I know we have talked about Plato a lot but I still seem to have a hard time with his philosophy. I know that he says there are three parts of the soul and makes the analog that there are also three types of people in a society. At first, I really liked his analogy but as I thought about it more later, it began to bother me. For starters, because it seemed like the guardian class was allowed to pick the virtue of wisdom over the virtue of truth. They were trusted to make this decision because they were wise, but where/how/when do you draw the line? Does the guardian just get to pick which situations in which he will lie. I guess the idea is that his wisdom will guide him. With that said, is he just born wise or did he learn to be wise, because then it does not seem fair that he got that chance while others are told they are metal blood that prevents them from overstepping. It seems like Plato's society does not trust that the population is capable of controlling its own appetites if even the knowledge and virtue to do so, which begs the question if "to err is human" then why does he make it sound like some people where just meant to be wise.
I suppose he did not mean for it to sound as demeaning as it sounds, but for this reason I believe that the real truth lies somewhere between what Aristotle and Plato thought. That fulfilling ourselves and being virtuous is important, but we also have a place (though I believe it is a place we decide, that also makes us happy) and a duty to other people. Life will not always be fair and emotions will always be there but if we can make friends and find people in our lives to help us moderate our desires to find a "golden mean", and I believe we could have a much better society.
I agree with you statement. Plato's point of view is very odd and not very ideal. I don't understand how someone can say a certain group of people have a different color of blood and that color is what their power rank is. I believe those that are in power should be virtuous and make it a habit to so what's best for the people. There does need to be golden mean because some people can only handle a certain amount of power. Then again, in Plato's time, the only people that had power were the wealthy, and his thought of those being in power should not want the power is true cause then the will be doing things for the good of the people and not for themselves.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both of ya'll. I was also wondering how people in Plato's society got chosen. He did say our purpose was determined by birth, which is unfair. I do agree that there is an underlining between Plato and Aristotle that could be beneficial in making a better society.
ReplyDeleteYour statements are all agreeable, but as well I believe in that the idea behind guardians was for them to make fair laws and to treat people fairly. It is obvious that Plato does not state in detail how can one become a guardian, but it is a good idea to consider to. There has been many cases where leaders are corrupted by power and Plato tells that a guardian would not have the same issue. It is the thought that counts.
ReplyDelete