INTRODUCTION

I feel it is essential to write this introduction so the reader will have a complete picture of my own theme in comparing some of Plato's dialogues. I have taken into consideration many ways to approach this paper, and have concluded that the best way is through a recent, yet eye opening, experience of my own.

In a brief description, it was an experience-through a relationship. A loving relationship between two people whom often traded places in navigating the course of the connection, and along the way there became major unspoken discrepancies between the "black and the white" or better but, the "light and the dark". It was an ongoing mental tug of war, and when I gave in I fell into the dark, but not forever.

I was brought down to the cave by my close companion, and lover with ease. He was a master at work. John, was a common man and non-philosopher. He wasn't too concerned with much past his own nose. In Plato's analogy of "The Navigator," he is a man with physical, mental, and attractive power. He didn't run very deep in feelings of understanding or compassion, and I had tried to get him to find these feelings within himself, which was impossible. In all my efforts, I ended up being belittled and brought down into the darkness. First, he demoralized my values and brought me down from the intelligible world. The world we are capable of having knowledge.. Next, my self- esteem was diminished and I was brought down to the sensible world, where there is only belief.

Finally, he succeeded in clouding my sight so well that he managed to knock me down into the world of ignorance and non-being. The darkness, and the cave. I never even recognized the path the entire way and I am generally very perceptive. I was, eventually I chained in the bottom of the cave, trying to focus in on the dark and not ever really understanding it all. That is exactly why I knew I was in the dark. He was happy, and I was quite miserable with myself. I knew where I was, but couldn't let go of those damn chains holding me there. My attachment, of love, was too strong and the pain of being there with him was as potent. He was content, because he knew exactly what he was doing to me and he knew how to keep me in the cave bounded by chains he and I created, and therefore he became the navigator of our journey that would land in a shipwreck.

When we first met, there was a strong attraction like two magnets. We were two opposites. I had confidence, strength and happiness within myself. They were all inherent qualities and not of physical strength. I was really happy with myself and therefore in the light. John's qualities were insecurity and weakness about himself inside. The big difference was that he pretended to have confidence and strength. These were our personalities, and my one characteristic that was a handicap , he targeted in on to corrupt me. I was naive, and if I hadn't been I would have realized the truth behind the attraction. He needed someone like me to demoralize and in doing so it would make him feel o.k. I was just like the captain, he had some minor handicaps that the drunken sailors used to manipulate the helm of the ship. (I use the word handicap as a hinderance, not a disability.) The captain was short sighted, and limited in seamenship as I was naive. These qualities didn't make our skill seem so important that they were special, just important enough to take over, so the voyage would be what the sailors wanted, (a drunken pleasure cruise), and what John wanted, to take away my overbearing confidence

with myself.

The three horse of the chariot of the soul is also a very clear description as to our differences. If "Reason" is in the lead position over "Spirit" and "Appetite", then you can maintain power with control. That was myself. John had "Spirit" and "Appetite" in the lead of his soul, and when he allowed this opportunity they will run wild and lead to destruction. Shipwrecked. At first, in the beginning of our relationship, we were in the light and he came along for the joy ride. Between the two of us, "Reason", "Appetite", and "Spirit", were running neck and neck. This was exciting and steady concurrently. We could make rational decisions and have a wonderful time together. I was the guardian for him in the light. The clear and visible world of what was real and worthwhile. Even though our souls were running neck and neck, I was still temporarily in the lead and guide. I was delighted to show him the intelligible world, and for a span of time he made some intelligent choices concerning his own life, and made great steps toward pragmatic thinking. Instead of being in an illusion of his own performances, with my guidance, he made realistic decisions. He was rational. This is when I went from being realistic to idealistic. I thought we could truly become a team, a solid unit. Together we would "conquer all" and reach our goals. It made me feel good, In Plato's writings there is no exact way to define good. He has a hard time in explaining the meaning himself. He only knows from what others think good is. He gathers some ideas and tries to make a well rounded explanation. Good is like the sun it should develop, grow, expand and give wisdom to things. The sun also nourishes and develops. If we were growing together then it was good. If we were increasing our wisdom then it was good. If we were being nourished and developed into the loving relationship it was, then it was good. I know we were performing all of these things, and I knew we were able to because I was influencing John to see the light. If he saw the light, then he would truly stay with me there. The question was, how could he properly climb from the dark, cross the divided line, and into the light? How could I stop him from seeing the dark? He and I both had the right qualities te be in the light, but if improperly nourished and developed, they would be spoiled for the highest of all pursuits. I was trying to redevelop his qualities into seeing the light, and he was the corrupter of my own. A vicious cycle which would get us but into a crash landing. I was blind to see that the real qualities John had were "gifted to inflict the deepest injuries on communities and individuals, and it does him the greatest good"^l. He felt good to knock me down and I felt good trying to help him see the light. We were going in circles.

He first took my guidance with respect and influences with pleasure, and once he did go back to school,(with my help and support), he suddenly became a walking encyclopedia of life and experiences. He was full of himself and of new confidence that he now took any helpful influences from me as pity on his manhood. After all, I had been down that road before so I thought I would help my companion out as not to make the wrong moves I once had. The bottom line was that he now wanted to navigate and control our ship. He was still running his soul with "Appetite" and "Spirit" in the lead and if he consumed control we would be destined for that shipwreck. A roller- coaster of emotions and a very unpredictable and irrational relationship. A drunken sailor was about to take control. He thought he was now a man of all knowledge, "he was filled with boundless ambition, and thought himself capable of running the affairs of the world, and became very high and mighty and full of senseless ostentation and insane pride"². In Plato's analogies, when a common man or non-philosopher or drunken sailor gets control of the ship this is how they begin thinking. One small accomplishment and that would be one great leap in their small and narrow minds. John did get control of the helm, and once he did he didn't know quite what do with the lead. It wasn't at all what he expected up there in the light. He thought he could handle my world. " and when he emerged into the light his eyes would be so dazzled by the glare of it that he wouldn't be able to see a ;single one of the things he was now told were real."3 He had to keep the lead and the only way to maintain to navigate was to bring me down into his world the world of darkness. The cave. At this point, he had complete control of me. Naive isn't such a good quality to contain for yourself. My vision of him was clouded with love. Strong feelings that essentially guided me to the cave and kept me there for quite some time. I realized what he was doing and put up a struggle, but the attachments were too strong. I kept following him, All the way there he demoralized my way of thinking, and insisted that anything I decided was irrational and wrong, when he was wrong. I teetered on the edge of the divided line between the intelligible world and the sensible world, still naive, yet the pain wasn't strong enough to open my eyes. I crossed the divided line, and kept coming closer and closer to living in darkness. The problem was, I became corrupted by this master of falsehood, (that is all he ever was), by my heart. My heart was only interested in following John, and since I was out of the intelligible world I really didn't seem him at all. I carried with me, the chains of pleasure and pain into the darkness of the cave, the world of nonbeing. The chains were solidly structured, because I believed John and I could still be a great unit. I still was idealistic about us, and very clouded. I couldn't see the chains for what they were, so they remained. I still wanted to navigate. I still wanted to be in the light with him and with "Reason" in the lead. Impossible. Did you ever see two pilots of a plane, or two captains of one ship ? At this point, I believe I was the hopeless star gazer sitting in the bottom of the cave, and that is exactly where John wanted me to be. Just as the sailors wanted the Navigator of their ship this way also, only then were they happy. John was also happy, and intoxicated in knowing how he demoralized me and got control of my ship and brought me into his world. Only when I started to regain my sight did I disrupt his world, and that is when I started to lose him.

Another important difference in us was that I had been nurtured in good soil, and under the sun. John had been nurtured in bad soil and in the dark, this reminds me of when I was a little girl. My mother was always giving me good advice and correct morals to go by, and one of her most famous heeds of information was, "you bloom where you are planted." I even bought a magnet for her, and it is still on our refrigerator. Therefore the qualities that I grew, were exactly the opposite of John, and the ones that he was so longing to get a hold of. They were the core reasons for attracting someone like him. He got a good grab at them, but they were inherent and could never be permanently taken away from me. I am not a philosopher, but I do carry some of the characteristics of one, and when you do they are the ones that are corrupted. It is like a double standard. You have these traits and depending on how you channel them is where you will end up, in the cave or in the sun. I am me. I don't pretend. When I was in the cave, I knew what I had to do I just didn't know how to explain it to myself. Now that the experience is over I can describe it in one of our discussions in class. I)-just has to be like the Nike commercial and "Just do It." I wiggled the chains and ropes a little to see what would happen, and it produced anger and fear in John. He didn't want to in the dark and alone again. So, after many attempts, I finally did break loose. I ran slow to get to the light. I ran slow because I hoped that he might follow. I believed this all the way back into the intelligible world, and once there I could again see clear again. How could we ever be a team when we were always going in opposite directions? We could never be together because it would have been a great disaster of two souls. Especially mine. A constant tug of war with chains. That was the truth, and once I saw that instead of how much I loved him and wanted to be attached to him, I finally cleared away all the brush that was fogging my vision, and that only brought me that much closer to the sun.

I have learned a great deal, not only in Plato's readings but in class as well. There are many I could talk about, but too many to write about. I can apply what I learned to the relationship and to many I will encounter in the future. Therefore I feel better off now than when I first sat down to Philosophy 112. Once I started to read Plato, I indulged heavily in his thoughts and was able to sift out any remaining questions I had. Between class, and the readings I have finally reached the ability to look back and then look up, and almost directly into the sun. I can thank John for giving me the experience of the cave, because when I previously had a grasp of the light it was not as strong, real and protected as it is now. I had never been in the darkness of the cave before, so I didn't have anything to compare the light to. Just as he didn't see the light before and all the reality that went along with it. We both had a taste of each world, and despised our environments. We eventually scurried back in our own directions, and in our own worlds where we were comfortable in. The complications of this decision, is what kept me in the cave, and him struggling to keep me there, was what we both realized it was happening and yet we were determined not to let go of each other. Why? We loved each other so much, that we endured the pain as long as we could take. That is when we left each other. I didn't wake up until I left, and I will be only that much stronger to resist the next time I run into this type of encounter. John needs proper nourishment to see the sun and to grow. John deserted philosophy, but he is a dying weed in the cave and if for some Godly reason he decides to find new soil to plant himself and grow he will see the sun too. Until that happens, I pity him. I tried, but he was unable to receive the light. He wants to hold onto the chains. The best relief I ever felt was seeing the light, and I felt like in "The Inferno" by Dante Alighieri. Just like the final steps of coming out of the levels of hell, only I was being guided by my soul with "Reason" in the lead:

So seems, the way Plato presents him, that the non-philosopher is trapped in a "catch 22". He is in the world of appearance, and is forced to remain prisoner because he knows of nothing better. Furthermore, any emissary from the world of light and intelligence appears to him a bumbling fool, and who can blame him from resisting attempts to uproot him? The possibility that he will ever realize his ignorance and surmount it is, as Plato makes clear in the Navigator passages, very slim.

Evaluation

The best way I can relate to Plato's epistemological and metaphysical theory is to ask myself, for instance, "how do I know that this and that and those over there are trees?" I could either posit a seemingly infinite regress of certain particular qualities they share, which would lead me no further than the point at which I began, or I could affirm the existence of universals. And, as far as I can ascertain, there is no reason I shouldn't. Their presence is a logically necessary. (hence their categorization as \a priori').

The hierarchy of universals leading up to the form of the good also appears logically necessary, although I am a little uncertain why Plato hastens to place what seems to be an ethical judgement on something that is, per se, purely metaphysical (the form of the "good"). Yet it does become somewhat salient when he discusses its ethical implications on the philosophical quest. And, taken allegorically (with a little extrapolation), the implications on knowledge and the philosophical life presented seem to fit their metaphysical counterpart tightly. The degree to which we can know something depends on the degree to which it is real providing 'knowing' is defined in terms of perception of what is real-- real depending on participation in universals; for, in other terms, cannot I say that I 'know' a hallucination?. And that that hallucination has being equally as much as a universal. Perhaps that should be left to rationalism or existentialism.) As far as I have researched, the notion there exists objective knowledge that can be attained with certainty hasn't been refuted yet (i.e. Hegel, et al.). But what little I know of Husserl's phenomenology and certain existential viewpoints appears to jeopardize the aspect of

objectivity.

The model for the philosophical life that Plato presents is, for me, timeless. Perhaps the somewhat ascetic lifestyle that Plato proposed doesn't fit today's notion of philosophy as being solely an academic pursuit. But when interpreted in more general terms (as synonymous with "the examined life"), the philosophical life is the only one to live if life is at all valued.

So, with the basic themes of these passages remaining solid, all I can do is take issue with minor particulars, such as whether poetry and art should be included on the level of "Illusion," or whether the majority of mankind should be represented as chasing shadows on this level and not chasing the objects themselves on the level of "Belief". Yet these concerns are irrelevant and inconsequential.

Overall, I'm sure my understanding of Plato's ideas doesn't quite do them justice. Yet the seeds have been planted and the ramifications of his ideas become more and more evident everyday.