.

@Paine

It seems the thread is turning towards poetry and Homer's Iliad. I'm enjoying it but not too sure where we're heading.

Is it about a poetic continuation in Plato? He isn't breaking away from poetry in any radical sense. The poets' influence seems clear. There is intertextuality.
I feel like I'm missing a deeper connection. Help?

Re: Emily Wilson's translation of the Iliad. Some interesting views:

Emily Wilson's 5 crucial decisions she made in her Iliad translation
https://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-forum/viewtopic.php?t=72989

Emily Wilson's Translation of The Iliad
https://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-forum/viewtopic.php?t=72905

My focus remains on where Plato has taken us in Book 10 after showing the poets in a new light. To that end, I am trying to get a better handle on the version of Er that Plato tells. Getting a clear view of the three daughters is difficult because there are other stories than those given by Hesiod who names them with different parents than spoken of in Er. I will keep looking around.

It does seem safe to say that the connection between 'spinning a thread' and mortality was well established in Homer. One example:

Nor shall he meanwhile suffer any evil or harm, until he sets foot upon his own land; but thereafter he shall suffer whatever fate and the dread spinners spun with their thread for him at his birth, when his mother bore him. — Homer, Odessey, Book 7, 193, translated by A. T. Murray

The plural spinners are κλῶθές in Greek. That matches the name of Clotho, the middle sister, in the Er story.

The discussion of Homer translations is interesting. But I need to stay focused on the architecture of mortality and a surprise plumbing malfunction.

It does seem safe to say that the connection between 'spinning a thread' and mortality was well established in Homer. One example: — Paine

OK. I think I begin to see what you're getting at. Plural sisters acting in unison.
Fate encircling the life and death of body and mind.

What do you mean by the 'architecture of mortality' ?

Is this a daimonic determination of destiny. A web being spun.
I've read that:

Homer speaks of Fate (moira) in the singular as an impersonal power and sometimes makes its functions interchangeable with those of the Olympian gods. From the time of the poet Hesiod (8th century BC) on, however, the Fates were personified as three very old women who spin the threads of human destiny. Their names were Clotho (Spinner), Lachesis (Allotter), and Atropos (Inflexible). Clotho spun the “thread” of human fate, Lachesis dispensed it, and Atropos cut the thread (thus determining the individual’s moment of death).  — Britannica - Fate - Greek and Roman mythology

So, the connection to Plato's Myth of Er is a structure of morality.
After death, judgement day.
The moral, the good and the just are rewarded > Heaven
The immoral, the bad and unjust are punished > Hell
But that's not the end of it...
If you believe the myth.

Be a wise, little philosopher, or else ?!

The discussion of Homer translations is interesting. But I need to stay focused on the architecture of mortality and a surprise plumbing malfunction. — Paine

:smile: That's fine. I was just going with the flow...

Is this a daimonic determination of destiny. A web being spun. — Amity

The role of the daimon is not as clearly set out as the powers that make a life a certain length. The most terrible idea of the spinning thread is that much is determined at birth.

Socrates is presented as receiving instruction from his daimon at particular times. Those moments are not presented as unavoidable fate. It sounds more like thinking for oneself.

Socrates is presented as receiving instruction from his diamon at particular times. Those moments are not presented as unavoidable fate. It sounds more like thinking for oneself. — Paine

Socrates had a daimonion. This was an inner voice which gave Socrates warnings. If the daimonion was silent, then this was taken as approval.

Like an inner advisor, I suppose it could be interpreted as talking/thinking to yourself.
Perhaps an inner dialogue...asking questions, awaiting response. From the universe?
Or an auditory hallucination!

There are the accounts of Socrates' daimon giving him warnings. In Phaedo, the voice said he should set poetry to music. Plato shows him as withdrawn from others before going to the party in Symposium. Plato keeps pointing to these personal experiences but does not turn them into a single story. They seem to vary as much as the different myths that are used throughout his works.

That is a contrast to Xenophon who does speak of 'conversations' with a divine agent in his Apology.

As for introducing ‘new divinities,’ how could I be guilty of that merely in asserting that a god’s voice is made manifest to me indicating what I should do? Surely those who take their omens from the cries of birds and the utterances of humans form their judgments on ‘voices.’ Will any one dispute either that thunder utters its ‘voice’ or that it is an omen of the greatest moment? Does not the very priestess who sits on the tripod at Pytho divulge the god’s will through a ‘voice’? But more than that, in regard to the god’s foreknowledge of the future and his forewarning of it to whomever he wishes, these are the same terms, I assert, that all people use and credit. The only difference between them and me is that whereas they call the sources of their forewarning ‘birds,’ ‘utterances,’ ‘chance meetings,’ ‘prophets,’ I call mine a ‘divine’ thing, and I think that in using such a term I am speaking with greater truth and piety than those who ascribe the gods’ power to birds. That I do not lie against the god I have this further proof: I have revealed to many of my friends the counsels which the god has given me, and in no instance has the event shown that I was mistaken.” — Xenophon, Apology, 12, translated by Marchant and Todd

No court reporters at the time so verification of who is closer to what was said is not possible.

There are the accounts of Socrates' daimon giving him warnings. In Phaedo, the voice said he should set poetry to music. Plato shows him as withdrawn from others before going to the party in Symposium. Plato keeps pointing to these personal experiences but does not turn them into a single story. They seem to vary as much as the different myths that are used throughout his works. — Paine

I wonder if it makes much difference to talk of Socrates' daimon or daimonion. Perhaps he has both.
I can't recall where he explicitly talks of either. I do remember previous discussions.
From @Fooloso4's Phaedo thread - https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/10914/platos-phaedo/p1

Socrates is doing something he has never done before, writing. He explains it this way:

often in my past life the same dream had visited me, now in one guise, now in another, but always saying the same thing: "Socrates,'' it said, "make music and practise it." Now in earlier times I used to assume that the dream was urging and telling me to do exactly what I was doing: as people shout encouragement to runners, so the dream was telling me to do the very thing that I was doing, to make music, since philosophy is the greatest music. (61a)

He continues:

I reflected that a poet should, if he were really going to be a poet, make stories rather than arguments, and being no teller of tales myself, I therefore used some I had ready to hand …(61b)

Several things need to be noted. First, he calls philosophy the greatest music. Second, he claims that he is not a storyteller. But here he tells a story about a dream from his past life. That it is just a story will become clear.

Unlike Socrates, Plato did write and he is a very capable storyteller, capable of the greatest music. His dialogues are akin to the work of the poets’ plays. What we will hear are not simply arguments but stories. The question arises as to whether this is a comedy or tragedy. Phaedo says that he was not overcome by pity and that Socrates seemed happy (58e) Phaedo reports feeling an unusual blend of pleasure and pain. (59a). As we shall see, opposites will play an important part in Socrates’ stories. — Fooloso4

[emphasis added]

Plato shows him as withdrawn from others before going to the party in Symposium. — Paine

Yes. I remember reading this and wondering about his mental health. What with his daimonion and now this odd behaviour; his absence being described as a 'fit'.

I turned round, but Socrates was nowhere to be seen; and I had to explain that he had been with me a moment before, and that I came by his invitation to the supper.

You were quite right in coming, said Agathon; but where is he himself?

He was behind me just now, as I entered, he said, and I cannot think what has become of him.
Go and look for him, boy, said Agathon, and bring him in; and do you, Aristodemus, meanwhile take the place by Eryximachus.

The servant then assisted him to wash, and he lay down, and presently another servant came in and reported that our friend Socrates had retired into the portico of the neighbouring house. 'There he is fixed,' said he, 'and when I call to him he will not stir.'

How strange, said Agathon; then you must call him again, and keep calling him.

Let him alone, said my informant; he has a way of stopping anywhere and losing himself without any reason. I believe that he will soon appear; do not therefore disturb him.
Well, if you think so, I will leave him, said Agathon. And then, turning to the servants, he added, 'Let us have supper without waiting for him. Serve up whatever you please, for there is no one to give you orders; hitherto I have never left you to yourselves. But on this occasion imagine that you are our hosts, and that I and the company are your guests; treat us well, and then we shall commend you.'

After this, supper was served, but still no Socrates; and during the meal Agathon several times expressed a wish to send for him, but Aristodemus objected; and at last when the feast was about half over—for the fit, as usual, was not of long duration—Socrates entered. Agathon, who was reclining alone at the end of the table, begged that he would take the place next to him; that 'I may touch you,' he said, 'and have the benefit of that wise thought which came into your mind in the portico, and is now in your possession; for I am certain that you would not have come away until you had found what you sought.' — Gutenberg - Plato's Symposium

[emphasis added]

Plato keeps pointing to these personal experiences but does not turn them into a single story. They seem to vary as much as the different myths that are used throughout his works. — Paine

Yes. The variations seem to suit the different contexts, audience and subject matter. The Symposium is one of my favourites. Party Perspectives on Love.

The End of Book 10.
This is a story. But not just any old story.

And so, Glaucon, his story was saved and not lost; and it would save us, too, if we were persuaded by it, since we would safely cross the river Lethe with our souls undefiled. But if we are persuaded by me, we will believe that the soul is immortal and able to endure every evil and also every good, and always hold to the upward path, practicing justice with wisdom every way we can, so that we will be friends to ourselves and to the gods, both while we remain here on Earth and when we receive the rewards of justice, and go around like victors in the games collecting prizes; and so both in this life and on the thousand-year journey we have described, we will fare well. — The Republic - 621c

Who or what can persuade us?
Arguments, stories or arguments within stories...stories within arguments.
To fare well.

Yes. I remember reading this and wondering about his mental health. What with his daimonion and now this odd behaviour; his absence being described as a 'fit'. — Amity

It is a completely normal thing to have. Just shunned in modern society. Plenty of people hear voices and live perfectly normal lives benefiting from these voices too.

All kinds of behaviour are shunned in any society. I am not unduly concerned re Socrates. Simply noting his behaviour as told. And wondering. I think sometimes he needed to be alone with his thoughts. Perhaps, this was a way of preparing himself...

How helpful or harmful are the 'voices' we hear in our heads? Are they our own reflections or something inserted by 'God' or any other being - a daimon? What do they tell us to do? Can we control them. Do we think of them as a guide we rely on? Or are they a result of brain/body chemistry? Dreams. Daydreams. Imagination. Whatever. They are all mental.

The problems start with delusions...and that's a different story...

I wonder if it makes much difference to talk of Socrates' daimon or daimonion. Perhaps he has both.
I can't recall where he explicitly talks of either. — Amity

It seems it does make a difference. With explanations and excerpts related to the daemonion:

In some of his myths, Plato, our chief source of information (along with Xenophon) on the daimonion, also mentioned a tutelary daimon (something like a guardian angel) that accompanies human souls (Timaeus 90c–e, Phaedo 107d–108c, Republic 10.617e, 10.620d–e).
However Plato does not associate this daimon with Socrates in particular or directly imply it is the source of Socrates' special sense. While the two words are etymologically related, daimonion conveys a more general sense than that associated with daimones, which are entities. The difference is analogous to the distinction we might in English make between "the spiritual" and a "spirit [...]

there are practical reasons for us today to study Socrates' daimonion. As each one may readily observe, in the course of any day we frequently experience inner 'voices' of doubt, caution and hesitation...

This presents us with a task of discernment — often difficult: should we act as originally planned, or heed the voice of warning. And on what basis do we decide? [...]

...listing excerpts from ancient philosophical literature on the subject. These are supplied, grouped by authors, oldest to most recent. To further aid personal study, a bibliography of main ancient and modern sources is follows. — Socrates and the Daimonion

This discussion was started by @Fooloso4 to look into how much value Book 10 might add to the whole work.

I think its value is pretty clear. With the final reflection on the Myth of Er, we can see the importance of poetic creativity in questions of philosophy.

As @Fooloso4 said here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15484/poets-and-tyrants-in-the-republic-book-i/p1

The question of persuasion and its means is of central importance. On the one hand, it is behind both the arguments of Thrasymachus and the other sophists as well as those of Socrates and the philosophers, and, on the other, of the poet’s stories of men and gods. The stories of the poets are an inherited means of persuasion manifest as belief. From an early age children are told the poet’s stories.

He attempts to persuade Glaucon and Adeimantus that being just is itself a benefit, both to oneself and to others. To this end, he acts the poet, weaving stories together with arguments.

Thanks @Fooloso4. Take care. Go well :sparkle:

and now this odd behaviour; — Amity

Socrates may have been "catching forty winks" before that dinner party. If I remember correctly, he ended up staying up all night drinking. Alternatively, you might consider that since he was described to be less drunk than the others, after that all night drinking, he may have been intentionally avoiding the pre-dinner cocktails, shots, or whatever was the custom. Those are real kickers to one's inebriation.

. I am not unduly concerned re Socrates. Simply noting his behaviour as told. And wondering. I think sometimes he needed to be alone with his thoughts. Perhaps, this was a way of preparing himself... — Amity

Consider, every minute aspect of description, written by Plato, has importance, and small things mentioned earlier can develop more importance later. And, the association between the earlier and the later is usually not mentioned, leaving it up to the reader to draw the link (deduce causation). A significant part of the dialogue concerns etiquette (notice "beauty" is the property of institutions), and Socrates is a bit of a social misfit. If you are socially inept (as I am), you may find some good party strategies in this dialogue.

I am not sure how to talk about these different experiences in a modern context.

In the Republic, the most repeated ratio is the individual soul being the measure of what happens in a City.

Socrates becomes a voice in the City like his internal voice works on himself.