Bump

Platonic love sucks!

And so it goes with all things that metaphysically attempt to circumvent, avoid or go beyond, reality.

He's definitely a hero of the elitist left

Ping!

Bertrand Russell calls Plato's Republic a "totalitiarian tract" in one of the first few essays of his "Unpopular Essays". He gives a good exhibition of pernicious outlook in that classic book.

Yes, Plato was taught by Socrates, and was Aristotle's teacher. Socrates of course was analytical rather than prescriptive, but Socrates was the basis for Western philosophy until the end of the Medeival period.

Plato's "Republic" is anything but...(a republic, I mean). The sytem he describes is an oligarchy, plain and simple... More "lords" and "serfs", such as has been around since history first started being recorded. People talk a lot about "a new world order", but when you scratch the surface of it, it's just more of the same-old, same-old, only on a larger scale...

the infowarrior

For those of us who need a nice lecture, the TLC program on great books discusses the pros and cons of Plato's Republic. It is indeed the basis for many utopian dictatorships. But like all utopias, it would never work (his view of seeing male female relationships to breed perfect children ignores that human heterosexuality is usually based on pair bonding; maybe Plato's view of sex is skewered since he was gay).

However, many of his point are good. And there is a good argument that he was merely allowing arguments about what should be in a government, to stimulate discussion, not really discussing the ideal state.

Plato had in mind an ideal state based on logic and living in accordance with loyalties to more than one's self. He wanted a government founded on a trained elite who would govern wisely and in which art and music would be forbidden that would destroy the people's moral character. Now Plato wasn't a big fan of democracy and he would have little patience and tolerance for any government based upon popular consent since he believed people as a whole are ruled by emotion and self interest and have no real idea what is best for them. After having seen how his friend and teacher Socrates was executed by the Athenian democracy, Plato was profoundly disillusioned with the notion that men could govern themselves freely since they were prone to being tricked by demagogues, hustlers, and con men into acting contrary to their true interests. Had Plato seen Bill Clinton's America I have a feeling the philosophy of government and society he promoted in The Republic would have been even more commended to him today than it would have been in antiquity. Granted the book certainly is utopian in depicting the kind of world Plato would have liked to see but all the same there is no disputing that as the greatest philosopher who ever lived we still find ourselves arguing not whether we can ever achieve a pefect state (Plato knew from his later Laws it would never happen; what he wanted to to get us to do was to rethink the comfortable assumptions we have about how the government and society we live in works) but whether we can expect a government and society to be decent and well ordered in its character and policy. That is the real challenge The Republic presents to us.

I wasn't exposed to it in school either. Although most people that I respect have come to the same conclusion as you. I got about 10 pages into it on my own and gave up 8-o

Maybe I'll try again someday.

Plato was an idealist, which aligns him with the modern left.

I recently finished a collection of works by Aristotle, who, as is known, was a student of PLato for many years, and categorically rejected Plato's works as frivolous.

Aristotle was more of a realist, and dealt with issues as such. For a good read, pick up his "Nichomachean Ethics", and his works on logic. They are much more refreshing, and make more sense.

Any freepers have any thoughts on him?

Hey Rightwing Canuck -- you've just rung my bell! You bet I do -- his philosophical analysis and methods have been the subject of lifelong study. Trouble is, I may not have a chance to write 'til tonight. So please leave the porch light on for me! best, bb.

Socrates was the basis for Western philosophy until the end of the Medeival period.

Excuse me, but Aristotle holds the distinction of being the father of Western Civilization.

Aristotle might have learned from Plato, but Aristotle's distinctly different philosophy -- metaphysically based in reality as opposed to Plato's mysticism -- appeared when Aristotle left Plato's Academy.

#14. You are correct. St. Thomas Aquinas was greatly influenced by Aristotle's writings and he sought to take Aristotle's philosophy and intensify it within a theological framework.

Plato though was a master at writing dialogues and what comes out is its like you actually eavesdrop on real people discussing significant issues at the time. The dialogues are really a popularized exposition of his philosophy. Much of the writing is singularly beautiful which isn't too surprising since Plato also happened to be a poet. While he wasn't the rationalist his student Aristotle became he managed to cover almost everything talked about and debated over the next 2,000 years. Its said philosophy after him was simply a footnote to Plato. That speaks for his intellectual and cultural influence on the Western world up to the present day.

You're understanding him perfectly. A much better Greek philosopher was Aristotle.

It was the world's first democracy, Athens, that was the setting of Socrates death. Thus, Plato had an aversion to the democratic ideal, and a presumptive view that the more intelligent and developed a man, the more good he was. A Republic, as he defined it, being guided by intelligent and developed men would be a "good" society lacking the corruption and instability of the government that he saw day in and day out.

Aristotle, his greatest pupil, understood that man's nature made it easier for him to do bad rather than good regardless of logic or insight. That is a primary distinction amongst living philosophies or "worldviews" even today.

You simply must read Karl Popper's examination of Plato in The Open Society And Its Enemies. His other main target in that two-volume set is Marx, which will give you an idea of where Popper is coming from.

Plato's big problem is one that other utopianists (and here I'd include Thomas More, St. Augustine, and to a degree Ayn Rand, which ought to tick off just about everyone on the forum) share, IMHO - the tendency to over-categorize people and assign them places in a planned society based on a set of characteristics that is not properly representative of the full range of human intellect. I do not think I'd be particularly happy in such a society; humans are neither bees nor ants.