ESSAY ON PLATO'S 'REPUBLIC'

"The True Navigator" and "The Sun, Divided Line, Cave"

Following is an essay of comparison, analysis and evaluation (interjected with my own thoughts and views) on the philosopher Plato's passages "The True Navigator" and "The Sun, Divided Line, Cave"

The main theme in "The True Navigator" is the corruption of the Athenian political system in Plato's time and its solution seen by Plato as the use of philosophers, seekers of understanding, as Rulers. Plato also portrays his feelings of helplessness with the above cause as demonstrated through the Navigator analogy.

The Navigator analogy's Captain (Ruler) is physically stronger than the Sailors of his ship, but not very intelligent. The Sailors (politicians) seeks to control the Captain through flattery and deceit, and praise highly anyone who can. All are seeking to control the ship for their own self-benefit not that of everyone on board. This ship's Navigator (philosopher) who studies the stars, winds, etc, is regarded as useless because he doesn't follow the fashion of the moment, but looks forward as to what storms may lie ahead unseen and would rather control the ship for the future vs.. the current. The Sailors (Politicians) want benefits of the moment for themselves vs.. possible sacrifices for this ship's (Society) future as seen by the Navigator -- so the Navigator is useless to the ship for the time, and those who choose not to use him.

"True lover of reality, will not rest content with each set of particulars which opinion takes for reality but uses his intellect to try and grasp the essence/universal of each thing as it really is." -- Plato, p.284

Philosophy is not dangerous in itself it is the way the philosophical mind may be turned or those that maintain the disguise of 'philosophers' for its high reputation, and then abuse its nature for their own purpose.

Courage, greatness of mind, quickness to learn, a good memory, self-discipline are characteristics innate for a true philosopher and having these high qualities may in itself be the downfall of the philosopher. High qualities will come off worse in the current corrupt political environment than the qualities of an ordinary person. If these qualities are turned the wrong way since early life through popular praise and public opinion this type of "philosopher" will learn to appease the masses through the "mass" own opinions of right and wrong; not what is necessarily the true knowledge of good/right. And so the masses are really controlling the Ruler. It is this corrupted or disguised "philosopher" who is dangerous, or as dangerous as the masses that control him. The true philosopher will see this control for what it is and shy away from the political to live in peace and safety from those who would harm one who is different.

The Min theme of "The Sun, Divided Line, Cave" is how the philosopher should be educated, and does this type of intellectual education actually hinder the philosopher from being a political Ruler of his fellow man. Plato states that the ultimate knowledge is Knowledge of the Good/the ultimate universal from where all other lower universals, beliefs, opinions can be evaluated realistically. Also, the highest form of knowledge should be a person's own -- the intellectual ability to think problems through and not accept others' knowledge as your own. The ordinary man does not have the patience or intellect for this time-consuming learning process and so doesn't the philosophical education set philosophers apart from and render them useless to the masses?

Plato -- "I will tell you about something which seems to be a child of the good." Student -- "Owe us the account of the parent." Plato -- "It’s a debt I wish I could pay in full,-take care I don't cheat you by forging on the interest due on this account." -- p.305 Plato believes a person can only reach the Form of. the Good through trial and error by his/her own intellect and questioning. He then proceeds to lead his students in exactly this way through the Sun, Divided Line, Cave analogies.

Society's Rulers should be guardians of what is right and valuable, but can only know this when they know what their goodness consists of. Knowledge of the Form of the Good is where all things derive their usefulness and value.

The Sun and Divided Line describe what the Good is and how to evaluate between Particulars (Belief, Illusion) and Universals (Reason, Intelligence) -- or constant change vs. permanence. The Gave reiterates Plato's view as in the Navigator that society as a whole is interested in fashion (the moment) and the philosopher concerned with, what will happen 4 moves later in this game of chess? (the future). What is best for the whole vs. what is best for the part.

The Sun illustrates there are 2 types of reality and reality is a matter of varying degrees at any point in a person's life, depending on the intellectual study the person has put into Truth and Reality at that time.

When the mind's eye is fixed on objects illuminated by Truth and Reality (permanent and unchanging) it understands and knows them. When the mind's eye is fixed on change and decay, it can only form opinions and even those opinions will change.

In the cave there are prisoners, legs and necks fastened since birth to look straight ahead (Athenian society mass rule training individuals from childhood to assume the public opinion as their own). Men walk behind carrying objects and casting shadows on wall in view of prisoners (changing political opinions at various stages in time and how their change can be predicted as first one than the other fail and are tried again). A prisoner is let loose and lead to fire where he can see properly the objects themselves which produced the shadows, but the light would hurt his eyes and wouldn't it be easier to go back to what he already knew? (the beginning of philosophical education). Next the prisoner would have to be forcibly dragged up the steep slope at the mouth of the cave into the sunlight. The former prisoner wouldn't he able to see a thing clearly that he was told was real. And here is where the philosophical education continues -- no one can be told what is real, they must gain their own knowledge of Reality through intellectual exercise and its varying degrees).-, just as the former prisoner would first look at shadows of objects, the objects themselves in daylight, sky at night, and lastly the Sun itself (the Form of the Good).

Among the prisoners (Society) there are prizes for the ability to remember the order of passing shadows (Political Opinions) and to divine future appearances (appease the Society). The former prisoner (Philosopher) would not want to return to the Cave (mass rule) of shadows to be ridiculed or even put to death for being different for he knows that he will be blinded by the darkness of opinions at first upon his return. The prisoners (Society) will not want to be brought to the light as it is easier to rely on the familiar than experience the new, besides it would be very hard work to understand something new.

"But knowledge, something which never loses its power, but whose effects are useful and salutary or again useless and harmful according to the direction in which it is turned." (Plato p.322 The capacity for knowledge is innate in everyone but must be nurtured and guided in the right direction to understand the Form of the Good.

Plato believes it is unsafe for the philosopher to become active in the Athenian political society at this time -- either corruption or death itself at the hands of corruption will do the philosopher in. His position seems to be more for trying to educate much of the mass to true philosophy before that the common people could relate to. He allowed them the luxury of examined thought. Through his teachings, the public of Socrates' time moved toward a more educated society. He added depth to the elements of the Greek Ideal of spirit, appetite, and reason. I feel that Socrates gave the public more skills to reason with.

In the first analogy, the Navigator, Socrates tried to explain how an uneducated society dismisses knowledge which not its own. The scene is set on a mutiny vessel. The crew had formed small power groups in order to depose the navigator and steer the ship themselves. The crew had no use far the navigator for he had needs and knowledge different from theirs. The navigator was skilled in watching the skies, charting the stars, and working with abstract ideas and laws. He had no use for power, unlike the crew. The power groups were not skilled in the art of navigation and did not feel that they should learn them. They rationalized their lack of knowledge by convincing themselves that it was impossible to acquire the knowledge of stargazing, that everyman has a innate talent for it.

It is easy enough, in this scene, to see how Socrates has placed the philosopher into a context the public could visualize. The navigator is much like the philosophers Socrates defended. Because the navigator had different needs then those of his crew, he was not accepted by them. The navigator (as philosopher) had educational skills that were not common to the crew (as general public). The crew attempted to compensate far their lack of knowledge by trying to attain control physically of what they lacked control over mentally.

The second analogy, the man training the beast, is a more subtle comparison to the philosopher. The man studied the needs and wants of the beast. When the beast growled, the man reacted. What pleased the beast was considered to be good while what annoyed the beast was bad. The beast did not operate on reason but an its physical passions. The man responded to the beast but did not really know how to get it to do what was right, for the beast had no rational accounts of any situations.

A comparison could be drawn between the beast and public opinion. Though I did not see the connection at first, I can now see what Socrates was trying to illustrate, if one chooses to see the man as a philosopher one can examine how Socrates related the philosopher to the general public. The philosopher studied the public, its needs and its wants. If the philosopher makes the public his master than he subjects himself to its approval. When the public agreed with the philosopher he was considered good. When they disagreed with him he was thought of as bad. The public does not form its beliefs on rational knowledge but on its immediate needs and satisfaction. The philosopher responds to the public but cannot train it because the public generally does not operate upon the rules of reason.

There is no need for the philosopher to give up on the power seekers and the impassioned public. People will eventually listen to reason if approached in the proper way. Socrates attempted to show the common people what he meant be philosophy. He allowed them to examine the philosopher's characteristics, habits and personality. In essence, Socrates gave them a way to examine knowledge more closely.

After Socrates had examined the role of the philosopher, he asked a simple question of his peers, "What is the highest good?" "Ordinary people think that pleasure is the good, while the more sophisticated think it is knowledge." (page 303). Goodness cannot be seen by the eye but is something known. Goodness is a quality shared by many things. The good cannot be readily defined so one must accept the offspring of the good, knowledge.

Socrates spoke of goodness as a universal quality. In the passage "the Sun/Divided Line/Cave" he focused his attention on the two forms of reality; the particulars seen by the eye and the universals known by the mind. He dealt extensively with the concept of the degrees of reality. Finally, Socrates allows one to witness an ascent of the mind toward enlightenment.

As his first analogy on goodness, Socrates offers up the sun. The explanation began with a physical description of how the eye sees light. Light is a condition necessary for seeing, yet light alone is not seeing. He expanded on this thought by making a comparison. The sun is necessary for sight, as good is necessary for knowledge. Light and sight.