Soho, New York, in the heat of the summer, is quite an experience; moving among the studios and creative outlets. I felt somewhat like Socrates might have felt when I returned to what a non-artist might consider a more proper environment, suburban Connecticut After an extended leave, I found myself bombarded with questions, insinuations, and even insults, from those around me, about the so-called "artiste". The absurd concept of the artist as dangerous and eccentric thrives among the uneducated just as id did regarding the philosophers in Socrates' day. Just as Socrates justified the usefulness of philosophers to Adeimantus, I've tried to reason with those who question the usefulness of the artist in our society. Socrates stated that those who failed to make use of the philosophers were to blame. Socrates society, in general, did not know how to put the knowledge of the philosophers to good use. I see the same mistake being made by the public today concerning the "art world". There is much knowledge, talent, and insight being offered to the world but the public is not willing to actively seek and examine it.

They are willing to settle for a position lacking in knowledge. The most damage done in any field is by those who pretend to practice it. Socrates was plagued by charlatans and sophists who preached knowledge by their own ignorance. They claimed to have held vast truths. Socrates openly admitted to his own lack of knowledge in order to allow others to examine what they consider to be true. Much of the same damage can be done to the arts by those who pose as artists without the commitment of being one. Unfortunately, many art communities are plagued with a few charlatans of their own for notoriety sake.

As the philosopher must rid himself of the good things in life that distract him, so too, must the artist. The proper environment is essential in the cultivation of philosophers and artists Good philosopher traits lean toward the baser, non-societal pursuits in life. They believe in the purity of life as a grand quest for knowledge To philosophers in Socrates' day, it was important to surround themselves with other knowledgeable and intelligent people for artists today, the same applies; for how can one learn of the past, present, and future without cultivating relationships full of learning opportunities.

Education is the key to dissolving all prejudices. Socrates believed that to remove the prejudices against the philosophers the public would have to be educated concerning them. punishments and inducements were forgone for lack of effectiveness- Persuasion was used instead. The prejudices against the philosophers as eccentric and dangerous were overcome-by Socrates allowing his peers to examine the existence of philosophers. Possibly, the same could be done today concerning the art world. Far true acceptance there must be knowledge.

Socrates' analogies played a key role in his acceptance as a true philosopher He brought his ideas down to a level are like the sun. Knowledge and truth are like the good. The sun makes objects visible to the eye while the good makes things understandable to the soul.

Socrates continued his analysis of the good with his second analogy, the Divided Line. In this he examined how some things are more real than others. The divided line is a scale to measure the reality of things in comparison to others. Socrates began by creating two realms, one of the intelligible world and the other of the sensible world, separated by the divided line.

The intelligible world, above the line, was formed by knowledge with certainty (deduction). It contained two subsections of knowledge; intelligence, positioned just below the good, and reason, found lust below intelligence. This realm is made up of a priori knowledge, knowledge logically prior to experience. It is also the realm of being. The sensible world, below the line, was formed by knowledge with probability (induction). It contained two subsections of belief; opinion, below reason, and illusion, the farthest from the good. This realm is made up of empirical knowledge, knowledge that must actually be experienced. It is also the realm of becoming.

The final analogy proves to be the most conclusive, for me, of all the selections read. Socrates created a myth for the examination of the realization of knowledge. The analogy begins with several prisoners chained, since childhood, to a cave wall. The darkness of the cave had some reprieve from the fire set behind the prisoners. There was a walkway with a curtain between the prisoners and the upper world. The fire cast shadows of activities on the walkway above the cave an the wall. These shadows were believed to be reality to the prisoners for they had never witnessed anything to the contrary.

One man was fortunate enough to liberate himself from the darkness of the cave. The light of the upper world was painful to his eyes. The prisoner could no longer see the shadows on the walls through the blinding light of day. His secure realities disappeared with his eyesight. He was initially distrustful of the actual objects that he witnessed, for his beliefs in their shadows were very strong.

Once in the light for a time, the prisoners eyes slowly began to adjust to the upper world. Over more time and with each new experience, the belief in the shadows began to fade. Soon the prisoner's eyes were strong enough to look at reflections, objects, and even such things as stars and moons. With even more time and effort, his eyes could look toward the sun without being blinded.

The prisoner began to pity his fellow cellmates that were left behind in the cave. He found life impossible to live in the darkness. He decided to return to the cave and save the others from their life of despair. As the escaped prisoner returned to the underworld, he stumbled horribly in the darkness. His eyes were accustomed to the light from above. He was ridiculed by his former companions for venturing above. They felt that the light had ruined his eyes and thus they had no use for him.

Socrates created the myth to clarify to his listeners the difference between the word of sensation and the world of intelligence. The cave is the world of sensation and opinion. Inside its walls, the inhabitants based their beliefs on illusions and opinions formed from misconceptions. The world outside is the intelligible world of knowledge and truth. The prisoner was forced to open his eyes and witness reality. The gradual acceptance of light into his eyes is likened to the ascent of the mind into enlightenment. His return to save the others from their lacking in knowledge and reality was rejected for he no longer was accepted by his peers. They, in a sense, had no use for his enlightened mind, just as Socrates' peers had no use for the enlightened mind of the philosopher.

Falling back on my likening the artist to the philosopher, I feel I can strengthen the position, in my own mind at least, after examining the analogies of the good. Many people view artists from the cave. They see the external qualities such as style of dress or hair yet fail to reach the internal qualities of knowledge and insight. They hide behind a curtain of prejudice thus forming illusions and misconceptions . If people were forced to open their eyes to the light of knowledge on the subject of all types of art maybe they might begin to understand its creators a little better. To me, there is nothing sadder than the dismissal of an artist because he/she does something that is different from society's general standards. Society does not know how to make good use of its artists. How can the general public accept something they know nothing about. Education is the key.

It's time to jump off the soap box and into metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics, or to put it more simply, reality, truth, and goodness. Plate created a theory of forms. He divided reality into two parts, universals and particulars. Universals are perfect, unchanging concepts that are neither spatial or temporal. An example of a universal is triangularity. One can draw a triangle on a piece of paper and proceed to destroy the paper. The universal of triangularity is not destroyed along with the paper. Universals are known in the mind not seen by the eyes.

Particulars are combinations of universals that can be altered, approximated, and destroyed. The same example of the drawn triangle can be applied. The triangle can be rendered in any size, with any tool, and on any surface. Different universals can be combined to make it so. The concept of triangularity remains the same yet the particular triangle. Seen by the eye, can go through limitless alterations in the physical world.

I think Plate held reality to be an attempt to embody the form of the good. In the passages, the philosopher seemed to deal with reality as knowledge striving to reach the ultimate height, the good. Plate required that the sensible world be differentiated from the intelligible world by the divided line. The sensible world, below the line, consisted of particulars, principles and laws put to use, and most importantly, appearances, The intelligible world, above the divided line, was concerned with universals, essential character, pure ideas, reason, laws and principles, and reality. Reality is understanding of the mind while belief is the persuasion of it.

The form of the good gives knowledge its truth. "it is the cause of knowledge and truth."

To see the form of the good one must first clear away all opinions and replace them with truths. The form of the good is pure being. It is the most perfect of all beings and the source of all that is true and real. The form of the good is also referred to as the highest possible abstract universal followed by identity and difference. What is good is concerned with ethics and how one is to live one's life. The Socratic Paradox, "All people pursue the good to the best of their understanding", does not readily define the good that should be pursued but leaves it up to the individual to decide on whether it be pleasure or knowledge.

My trying to contradict Plate would be like attempting to fight in a real war with only a squirt gun for protection. I do not have the knowledge to do mental battle with Socrates but I can say that I have more than I started with. At first reading I had Plato pegged for a rich woman's Sunday brunch topic. There was no way that anything he wrote could possibly apply to myself, a product of the twentieth century. I was wrong. Granted, I may not have understood everything perfectly, but the SUN does not hurt eyes so much anymore.