Socrates compares the relationship between a citizen and a city to that of a child and a parent. Athens has nurtured Socrates in body and mind, given him an ideal environment to raise his own children in, to give him a platform to exhort people to be virtuous (Crito, 51a). As any child benefits from the protections and provisions of a parent, he must also obey the parent when it requires something of him. So, Socrates considers it his civic duty to obey Athens wishes since he has benefited from his citizenship. Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of
In the beginning of book VI, Socrates makes a point by saying that philosophers have always been able to see things as they are versus people who see things as they vary and so he asks, who should rule? (484b) Socrates then launches into how philosophers are the ones who love the truth and want nothing and will not stand for anything, but the truth. (485c) It is because of that they should rule and so Socrates is asking for a philosopher-king who will seek nothing but the truth through knowledge and wisdom. This is the most important and boldest claim Plato makes in the defense of philosophy.
On the other hand, Erudite and Dauntless seem to take over the “government” as a whole. As Plato says in his writing The Republic “an ideal state is when each class may have to make sacrifices to achieve the greater good of society.” Plato stating this fits perfectly within the societal classes that the factions live in as well as the government that is created because of the actions taken by both factions together. Society in the movie as a whole embody the characteristics that are need to create an ideal state. There are three tiers in which create a well-balanced society, the Philosopher kings, soldiers and production/artisan class.
Book three addresses the type of education that should be taught in this ideal city, and the discussion moves from what it means to be just, to what it means to be courageous and moderate. Socrates ideas on the type of education that should be taught were unconventional for this time in Greek history. For instance, Socrates argued that certain pieces of literature ought to be censored if they promote weakness or disobedience. Correspondingly Socrates places a large emphasis on the role education plays in terms of contributing to the vitality of the city. Socrates contends that in order to have a just city, the city must develop just citizens, and the only way that is possible is through proper education of both the mind and the body.
He uses the example of ruling a city, where a government would change the rules and laws to best suit them, and as the rules are followed by those who act justly, the just would be acting in the favour of the stronger. Socrates objects to this and claims that humans will make mistake, as that is part of being human, and may
According to Socrates there are two types of justice, the political justice and the justice of a particular man. As we know, city is bigger than a man. Socrates believes that it is easier to find justice at the political level which means in the city, thus he tries to define a just city from scrap, and will see in which stage justice enters. Also, Socrates tries to find justice in the city before finding justice in the individuals because individuals are not at all self-sufficient. We humans have similar needs such as food, clothing and shelter and in order to accomplish these goals human beings form unions, where each and every individual specializes in a field.
I believe that Plato believes that people are inherently good and they will do what is morally right and just for society. They will earn their right to power and ensure fairness for all to prevent the tyrants from trying to take control. Plato mentions three main arguments regarding
In a perfect world, the philosopher would become society’s greatest ruler. If we look at Socrates’ definition of the ideal philosopher, it would turn out that the philosopher has everything we look for in a leader. The philosopher has spent most of their lives exploring outside of the cave. They would be able to see the truth with clarity, and lead society through the most stable paths to ensure an ideal future. There would be no quarrels, as all of society’s trust is placed onto the capable philosopher’s shoulders.
In The Republic: Book 1 by Plato, the main argument and discussion being told is the definition of justice and the different perspectives and interpretations. One of the characters in the novel Thrasymachus, an angry guy who thinks everyone is wrong represents the original and analytical explanation. He defines justice as “the interest of the stronger” suggesting that power is correct. Thrasymachus believed that every person acts for themselves and attempts to get what they can but however only the toughest will get what they want. A popular example that portrays this understanding of the definition of justice is how a government serves the interest of its people.
In his discussion over how the citizens should be educated and how to control their knowledge, the question of the ethical and realistic expectations of the city. However, the problem, or downfall, of Plato’s city is its foundation. A foundation of lies. Plato’s web of lies, falsehoods and manipulation make the entire city
In his book The Republic, Plato explains why a philosopher should rule and why she is best suited to rule. Before he jumps to the answer however, he gives a clear insight into who he believes a philosopher is and how such philosophers will rule the Kallipolis. Plato gives the definition of a philosopher in Book V of The Republic, stating that philosophers strove to gain as much knowledge as they possibly could during their lives. This goes back to his argument that knowledge is equal to being just which is also equal to being happy. Thus, in order to fully understand what makes a complete “philosopher-king”, the origin and shaping of such philosophers must be analyzed as well as how they are put in charge of the nation they will rule.
The mores that one is instilled with is a complex concept to which we do not give much thought to in a day to day basis. In Plato’s The Republic, Plato dives into the inner workings of justice and other moral matters through the voice of Socrates, who serves as a character to give the reader a distinct perspective in the narrative. Throughout the text, Plato touches on many issues in Ancient Greek society in order to create a utopist city. Along the agenda, Plato emphasizes the quarrel of the rudimentary benefits of truth vs. lies, and which one of the two would conquer more with justice. In the transpiration of the debate, Plato convinces the reader that the truth is a closer fit to the principles of justice through a fallible initial argument, and analogical points, emphasizing the truth all the way from the tyrant to the slave.
Plato believes that good citizens are those who accept the governance of their rulers largely due to the agreement between rulers and the ruled. His position is weakened by oppositions within his argument and by the lack of supporting evidence on his part. Plato believes that good citizens are those who accept the governance of their rulers based on the common understanding of both the ruler and the
In Book IV of Plato’s Republic, Socrates and his peers come to the conclusion that a city is going to need people who have an understanding of what justice should be. Socrates at the end of Book IV can make the difference between individual, political, and social justice. He knows that individual and political justice is so much in common because they both weigh in heavy on truth, honor, and appetitive soul. That appetitive soul is an element that helps the secure the just community with love and support.
Here leads me to believe that Plato through Socrates is verbally expressing that the people of the State depend on the correct choice of their future ruler and type of person this ruler is to be, so it is up to the prior ruler to make sure of the person they opt to rule properly. On the other hand, if a new leader is chosen infelicitously, or person who is fixated on nothing but making money and becoming rich off of their citizens backs and misfortunes, then once they take position, others like them are sure to follow and eventually the state would be in ruin. They would begin to lose focus of why they are in their position and would be warring with other nations. The citizens would become slaves for their rulers cause. The best way to choose
