normal thought process that most people practice in economics.  The truth exists in the fact that the philosopher did experience true reality, and Robert Kiyosaki is a billionaire because he followed the steps outlined in his book.  Both of these people chose not to be ignorant puppets under the control of a seemingly superior being; instead, they enlightened themselves and sought to change the rest of the world.

yo

                I absolutely hate talking politics. I don’t do it.  I feel no desire to do so and honestly most of it goes over my head and I just tune out of conversations. So the fact that Plato felt like he even had a grasp on what a Utopian society would look like or what a superior government would look like is impressive in itself. But really what I got out of all of this is that there is no ideal government or society, it’s unattainable. He has this grand idea of what would work but it’s just that—an idea. So then as he went through describing the 4 types of governments there are holes in all of them. It’s like voting for president; you’re picking the lesser of two evils. There has to be a better choice but maybe there isn’t a right choice. Perhaps I’m going off on something not completely unrelated to Plato or Socrates and I’ve yet to even mention a cave but that’s what today’s discussion had me thinking about.

What's Around the River Bend?

Dr. Schuler mentioned a quote today in class that struck me. He said, “You never step in the same river twice.” This quote is so true. The river is never the same. It is always changing and flowing (insert Pocahontas here). I see this as an example of how we should be living our lives. We should never settle for one solid idea. As philosophers, we should not want to set one concept as the absolute truth. We should always be looking for more evidence to compliment or contradict that concept. What is truth anyway? We know nothing, and we are always looking for what we do not know.  And that is what makes us wise. 

PS. I commented on Jasmine's

Ideal in Theory

This is extremely painful for me to say, and if you know my views on politics, you know why.

Aristocracy is the best form of government. There, I said it.  A government with a supreme ruler, a just man, who runs his nation in the best possible ways.  Keeping his people from harm, both physical and mental.  All of his people have jobs to do, and it turn, no one is in need.  This form of government describes how I have always pictured the Kingdom of God, with God the supreme ruler, and all of his people cared for and happy.  

However, The reason it hurt to say this is simply because I am of the (rather strong) opinion that this form of government cannot work on earth as we know it, in a world full of sinful people.  Who would be our ruler, and more importantly, what would ensure that we always put the right man in power?  Sure, the rulers come from a certain group in the text, but who is to say or ensure that the one RIGHT man gets there.  And what if there is a time when no man is fit to lead the country?  Are we then ruled by a power-hungry dictator?  I am not saying that American government is perfect, by no means, but in its original form, the American ideal of government led by the people under the constitution is an efficient one and possibly one of the best options we currently have.  

Commented on Susan's "America the Tyranny"

-Jamie Kilpatrick

PS: There are several things I could/ kind of want to add at this point, but I am one who generally prefers to discuss my political views in person. That being said, if any of you would like to (respectfully and civilly) talk American politics, I'm almost always up for it.

Understanding Justice and Honor

In Book VI of the Republic, while debating with Glaucon on the type of man who should govern the city, Socrates makes a simple statement:

 

"...a man who does not understand how justice and honor are related to the good won't guard them very effectively."

 

I completely agree with this assumption. If a ruler does not know how justice and honor correlate to what is good then they cannot truly understand what "the good" is, and without that understanding they will never be able to lead their people to the ultimate city that Socrates is defending.  If a ruler does not have an understanding of justice, the city will become corrupt. If a ruler does not understand honor then he himself will become corrupt. Without these two founding principles a ruler can never know what is good, and therefore cannot defend it or the principles that amount to it.

 

 



 

The Cave and The Great Divorce

I noticed in the reading, which was likewise highlighted in class today, one of my favorite points of Plato: that which is real is eternal. It no doubt was a revolutionary thought in his day, and a mystery that other thinkers would expound upon in ages to come. It certainly fits in well with Christianity--and is a thought that C.S. Lewis seems to expound upon in his book The Great Divorce. When the main characters get to heaven, the grass, the rocks, the rain are all so real that they hurt to walk on. Instead of Heaven being a place that is shadowy and ethereal, it is the other way around. One sees a parallel between C.S. Lewis and his narrator and the individual of the cave, thrown into the real world after a life lived in the cave and seeing only shadows.

Democracy...good or bad?

I could not help but notice that democracy was not the most favorited of the government, but in today's society it is the dream. In the republc, a democracy is described as a free, and aparently equal government, but it does not seem that is the case. Since the next staple after democracy is tyranny it is a lot easier to tell that there are many flaws in a democracy. Because people can pretty much do as they please there is room for curruptoon and eventually it could lead to revolt with a tyrant set as the leader. At first this seems good because the tyrant can distract the people so they really have no clue what's going on. It is scathe to think a democracy can turn into a tyranny so easily considering we live in a democracy. I wonder if our current government acts as much like this government did and if there is enough room for a tyrant to move in. P.S. I commented on Sam's blog

You know you're a philosopher when...

1. You are incapable of making a decision or forming an opinion without first undergoing an existential crisis.

3. Your last resort when losing a debate is to point out your opponent's fallacies.

4. Nothing, no not even a chair, can be given a simple definition. 

5. You frequently catch yourself saying, "I could argue for either side. It's not that one is more or less right than the other but there has to be a balance."

6. You can talk yourself so much into disbelief that you end up believing all over again.

7. You find it ironic when people refer to you as smart because you feel as though you have never known less in your life.

"To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadow of the images."

Philosophy, broken down in Latin, means "love of wisdom", but it is so much more than that, it is the love of the search, the struggle, the hunt, if you will, for ultimate truths. Philosophy in its very essence, tears back the curtains to reveal the puppet master- think, Wizard of Oz, where the man behind the curtain is not as intimidating as you originally thought. Philosophy will never accept anything for what it appears to be. It must analyze and dissect every idea down to its core until we are left sitting in a classroom slamming fists on the table, crying, "Why is Chalk?!", only to return to our dorms, reading Plato until our eyes strain, and all that's left at the end of the week is an unraveled definition of justice and the conclusion that we know and understand less now, yet more than we did before, at the same time. 

The point of philosophy is not to chase yourself in circles, but to unveil real truth behind the shadows, while accepting that these truths may not always be as concrete as we would have hoped.  Life is full of shadows, puppets, puppet masters, and curtains. It is the philosopher's job to to shed light into the cave, disturbing the shadows until they are no longer recognizable. 

America the Tyrany

Before reading this sections about all the different kinds of government and which is the worst and which is the best, I thought that surely after aristocracy with the true king, democracy would be the next best government.  I was very surprised when I read this for the first time to find out that a democratic government is only one step better than the one ruled by a tyrant.  This made me wonder, how far is our own democratic government from becoming a tyranny?  I remember, when Obama was elected into his first term, people running around saying that he was the Antichrist and that he would become a tyrant.  Back then, it seemed a little extreme, but now after reading Plato I wonder how likely this actually is.  On the other hand, is it possible for our government to go in the other direction and become an oligarchy, and then a timocracy, and then finally an aristocracy again?  I don't know for sure, but I do know that it is possible for governments to develop in either direction, and to me a tyranny seems more likely. . .

I commented on Malory Searcey!
Susan

Socrates on Homer

Socrates basically discarded most of Homer's work while forming his ideal city, but in other dialogues, he quoted Homer to support his own arguments. If Socrates believed that Homer wrote false, immoral stories, Socrates' use of Homeric poetry seems illogical and inconsistent. After reading the allegory of the cave, I wonder if Socrates might have had a deliberate reason for quoting Homer. He talked about the necessity of seeing shadows and reflections before seeing real things. If poetry is a shadow or reflection, perhaps Socrates was using truth found in Homer's works to lead people from the darkness of ignorance to the light of goodness and knowledge. Maybe this was one of his steps up from the cave.

This is just conjecture. I welcome anyone closer to the light to show me where I am wrong. Don't worry - I promise there will be no threats of hemlock involved in my response. :)

I commented on Samuel Weeks' post.

Manners

We touched briefly on the subject of manners in class but I wanted to expand on that a little and drawl some parallels, because it's very important to me.
I personally hate that the respect of good manners has disappeared in society so much. Young people are stepping all over older people and caring nothing about it.
In the Bible there are several times when it talks about having respect and honor for parents and elders. I think the fact that manners has declined so much is a direct result of where our country has gone socially. We have fallen so much from our founding principles that we don't value the same things. I wish that we still held higher standards for ourselves.

P.s. I commented on TinsleyG's "Philosophy Still Works"

Enter the Cave-trix

You're about to read a cross between Republic, Book VII, and The Matrix. If you haven't seen it, go watch this scene first. Are you done yet? Good, let's get started.

___________________

A shadow, followed by a shriek. The vague figure shifted with flickering orange lights, though the shackled man himself was in deepest darkness. The bonds around his legs and neck were covered in rust and blood. He had tried to escape before. The bonds were unbreakable. All his life, he had no possessions, except himself, the darkness, and a few questions. The Cave... is it real? What is real? Who am I? Am I at all?

Another shadow, but this one was different. It grew larger and larger as it came from the far off light. Soon the shadow was standing right in front of him. The shadow was old, but dignified in stature and completely unshackled.

"Who are you?"

"I am Socrates. I come from the outside."

"Are you god?"

"No. I am just a man, but if you want, you can become like me."

"What are you doing here?"

"I'm here because you are miserable, naked and broken, but more than that, I'm here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. It's been with you your whole life. You know what I'm talking about."

"The Cave?"

"Do you want to know what it is?" The captive nods. "The Cave is everywhere. It is all around us, even now in this very antechamber. It is Ignorance and Oppression, the Subjugation of your precious Spirit. It is a prison, a prison for your mind. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the Truth."

"What 'Truth?'"

"That you are in bondage."

"No, that's impossible. There's nothing beyond the Cave. The Cave is all there is."

"It's easy to explain why you'd think that. The Cave is all you've ever known. You've always been inside, but I offer you something else: the chance to be outside."

"Outside?" More violent shrieks reverberated from the back of the cave. It was only a matter of time before the other shadow returned.

"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back." He held out an object. "This is the key to Knowledge." He dropped the key within the man's reach. "Stay in the Cave and believe anything you want, or loosen your shackles and finally see for yourself. The choice is simple: darkness or light. Either be a slave to man, or be a slave to truth. There is no in between. But remember, I'm not promising an end to pain. What you learn may disturb you and leave you more naked, miserable and broken than you already are. But at least you'll be free. The truth is all I'm offering. Nothing more."

"Truth? Freedom? I'm not sure if I want that. It sounds scary."

Socrates laughed. "Indeed, it is." He turned to leave. "You have what you need. I leave the rest to you." The shackled man watched the shadow as he became smaller and smaller, until he disappeared into the light. The captive sat with the key and wondered what to do with it.

EDIT: Commented on Tinsley G's "Philosophy Still Works."

Man's Greatest Peril

"A  man should be concerned first of all with searching out and studying that which enables him to discern the good."

Something that I failed to discuss today in my surprise explanation of the story of Er, was the actual choice that men must make when choosing which life they will claim as their own. Socrates claims that "this moment of choice is the time of man's greatest peril." To that statement I think I would have to agree. This is the crucial tipping point where man makes a decision of what his fate in life will be without truly knowing the whole picture. Honestly, when I read this I could not help but feel relieved that we never have to face a decision of such magnitude.

However, I think that at this point in The Republic, Socrates would agree that there exists some form of standard or guideline by which this decision can be approached. "Fixing on the nature of his own soul, a man will call worse anything that brings the soul closer to injustice and better that which brings it closer to justice." He then goes on to say that this is the ultimate "choice as in life as in death." When I read this I couldn't help but think that this is actually incredibly profound advice for life. If we commit our life's work to pursuing that which is good, just, and true, I truly believe that this is how we as humans can make the most of our lives on earth, and as Socrates puts it "find his greatest happiness."

P.S. I commented on Michelle's "The Myth of Ur"

Philosophy Still Works :)

I had such a light bulb moment in class today.  I think it was pretty late in coming, but I finally realized the correlations Plato and Socrates have to normal, everyday life from Judeo-Christian standpoint.  This whole time we’ve been studying them, I’ve had the thought process of studying like history: outdated ideas that cannot (or rather, should not) be used in practice today, more learning from the mistaken ideas of the past.  After all, many of the books we’ve studied have been that way; but today was the first day I realized what I personally can glean from Plato.  It’s not a sacrilegious thing to have Socratic thought.  Many of the aspects in Plato’s Utopia are of course wrong, but there’s so, so much that can be applied today, not just to our world, but to my individual life.  Once again, I think this realization was a little slow in coming, I’m sure I should have had it since the beginning of the semester, but I’ve had a sort of bias against putting philosophy into work.  However, it can certainly affect my entire view of the world, the soul, and myself.  It’s very different, and very fascinating.

P.S. Commented on Michelle's "The Myth of Ur"

Sin's Cave

     While reading through the Republic, I've found that I'm still stuck in book 7.  I can't get over the cave allegory. Socrates' allegory here is the starting point of religion, I loved that Mashburn confirmed that earlier today.   Has anyone else had connections with Socrates' cave and Sin's Cave? That's just something that has been striking me.

     Let's travel down to the Cave of Sin.  Before one becomes a Christian they are bound by sin, in the carnal world. Knowing only shadows of things spiritual and eternal (maybe some of us have no knowledge of these things at all). Our 'knowledge' comes from instructors or puppet masters instructing us, in what reality really is.  The Holy Spirit is what loosens our shackles and compels us to stand up. We then begin to learn the truth, we see a light, we know there is something beyond the physical. There are things eternal, like our own souls, but fully discovering and following this light will take total dedication. We have to make a change, our whole being must turn from the darkness to the light.
     This  is were Christians become saved. From here we have to travel out of the cave towards the Light. This is painful and diffcult, just like following Christ here on Earth is. As young Christians we have to make the difficult transformation, giving up everything we have known and the carnal world. Once we make it out into the light, we don't fully understand everything. Our spiritual eyes have not yet adjusted. After time we learn who Christ really is, what salvation really is, what our purpose really is. We find the Ultimate Good, it is Jesus Christ.  Through Him we can see past tangible things to the things eternal.  We are then given a mission, to back down to the cave, to bring the message of Christ to the other prisoners.  However, going down there means, we may never come back up, we might just die.  Christians have been martyred and persecuted for thousand of years by prisoners and puppet masters. We then guide others to Christ, if anyone will listen.

   I think Socrates was right on the edge of being a Christian, and I can see how some theologians would argue that he was one.  However, I beg to differ because Socrates seemed to never have his answer. He couldn't recognize that the God of the Jews was this Ultimate Good, maybe he never knew. Also, Socrates argues that every man has an innate good within him. Truthfully though every man is evil Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God".   We will never be fully able to see the eternal or learn to look with the eyes of spirit unless we use the Sonlight.

P.S. Commented on Skylar's post

The Myth of Ur

I thought the reading of the myth of Ur the warrior was inspiring and tied together the philosphies and ideas that sprang from the Republic. The purpose of philosophy is to understand the true nature, or essence, of ones own being. Ur's story shows some notable figures in mythology doing so, and that helps me to understand how they pictured themselves. From a hero becoming a normal man, a singer becoming a mute swan, and an annoying chatterbox of a man becoming a monkey; this helps me to interpret their very primordial essence of their character and worldview. To know ones own true soul is better than all of the knowledge this Earth with its wonders can offer. This is my belief and has been shown throughout history to be a funding principle in the universe. As Polonius says to his departing son, "Above all else, to thine own self be true."

Similarity in Philosophers and Christians

In Book VI there is a section where Socrates is talking about philosophers and their attempt at creating a just city that I thought was similar to the life of Christians today .  He mentions how the only way for a perfect state or man to exist philosophers must take over governance of the state whether they want to or not. Or a passion for true philosophy must some how be instilled in the men now holding power in order for a perfect state to be formed.  The only problem with this actually happening is the multitudes opinion of philosophers.  Socrates states, "Would you not also agree that philosophy suffers from hostile public attitudes because of the intrusion of bogus philosophers into places where they have no business? Quarreling with one another, they are filled with malice and forever discussing personalities, the very last thing a philosopher ought to do." Socrates goes on to say that if a true philosophers mind is fixed on and attempts to imitate eternal realities there is no time to be lured into the petty affairs of men.  Therefore, if the multitudes sees the true philosophers they will be more compelled to follow them and obey them and then the perfect state can be started with a clean slate. 

Now to me I felt like this was a parallel of a true Christians life.  We are faced everyday with people who claim to be Christians but are not because they are too focused on worldly affairs and not on imitating the life of Jesus Christ. Then, like false philosophers, bring about a false reputation of actual Christians.  Now, how is a true Christian whose mind is fixed on things above( to be Christ-like)supposed to lead the world to be a better place if the majority of people think all Christians are corrupt and not living by the standards they claim to be?  There is no such thing as a perfect state or a perfect man, but if true Christians were somehow able to make the multitudes see the life of a true Christian maybe non-Christians would be more interested in becoming a follower of Jesus Christ and not a follower of the world. Then, like the clean slate rewarded to the perfect state lead by the philosophers, the new true Christians will get their clean slate through salvation. This will result in a more Godlike state which should be the ultimate goal of Christians to win non-believers to Christ. It just amazes that even though the world has changed so much Socrates thoughts and revelations are still relevant to the world today!



P.S commented on emilylaforce's  I guess Socrates didn't have a girlfriend...

Hugo and Plato

My brain is trainwrecking over Plato this morning so I'm pausing my reading to blog. I'm doing the best/worst thing I could do- reading Les Miserables while I'm reading Plato. I feel like Plato has this ultimate idealism and with Les Miserables, Victor Hugo has the understanding of that idealism with the reality of the human condition.
We aren't really that Just. The problem with the Just city is that it doesn't work.  Maybe it's a picture of heaven, or maybe it's a picture of what everything is supposed to look like if we all loved each other and really wanted what was best for each other. But we don't.
At one point in the Rebuplic, Socrates said that in the event that no one is just, Democracy is best. And I think that's the conclusion America (and many places around the world at that time- France, for example) came to. The conclusion that a King isn't going to know what you need any more than you do. That a Guardian is not made of gold while I am made of bronze.
The first time Hugo uses the phrase 'Les Miserables' in his work is when Marius realizes that the people living next to him haven't eaten in 3 days. He gives them all his money and they spend it in a scheme trying to rob someone else. This is truely the Miserable. Starving to death and the charity they are given they use to destroy others. These are the dredges of humanity. These are the people Plato suggest we kill to purify the world.
But I just refuse to believe that is the answer. I refuse to believe that atlas shrugged, that the only thing we need to do is get rid of all the people who aren't wicked.

"People arent either wicked or noble. They're like chef's salads, with good things and bad things all chopped and mixed together in a vinaigrette of confusion and conflict."
-Lemony Snicket

You might be a heifer if...

The dialogue in Book 9 kept me flipping the pages with eager anticipation of what was coming next. The different cities were interesting, but when it got to the part about who experiences the most pleasure...yes. t was so refreshing to read and relate to Socrates (because sometimes I honestly feel like he's talking in circles and what is his point anyway??). Socrates and Glaucon continued their conversation and dove into the topic of pleasure and who it is that truly experiences pleasure? Is it the lover of wisdom, the lover of victory, or the lover of gain? Socrates argues that it is the lover of wisdom because "the kind of pleasure connected with the vision of what is cannot be tasted by anyone except the lover of wisdom" (582c). Socrates further explains the necessity of pain so that pleasure might be fully appreciated and how those who live in darkness and never experience true pleasure  will see the absence of pain as pleasure. It reminds me of the allegory of the cave. The man who comes up from the cave is blinded by the light and considers it painful. However, the longer he endures the pain and pushes through, searching for the truth and escaping the shadows, the less painful it becomes and he gets a taste of true pleasure. Of course, the descent back into the cave to bring others out of darkness is often painful, because it involves stumbling through the shadows and ridicule. But the descent is a necessary part of experiencing the pleasure because only the heartless would condemn fellow humans to sitting in shadows because they know no other option. At least venture into the darkness to offer a glimpse of light. This is the pursuit and journey of truth. In Section 586a, Socrates gives a cattle analogy that is super-relevant to our world today- people are enjoying diluted pleasure that is less-than the best compared to what they could have, but because of lack of virtue and ignorance they go through life without looking for something higher:

"They don't look upward toward what is truly above, nor are they ever brought to it (why sometimes you have to pull people reluctantly out of the cave); and they aren't filled with what really is, nor do they taste the pleasure that is sure and pure; rather, after the fashion of cattle, always looking down and with their heads bent to earth and table they feed, fattening themselves... and for the sake of getting more of these things, they kick and butt...killing each other because they are insatiable; for they are not filling the part of themselves that is, or can contain anything, with things that are."

So it is necessary that they experience pain; that they might see the need to look up and long for pleasure higher than the shadows.

I guess Socrates didn't have a girlfriend...

I know I'm going to get a lot of backlash for this but if you don't agree with me on this, don't freak out. I accept the fact that my opinion wont necessarily be accepted by all. First of all, I'm a little freaked out that in book 5, Socrates talks about mating festivals and that kids won't even know who their parents are. Does Socrates think that humans are animals when it comes to sex? I guess he never had sex before because obviously he doesn't know what it means. If so, then I can't believe he would approach it so callously. Sure, there wouldn't be any divided loyalties, but there's something special about having a family and a home. I wonder if Hitler got his inspiration for his baby camps from this. It's crazy how I find that so many people have taken Socrates' ideas to extremes, like Nazism. Where the good of the state overode the good of the individual. I wonder if you can have justice without love. Socrates talks about treating everyone as equals, but I wonder if anyone even loves anyone. Apparently not if people can have multiple partners in the mating festival. The whole thing makes me sick. Glad we don't do mating festivals today. Awkward....