I've been enjoying Jamal's discussion and the discovery of 'literary easter eggs'. A different approach or angle to reading the Republic, Book 1. I'm in two minds about it. — Amity
nebulous soon — fdrake
The Glutton by A. K. Blakemore. — Jamal
Well, the Republic is full of such Easter eggs. They are hard for us to spot, but audiences in Plato’s day would have been able to. Just to give you one example, again on the very first page. When Polemarchus and Adeimantus and company run into Socrates and Glaucon, Polemarchus makes a joke. He says, “Hey Socrates, do you see how numerous we are compared to you two? You better do as we say and come to my house.”
In other words, he’s making a joke about factionalism. During times of social harmony, such jokes may be funny. But to Plato’s audiences, this is a very dark joke. Because his audience knew, as we discussed last time, that Polemarchus himself, would later become the victim of the kind of factionalism he now makes light of. Plato’s audience would also know that this road from the Piraeus back to Athens is where, decades later, the Thirty Tyrants would be overthrown in a battle (the Battle of Munychia in 403 BC) and their leaders killed.
In response to Polemarchus’ joke, Socrates says, “What if we persuade you to let us go?” To which Polemarchus jests again, saying, “Can you persuade someone who refuses to listen?”
Again, it’s easy to read past this stuff and not think much of it. But how brilliant is this setup? That one question alone, sums up the essence of factional division. How do you persuade someone who refuses to listen? Not only does this Easter egg build up a dark sense of irony, it also subtly broaches the topic of factionalism, which will figure prominently throughout the entire dialogue. There are little Easter eggs like this all over the Republic, and unfortunately we don’t have time to go through them — The Hunt for Justice - Plato's Republic I
I'm curious. Does that mean your focus has now turned away from the 'literary easter egg'? — Amity
I searched for 'literary easter egg' with regards to Plato. And found this podcast and transcript. — Amity
SOCRATES: Well, now, it is not easy to disagree with Simonides, since he is a wise and godlike man — 331e5
SOCRATES: You and I will fight as partners, then, against anyone who tells us that Simonides, Bias, Pittacus, or any of our other wise and blessedly happy men said this. — 335e7
It seems, then, that a just person has turned out to be a kind of thief. You probably got that idea from Homer. — 334a9
You and I will fight as partners, then, against anyone who tells us that Simonides, Bias, Pittacus, or any of our other wise and blessedly happy men said this. — 335e7
This connection requires textual support. Again, I see the question of origination as secondary to how it is to be understood. The truth or falsity of what is said does not depend on who might have first said it. — Fooloso4
We cannot too quickly conclude that either Simonides is not wise or if wise did not say this. It may be our own wisdom or lack of wisdom that is being called into question. — Fooloso4
But it has been brought up! Cephalus opinions about such things as justice are shaped by the poets. Consider how frequently the poets are appealed to. — Fooloso4
The other thing he cites is fear of punishment in death. Something that he never took seriously when he was younger. As far as I know we do not know anything about him prior to his old age. We do not know to what extent fear of death might have changed his behavior. — Fooloso4
CEPHALUS: What I have to say probably would not persuade the masses. But you are well aware, Socrates, that when someone thinks his end is near, he becomes frightened and concerned about things he did not fear before. It is then that the stories told about Hades, that a person who has been unjust here must pay the penalty there—stories he used to make fun of—twist his soul this way and that for fear they are true. And whether because of the weakness of old age, or because he is now closer to what happens in Hades and has a clearer view of it, or whatever it is, he is filled with foreboding and fear, and begins to calculate and consider whether he has been unjust to anyone. If he finds many injustices in his life, he often even awakes from sleep in terror, as children do, and lives in anticipation of evils to come. But someone who knows he has not been unjust has sweet good hope as his constant companion [...] — 330d
He is, by all appearances, a gentleman. To the extent that he is just, he credits his wealth. — Fooloso4
Who says that Cephalus is bad or contemptible? — Amity
It is not the case that he leaves the debate the moment he gets a difficult question. He engages with Socrates up to the point where he agrees but then he must leave to attend to religious matters. — Amity
Cephalus is perhaps haunted by any wrong doings or injustice at his hands and wants to make amends. — Amity
Context needs to be understood as to why Plato might wish to banish poets, even as he wrote in such a poetic and creative manner. — Amity
Do you intend to widen the focus beyond Book 1 ? — Amity
In Book 2, the trio begins sorting the poets into different baskets. — Paine
I don't know if it's relevant, but back then, there were no academic credentials to add weight to an idea. It was common for people to pass their own ideas off as the ideas of famous people in order to gain credibility. An elaborate example of it is the book of Daniel in the Old Testament. From the text, we can tell that this book was written much later than it purports to be. They used the name of Daniel because he was a folk-figure. He was supposed to have been a wise man, but there's no record of his existence.
Plato might have been sensitive to this issue because he himself was using Socrates as a mouthpiece. So it's possible that the exchange is the sort of thing we do when we argue over sources, but the whole issue was much more wide open. There might have also been some clever subtext to it as well. — frank
In those days, poets existed [made their living] through the patronage of the rich. They penned praises for their patrons. — L'éléphant
Still, as I recall, Socrates says he's interested in talking to him precisely because of his advanced age, and seems to hope it will be a more reflective time of life, when matters of the soul might loom larger than worldly affairs. And he crosses that interest with a question about his wealth, whether he can only spare his attention because of his financial security. (Maybe he doesn't specifically ask that, I don't remember, but he's interested in how much interest he has in money and why.) — Srap Tasmaner
I imagine when you say that, Cephalus, the masses do not accept it. On the contrary, they think you bear old age more easily, not because of the way you live, but because you are wealthy. For the wealthy, they say, have many consolations. — 329e
To me, the idea of old age being naturally a philosophical period strikes me as quite reasonable and very Greek, if I may say so. At the other end, Socrates tries to get at the (noble) young before they're too caught up in responsibilities and cares. Also natural and reasonable, in the same way.
By "Greek" I mean that obsession with stages of growth and development, progression toward embodying your deepest nature, that stuff. — Srap Tasmaner
His age and circumstances allow him to be more interested in less worldly matters, like talking with Socrates, which won't make him or his family any richer. — Srap Tasmaner
Yes. I look forward to hearing more. As yet, I don't understand enough to participate with any confidence. — Amity
Thank you for starting this discussion. An exceptional OP with clear thoughts, quotes and sources. — Amity
My first attempt at reading Plato's Republic was some time ago. I think on the OnlinePhilosophyClub site. Even with help from Fooloso4 and an online course, I found it perplexing and gave up on it. — Amity
Maybe setting up a guilt by association? The wealthy pay the piper and he plays their tune. So the poet is just a tool. — Benkei
Or undermining any claims to authority with respect to wealthy men and poets alike. — Benkei
Other than that, I've got nothing. — Benkei
'animals' seem to cover everthing other than insects and possibly some inverterbrates — Wayfarer
That made me wonder about the criteria for being accepted? I didn't have to go through that process and can't find information on 'how to join'... — Amity
The Philosophy Forum is now invitation-only, but anyone who wants to take part in philosophical discussions and who can follow the site guidelines is very welcome to join.
If you'd like us to send you an invitation, send an email to infoatthephilosophyforumdotcom telling us something about yourself, why you'd like to join, and what you're interested in.
Fictions by Jorge Luis Borges — javi2541997
No, mate. I don't participate in guiri things. — javi2541997
I don’t know if we’re safe and sound yet — Jamal