The Contradiction Of Animals In Plato's Republic '

Title: Plato's Republic

There is some truth to the idea that certain appetites are difficult to control. As animals, we seek things like food and sex, as these are among our most basic needs. As humans, we may seek some of these things to excess, and indulge in them readily when they are available. There is a case to be made that our desire for recreation (alcohol, drugs, leisure time) can also be taken to extreme levels. These are also animal responses, since we have developed systems of living where many of us do not worry for our survival. The idea is that other animals, if they did not fear for their survival, would also indulge in whatever other activities they find pleasant. There is evidence that some animals play; and many alpha

In the Book I discussion of old men, the man who has overcome the animal desires is the most at peace with his life and his impending death, while the other fears for what he has lost, and what he may yet lose in the future when he dies. Yet, while the fear of death is primal, animals do not contemplate it. When it is their turn, they simply allow it to happen. Animals do not suffer from the same contemplation of death that we do as humans. If the animal nature is not to fear death – that is human. This undermines the rationale outlined in Book I, however, but maybe does not undermine the rationale that discipline is virtuous. However, there are ties between these in the ultimate argument that indulgence is inherently animalistic. I find that the evidence points more to indulgence as a human trait, one that emerges when our basic needs are satisfied. While there are those who engage in indulgence to the point where it is legitimately self-destructive, that is not the norm for human

In particular, we as a human society today have a certain hubris. We have made many advancements and while any reasonable person would realize that we still know very little, many others are entirely certain that their view of the world should not be challenged. I think of politicians who obstruct action on climate change – these are the bitter indulgent, hubris-driven people who feel that they know better than anybody else, that they need not listen to the advice of experts and thus deliver us policy not based on either evidence or reason. This shows that Plato's lessons have yet to be fully absorbed into our culture. Whatever one believes about the idea of animal nature, we remain undisciplined, and still hold our own knowledge at too high a level. We believe we are smart enough to see our flaws when clearly we are not, as a whole, able to do this enough to take action. It is not just politicians who contribute to our self-destruction, after all, but all of us, addicted to a lifestyle of comfort and consumption, the precise indulgence against which Plato tried to warn us 2300 years