Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of plato republic
The role of art in society according to plato
Plato's perspective on art
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis of plato republic
Plato’s republic is based, largely, on order and responsibility. The only morality in this society deals with the relative functions of the members of said society. For example: A man kills another man. Why is this a bad thing? In most societies, this would be considered bad or wrong because the societal morals dictate that one’s life is sacred and one’s body is one’s own etc etc etc. In Plato’s republic, the only reason people (namely, Plato) would be against a murder, is because, once a man has lost his life, he will no longer be able to function according to the provenance of the governing bodies. Despite the fundamental difference in moral purpose, however, morals do indeed play a prominent role in the republic. Consider the republic as …show more content…
One person’s opinion of a given work will differ greatly from the next. The point in question here, is not whether art is good. The point that needs to be dealt with, at least as far as Plato is concerned, is whether or not art has a negative (or enticing) effect on the general population. Given the fact that the effect of art differs so drastically from one person to the next, censorship of a given work will be next to useless. Also, because only certain works are censored, censorship becomes even more useless. The fact of the matter is, it is not the art that is perverse, it is the humans. Saying this, it becomes clear that censorship of art in any form is a fairly moot …show more content…
These concepts and measures he was thinking of taking - ie the censorship of art, the demand for productivity over morality, the concept of everyone having a place in society, the notion that everyone should do what they need to do, the precept that people should have no possessions of their own but should be forced to work for them and eat and share in public with their community – would not result in the society he was dreaming of but would, in fact, result in a horrendous cascade of logic leading to a degeneration of order and morality and eventually ending with a tragic loss of humanity. The reasons for this are simple. Firstly, the censorship of art is nothing more than the censorship of ideas that are both spontaneous AND inherent to the people themselves. Thus, censorship is useless. Secondly, the censorship of art removes means of expression and release and will result in the occurrence of these negative acts on a more regular basis. Thirdly, and most importantly, the children, with no foil to the good in their lives, will not know bad and thus will not have any proclivity to follow a given moral code. To them, there will be no morality, only good. Thus, the censorship of art, unto itself, will cause the negative effects mentioned above. This is why the censorship of art will ruin the
The main way to institutionalize rules is through government and in the form of laws. Plato's The Republic is not an explanation of the laws of the people. It is a separation of power amongst three classes--Rulers, Auxiliaries, Commoners--that makes the most of each person's natural abilities and strives for the good of the community. The point is to create a harmonious unity amongst the three classes which will lead to the greater good of the community and, consequently, each individual. The three classes are a product of different aptitude levels for certain tasks amid various individuals.
In Plato’s Republic, justice and the soul are examined in the views of the multiple characters as well as the Republic’s chief character, Socrates. As the arguments progress through the Republic, the effect of justice on the soul is analyzed, as the question of whether or not the unjust soul is happier than the just soul. Also, Plato’s theories of justice in the man, the state, and the philosopher king are clearly linked to the cardinal virtues, as Plato describes the structure of the ideal society and developing harmony between the social classes. Therefore, the statement “justice is the art which gives to each man what is good for his soul” has to be examined through the definitions of justice given in the Republic and the idea of the good
Thrasymachus approaches Socrates, the main character of Republic and most of Plato's work, during a conversation on the topic of morality. The aggressive Thrasymachus interjects his own opinion; morality is "the advantage of the stronger." (Republic 338c) Upon clarification, Thrasymachus lays out his view of socially created moral relativism, as opposed to Socrates' moral objectivism. Thrasymachus illustrates his view by citing how different types of government create laws serving purposes specific to each government, "a democracy passing democratic laws, a dictatorship making dictatorial laws… In doing so each government makes it clear that what is right and moral for its subjects is what is to its own advantage." (Republic 338e)
The Romans called their political system not democracy but republic. Republic is something that belongs to the people. In Rome the right to take part in the governing belonged only to the men and those who had the statute of being citizens. The differences of republic and democracy are because of the origin of the two terms Greek and Latin language. The ancient Greeks discarded the tyranny as well as the disorder. Plato as well as Aristotle stabilized the complete democracy which was not based on the laws, with the power of the crowd and considered it as a form of ruling based on the jealousy and sweet talk of demagogues. Both of them considered the democracy to be wrong kind of state governing. Plato considers the democracy as nice and various public orders but without the necessary governing. The main good of democracy is freedom.
During the time period of The Republic, the problems and challenges that each community was faced with were all dealt with in a different way. In the world today, a lot of people care about themselves. For many people, the word justice can mean many different things, but because some only look out for themselves, many of these people do not think about everyone else’s role in the world of society. The struggle for justice is still demonstrated in contemporary culture today. One particular concept from Plato’s The Republic, which relates to contemporary culture is this concept of justice. In the beginning of The Republic, Socrates listeners, Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, ask Socrates whether justice is stronger than injustice, and
To understand Plato's arguments concerning the rise of tyrants from democracy, one must first examine how Plato suggests that democracy evolves from oligarchy. Plato sees democracy as a degeneration of oligarchy, something that evolves from a failure to be properly disciplined and restrained in the fulfillment of desires. A democratic person is not necessarily a mindless hedonist, he or she may even be restrained in many regards, but would deny no one the opportunity to be and argue that the mindless hedonist is just as virtuous and honorable as the spendthrift oligarch. Plato explains that a democratic man one who “surrend(ers) rule over himself to whichever desire comes along, as if it were chosen by lot, until it is satisfied; and after that to another, dishonoring none but satisfying al...
Plato views the democratic state as a city “full of freedom and freedom of speech[,]” where its citizens “have the license to do [whatever they] want” and the right to self-determine. Plato however, sees this insatiable desire for freedom at the expense of neglecting everything else as the downfall of democracy. To clarify, a society that is staunchly protective of its equality and freedom will be particularly sensitive towards any oppositions that seem to limit them, to the point where it actively attempts to “avoid [obeying the law and] having any master at all.” Thus, “unless the rulers are very pliable and provide plenty of that freedom, they are punished by the city and accused of being oligarchs.” Since those in power fear the accusations of those being ruled, they become docile and submissive. On the other hand, those who are ruled are encouraged by their rulers’ meekness and, convinced of their inherent right to freedom, begin to behave as their own rulers. Thus, this blind chase for unconditional freedom will propagate disorder across the society, and eventually cause the people to see “anarchy [as] freedom, extravagance [as] magnificence, and shamelessness [as]
The second book of the Republic shows the repressive quality of Plato’s society. Plato, talking through Socrates, wants
In Plato’s Republic, Socrates claimed that stories affect the souls of those who hear them. Given this, he went on to argue that censorship was not only necessary but also beneficial to society. Socrates wanted to censor portions of poetry, the arts, and sciences that were not productive or beneficial to society. He believed that poetry was neither philosophical nor pragmatic and did not lead to true knowledge. Rather, he found it to be unethical, leading to desires and passions. He thus declared it inferior to the practical arts and lacking in educational value.
In Anatomy of Criticism, author Northrop Frye writes of the low mimetic tragic hero and the society in which this hero is a victim. He introduces the concept of pathos saying it “is the study of the isolated mind, the story of how someone recognizably like ourselves is broken by a conflict between the inner and outer world, between imaginative reality and the sort of reality that is established by a social consensus” (Frye 39). The hero of Hannah W. Foster’s novel, The Coquette undoubtedly suffers the fate of these afore mentioned opposing ideals. In her inability to confine her imagination to the acceptable definitions of early American female social behavior, Eliza Wharton falls victim to the ambiguity of her society’s sentiments of women’s roles. Because she attempts to claim the freedom her society superficially advocates, she is condemned as a coquette and suffers the consequences of exercising an independent mind. Yet, Eliza does not stand alone in her position as a pathetic figure. Her lover, Major Sanford -- who is often considered the villain of the novel -- also is constrained by societal expectations and definitions of American men and their ambition. Though Sanford conveys an honest desire to make Eliza his wife, society encourages marriage as a connection in order to advance socially and to secure a fortune. Sanford, in contrast to Eliza, suffers as a result of adhering to social expectations of a male’s role. While Eliza suffers because she lives her life outside of her social categorization and Sanford falls because he attempts to maneuver and manipulate the system in which he lives, both are victims of an imperfect, developing, American society.
Plato’s idea for a perfect government is to have three different classes to have different roles to help the society. The first group of people is the Producing class and they are responsible for providing materials and food for the city. This is where the farmers, blacksmiths, the fishermen, and other jobs like them. The second group is the Auxiliaries and they are the ones who job is to protect the city from threats, so the soldiers. The final group is the guardians, these are the philosophers and it is there job to not only be knowledgeable but to be just. Plato believes that there are several things that can derail the advancement of society. “Then nothing insane and nothing akin to dissoluteness can be involved in the right of love…Then sexual pleasure must not be involved” (121). Plato believed that sex should only be reserved for special festivals and for creating life, other than that people should keep in line with how a father and son touch each other. Plato did not just regulate what two people did in the privacy in the own home, but he also regulated what people should be learning in school. “At any rate, it ought to end where it has ended; for surely training in the musical crafts ought to end in a passion for beauty” ...
The Republic is the most important dialogue within Plato's teaching of politics. It deals with the soul, which, as we know from the beginning, at the level where one must make choices and decide what one wants to become in this life, and it describes justice as the ultimate form of human, and the ideal one should strive for both in life and in state. Justice as understood by Plato is not merely a social virtue, having only to do with relationship between people, but virtue that makes it possible for one to build their own regime and reach happiness.
...is own desires rather than his subjects needs is not virtuous. Second, a person in the military, who is supposed to be courageous may desert his fellow troops in fear. Third, many common people commit crimes, and create conflict within the community. None of these people are virtuous. However, this is exactly what Plato was getting at. Plato believes that when each of these classes performs its own role and does not try to take over any other class, the entire city as a whole will operate smoothly, showing the harmony that is genuine justice. (ln 433e) What makes the Republic such an important and interesting piece of literature is that by examining what brings true justice and harmony to the world, we can therefore understand all of the virtues by considering how each is placed within the organization of an ideal city.
The book I'm a Stranger Here Myself, written by Bill Bryson, is based on a collection of written articles. Bryson writes about everyday events and shows their negative qualities through whining or creative criticism. He attracts the readers' attention by writing ideas that relate to a normal persons life. His methods are very powerful because it attracts his main audience of common people through his simple vocabulary use and everyday middleclass situations. Also between his "complaining" he throws in little jokes that make his stories entertaining. This makes the reader continue reading because it constantly grabs their attention. Another reason of why Bryson's style of writing is very effective is because all of his stories have a main theme that gives a strong and important message to the reader. Some of these messages may be a little controversial to some readers but are very thought out and well explained.
Kieran, M. (2008, January 28). Art, censorship and morality. Open Learn, the Open University. Retrieved January 5, 2014 from http://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/culture/philosophy/art-censorship-and-morality