Lap's PHI100 Weblog

  In Book 7, Socrates describes education as a 'turning around' of the soul. How do you think education today would look different if this was the guiding idea? Also, what else is wrong with education today? Are there any radical changes you would like to see in education (K-12 or college)  today? Explain why. Socratic Education Plato's Socratic Education is described as an elitist molding program that shapes the morals and logical powers of said Philosopher Kings. Since the Rulers (gold souls) of Kallipolis aren't allowed to own property and own wealth, the city's elite (presumably the richest producers and most talented Auxlillaries) are to train the prospective leaders physically (Gymnastics), intellectually (Astronomy, Geometry) and philosophically (Modern-day Science and Philosophy were one and the same in ancient times. There was no hard/soft science split either). Philosopher-kings would be excellently able to steer the ship of state.  Modern-day political po...

 Books 5 and 6 concentrated on the Just City (Kallipolis). Professor Foster makes it a point to INTERPRET the text rather than to passively accept the text. Books 5 and 6 are arguably the two chapters that readers must differentiate between Plato and Socrates and rigorously interpret the words rather than passively accept Bloom's translation. Socrates or Plato, perhaps even Bloom, construct Kallitopolis through intense storytelling. Not only are we treated towards "waves" (communism of women and children, eugenics, and the like) we also have rapid and compelling rhetoric. Unlike other books, Socrates takes center stage. Instead of playing the fool to reveal foolishness, he is now in full command of his powers. In my opinion, Plato is baring his soul and giving us his personal reasons as to why his life must not be repeated and why Athenian democracy and Athenian excess has led to where the Greek Peninsula is the state it is in now. Reading this in 2020, it's not hard ...

Already reeling from Book One and Book Two, reading the third and fourth books of Plato's Republic was a completely new challenge. Perhaps the hardest task was delineating Plato's arguments from Socrates and seeing when was the author speaking through Socrates and when was the Socratic argument being documented. Books 3 and 4 centers around natural justice. Glaucon And Tharsymachus used the story of Gyges Ring as well as the Sophistic arguments that justice was the perpetuation of natural aristocracy's doctrine over weaker people. The latter makes an argument that hierarchy is inherent in all types of governed societies.  Socrates doesn't rebut these claims but tries to counteract these arguments with his own tale of justice as a natural inhibition arising from One Man's inherent craft and the environment (city) that he is formed in. He believes that aristocratic tyranny can be prevented if classes (Auxiliaries, Producers, Guardians) are rigidly formed and that the ...

 “And each ruling group sets down laws for its own advantage; a democracy sets down democratic laws; a tyranny, tyrannic laws; and the others do the same. And they declare that what they have set down—their own advantage—is just for the ruled, and the man who departs from it they punish as a breaker of the law and a doer of unjust deeds. This, best of men, is what I mean: in every city the same thing is just, the advantage of the established ruling body. It surely is master; so the man who reasons rightly concludes that everywhere justice is the same thing, the advantage of the stronger.”​e​339 a Kirsch, Adam. The Republic of Plato (p. 57). Basic Books. Kindle Edition.  In Book One, Thrasymachus and Socrates argue over the substantive meaning of justice and its application in greek life. The former, a sophist, already tired with Socrates' debating and argumentative style tries to sum up his view of justice through a clear-eyed view of how the city-states are governed in Greece...