ipl-logo

Plato's Argument

1829 Words8 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Plato concept of knowledge

Knowledge is Sufficient to Qualify Philosopher as a Ruler
Plato insists on his proposition claiming that knowledge alone is sufficient to qualify philosophers to be the ruler “...provided that they are not inferior to the non-philosophers in virtue...they are superior pretty well for the most important one” (484d) and makes plausible arguments to support it by explaining the importance of knowledge of the form of good for the ruler in a perfect state and the most important virtue that only philosophers possess. The Argument can be formulated as: 1) philosophers have knowledge, and 2) philosophers are not inferior to the non-philosophers in virtue, and 3) Philosophers are superior pretty well for the most important virtue of understanding/knowing …show more content…

However, none of the virtues he counts for a philosopher ruler is regarded anymore even as a value, so it certainly is not applicable to our society. Although many of western countries based their constitution upon the ideas of philosophers, I believe, the society and political section is getting biased increasingly. But, what if the world changes in a way that people refrain from today's pragmatism where they evaluate everything with its usefulness for their own sake regardless of its being good or bad due to lack of absolute good or bad. In this case, the guidance of philosophers for the governors would be necessary to renovate the political ground. This is a wishful thinking as Plato mentions, but I believe that one day, human beings would look for an ideal society and Plato's proposition might be a leading clue to make the future society. However, if he is read not attentively, one can derive fascism and racism from Republic, but I believe the ideal individual he proposes as the ruler should not extend to the whole society, say, a country as he never did so. Although he believes that there should be a hierarchy in the society, he puts the most responsibility on …show more content…

to learn the form of the Good, because by taking this step he would understand the highest idea, the ground and origin of other ideas as he puts in the sun analogy, as Strauss put it “the first idea is the ground of both ideas and knowledge of ideas” (ibid.138).On the other hand, he declares that the most valuable qualities of a ruler come from his natural passion for the truth that perfects through time and education. Therefore, only a real lover of learning that has an intense erotic love for the truth and won't stop learning until he knows and lives and being nurtured by truth deserves to be the ruler. Such a person with a divinely inspired erotic love to true philosophy will be relieved of the pain when giving birth, say, to give birth to beautiful things through art, since art is the creation of the soul, and if all aspects of beautiful things are carefully thought, the ultimate object of love, the final revelation the form of divine beauty, will be seen. So, it reveals that he is a lover of the form of divine beauty, follows that he is ultimately a lover of the form of divine good, since the beautiful is the good. Since justice is to improve or retain the situation that is good, a notion of good and bad involves in justice. Justice is also an art so far as it serves for the others but not itself, and for its causing

Show More
Related
1310 Words | 6 Pages

For the individuals who are searching for a tasteful meaning of devotion, the discourse is a failure, for no conclusion has been come to concerning the exact idea of that goodness. It has now and again been kept up that the genuine motivation behind logic isn't to answer addresses yet rather scrutinize the appropriate responses that have been given. Anyways, this is precisely what Socrates has been doing in this back and forth. Euthyphro has displayed a few speedy and prepared responses to the inquiry "What is devotion?" however upon magnification, each of these questions has appeared to be unsuitable.

Read More
802 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More
376 Words | 2 Pages

Plato’s Apology is in the words of Socrates. The apology explains what Socrates though of death as he awaited his death after being condemned for not believing in God. He believed after death, one would either go to another world or be in a state of nothingness. He had the theory of death being a place where one would learn about life and talk to people that no longer walk the Earth. He supports his argument that death is a gain by explaining that he, Socrates, will get to speak to famous poets and past heroes.

Read More
732 Words | 3 Pages

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

Read More
411 Words | 2 Pages

The final argument of Plato’s Phaedo was created to prove souls cannot perish. Plato does so by arguing how a soul cannot die nor cease to exist on the same fundamental grounds of how the number three can never be even. For the number three holds the essence of being odd, without being odd entirely. Similarly, a soul holds the essence of life through immortality, however the soul is not immortal itself and only participates in immortality, just as the number three participates in being odd. Additionally, an essence or form cannot admit to the opposite of itself just as small cannot be large simultaneously, and hot cannot be cold.

Read More
1060 Words | 5 Pages

The world we live in is filled with crime, evil, and injustice, but do people have the desire to do bad things knowing that they are bad, or do they do them thinking that they are good? In this essay, I examine Socrates argument, found in Plato’s Meno, that no one knowingly desires bad things. If Socrates were right, it would mean that it is impossible for someone to perform a bad action based on their desire for that bad thing. Instead, all bad desires result from the ignorance of the person performing the action in falsely believing that the action is good. Though Socrates presents a compelling argument, I argue that it is possible for someone to act badly, all the while knowing that what they desire is bad.

Read More
405 Words | 2 Pages

Plato breaks the justification of knowledge down into two types of realms that show what can be known by reason and what can be known by the five senses. These realms, then divided into two other unequal parts based on their clarity and truthfulness, make up what is known as The Divided Line. By understanding The Divided Line we can fully grasp the differences between the perceptual, also known as becoming, realm and the conceptual, also known as being, realm. The perceptual realm is the opinions and beliefs of people or it can be known as the visible realm.

Read More
1013 Words | 5 Pages

Socrates in the dialogue Alcibiades written by Plato provides an argument as to why the self is the soul rather than the body. In this dialogue Alcibiades and Socrates get into a discussion on how to cultivate the self which they both mutually agree is the soul, and how to make the soul better by properly taking care of it. One way Socrates describes the relationship between the soul and the body is by analogy of user and instrument, the former being the entity which has the power to affect the latter. In this paper I will explain Socrates’ arguments on why the self is the soul and I will comment on what it means to cultivate it.

Read More
633 Words | 3 Pages

In Plato’s, Phaedo, one of the arguments that Socrates makes for justifying his theory about the soul being immortal is the argument of opposites. The argument of opposites is found from 70c to 72c in the Phaedo. The argument is not logically valid as there are a few fallacies that occur with the definition of opposites with which Socrates defines his argument. This argument ultimately fails at being logically valid as contrary to premise 1, all things that have an opposite do not come from only their opposites. Socrates also does not specify in this argument whether he is referring to the soul dying or the body dying in the final premises.

Read More
2004 Words | 9 Pages

Plato proposes that in order to function the noble lie effectively, the citizens must be persuaded to believe that their political role was chosen prior to birth, due to the composition of gold, silver or bronze in their souls . This gives rise to the ‘’Myth of Metals’’ , which states that every citizen is born from the earth and must regard the native soul as their mother. The citizens possessing gold and silver are the most honored and qualified to rule, whereas a workman takes no part in protecting or governing the city and carry on all necessary lines of work. The city state must be ruled by the philosopher kings who belong to the category of rulers and possess a high degree of knowledge and are capable of identifying the activities that promote the welfare of the entire society. The philosopher kings must be chosen from amongst the class of

Read More
1114 Words | 5 Pages

Plato’s republic aims to describe a just state, and in turn a just individual consistently throughout the text. By analogising the justice of the state and the justice of the individual, Plato attempts to demonstrate that a just society will breed just individuals. However, there are certain loop holes within his thought process that can lead one to wonder whether or not his ideas are pragmatic, and could function within a real societal structure- and if human beings given their inherently selfish nature, can adopt the traits necessary in order to achieve justice and the ideal state described in the Republic. Plato described the human soul as a “tripartite soul” where three main qualities seen in the human being, will also be reflected in the three classes of the ideal state. Reason is the highest of the three main qualities, and it forms the class of rulers and guardians.

Read More
832 Words | 4 Pages

The just person’s soul entails motive for certain kinds of objects the most important of which is knowledge. Socrates describes the hardship and extreme effort required to gain knowledge of the forms and the form of the good, thus the just person will seek learning and not spend time to take care of the satisfaction of desires that typically lead to unjust actions. This approach to unite the gap between a just soul and just actions may have some drawbacks. One negative aspect may be that several unjust actions may be motivated by desires that are compatible with the desire for knowledge. For example, why wouldn’t a person with a great fascination for knowledge steal a book if it would contribute to their

Read More
1212 Words | 5 Pages

1 INTRODUCTION Power and authority are the most important aspects of politics as such way of thinking comes a long way from the earliest thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle to mention few. They are the fundamental features of state in politics, focusing on who should have the power and authority over the people and who should rule them. During the time prior and after the birth of states, political authority has always been a major concern with regards to who should rule and how and who shouldn’t. Therefore this issues need to be addressed in a way that will at the end benefit the society. Plato is the thinker or theorist who came with addressing who should rule in a political environment in what Plato outlined that only Philosophers should rule.

Read More
969 Words | 4 Pages

Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.

Read More
758 Words | 4 Pages

The ultimate goal of human life for Plato is to know and understand the truth or the “eidos” of the “good”. The only way for us to see this truth is through our minds. The truth is not accessible in the physical world but in the intellectual realm. For us to be happy or for use to know the truth is only when we are beyond our physical sense it is a totally different level. So according to Plato, “knowledge” and “virtue” are corollary meaning that as long as one exists the other will follow.

Read More

More about Plato's Argument

Related Topics

Open Document