[Something Inside] So Strong - Labi Siffre



The higher you build your barriers
The taller I become
The further you take my rights away
The faster I will run
You can deny me
You can decide to turn your face away
No matter, 'cause there's

[chorus] Something inside so strong
I know that I can make it
Though you're doing me wrong, so wrong
You thought that my pride was gone
Oh no, something inside so strong
Oh, something inside so strong

The more you refuse to hear my voice
The louder I will sing
You hide behind walls of Jericho
Your lies will come tumbling
Deny my place in time
You squander wealth that's mine
My light will shine so brightly
It will blind you, 'cause there's

[chorus]

Brothers and sisters
When they insist we're just not good enough
When we know better
Just look 'em in the eyes and say
"We're gonna do it anyway"
We're gonna do it anyway

[chorus]
Brothers and sisters
When they insist we're just not good enough
When we know better
Just look 'em in the eyes and say
"We're gonna do it anyway"
We're gonna do it anyway
We're gonna do it anyway
We're gonna do it anyway

Because there's something inside so strong (something inside so strong)
I know that I can make it (I can make it)
Though you're doing me, so wrong
You thought that my pride was gone
Oh no (oh no), something inside so strong

Something inside so strong
I know that I can make it (make it, make it)
Though you're doing me, so wrong (doing me wrong)
You thought that my pride was gone
Oh no (oh no), something inside so strong
Oh, something inside so strong
Oh, something inside so strong
Ooh-ooh, something inside so strong

Songwriters: Labi Siffre. For non-commercial use only.

I don't know if I'll be posting anything here anyway. — Jamal

That's what I thought. Our loss. Weeping uncontrollably :sad: :broken: :cry:
Novels are good for the soul :halo:

can't do everything at once, no matter how much you badger me. — Jamal

:lol: So, you will be getting back on the Book 1 horse soon, then ?
Missing ya' :groan:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15484/poets-and-tyrants-in-the-republic-book-i/p1

We will have to agree to disagree that there can only be one meaning: per you saying: "I see only one river and one meaning or understanding, given the context." — Paine

Perhaps we need a negotiator? Haven't heard anything from @Jamal or any previous participants for a while... @Benkei @Srap Tasmaner ?

I am not saying I am correct. It is my interpretation.There are clearly other interpretations of the reading, no?

My beef with the translators is that a quality of the stream is overlooked in the interest of giving it only one function. — Paine

What is the quality of the stream?

In the context of the story of Er, however, the stream is known in our lives by its effects. — Paine

What do you mean by this?
If the function of the river Lethe is to forget any previous life, then how do we know its effects?

Why would the function of drinking its water be to provide 'carelessness' or 'heedlessness' ?

What is the connection between heedlessness and forgetfulness?
— Fooloso4

I would not attach too much specific importance to these words. — Metaphysician Undercover

I think it is important to note the words used in translation and interpretation.
As already mentioned, I think the meaning matters as to the best fit in the context and circumstances. I won't rehash my view again.

These are generally emotion based concepts, and the words for feelings are used in a variety of ways... — Metaphysician Undercover

I'm not sure what you mean by 'emotion based concepts'.
Is it that one can be seen as 'bad', the other 'good'?
So, I prefer 'forgetfulness' to 'heedlessness' or 'carelessness'. Other translators or readers prefer 'carelessness' which in my view has a negative connotation.

The Lethe is a symbol in Greek mythology. Not just a word.
So, it is important to understand its meaning, in the context of Book 10.

The words 'thirst' and 'hunger' are interesting to consider.

Don't they show both a need and a desire?
They are signs or symptoms of both body and mind, arguably on the verge of unhappiness, dehydration or malnutrition should they not be properly assessed and action taken. This has nothing to do with 'virtue', rather practical wisdom.

If the hunger is for more than is necessary then I agree that can be problematic in terms of morality. Greed and Gluttony being 'vicious'.

This combines all of Plato's 3 parts of the soul: reason, spirited emotion and appetitive desire.

It seems that reason should be given the higher power but is this 'just'?
Isn't desire one of the main motivating factors. The desire to be healthy and well.
And fear - or concern - is the other. It is prudent not to die, if it can be helped.

The worry of excess is understandable. It could be argued that there can be an excess of cold, objective reason to the detriment of the spirited soul.

Passion and learning in the arts and literature are still being judged as having lower value than philosophy.

Following the discussion of Book 10, Plato's Republic: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/940663
and exploring Greek Mythology: https://mythicalencyclopedia.com/lethe/

Lethe, the River of Forgetfulness - the Chronotype project

Having fun in Book 10 of Plato's Republic. Yes, I am! :cool:

Discussing the river Lethe - and its meaning. Is it about forgetfulness or carelessness? This has led to an exploration of Greek mythology. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/940663

Embedded in a fascinating site which shows 'Lethe' in different contexts, including Art and Music:
https://mythicalencyclopedia.com/lethe/
The sound of Lethe.

Lethe, the River of Forgetfulness · Chronotope Project · Jeffrey Ericson Allen

It is two different Greek words. I meant to say that with my first comment on the passage and now realize that I did not introduce enough background to make that clear. The wiki is correct when it says: "Also known as the Amelēs potamos (river of unmindfulness)" — Paine

Thank you for the clarification. The words can be synonyms, the change of meaning is a choice of the translator. The introduction of ambiguity is not helpful. English synonyms for 'forgetfulness', depending on context: https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/forgetfulness.html

The name of a river.
— Amity

I wonder if this aspect is why the two separate meanings got collapsed into one (by some). The reference to the "plain of Lethe" is not given primacy over the "river of carelessness" in the text. The different meanings are related to their effects. Looking at how the mythology is developed; the mapping of the underworld follows the story of the origins of the quality being described. — Paine

Perhaps. But I don't see that 2 different meanings have been collapsed into one. As explained, I see only one river and one meaning or understanding, given the context.

Why would the plain of Lethe be given primacy? Isn't it only part of the journey description and a reason for the 'thirst'? A barren place of hot desolation? 'through burning and choking and terrible heat, for it was empty of trees and earthly vegetation' 621a.
Perhaps in the contrast we can see the river as some kind of oasis. A place of relief. From whence the souls can refresh and rid themselves of the hellishness they have suffered? Forgetting.

Yes. I agree it is interesting to consider the mythology and the mapping.

I wonder if the insistence of the river with a name comes from poets such as Virgil where the role of Lethe is located in the afterlife (and pre-life) and has no role amongst the living. — Paine

Why do you use the word 'insistence'?
I found an interesting site which references and describes the Lethe in different contexts. Symbolism and significance. Literature - Modern Interpretations - Art and Music. Philosophical perspectives.

Lethe: The Spirit and River of Forgetfulness

Lethe has been referenced in many classical literary works. In the Odyssey, Homer describes Lethe as a river that the dead drink from to forget their former lives. The poet Virgil also mentions Lethe in his epic poem Aeneid, where he describes the river as a way for the dead to forget their past lives before being reincarnated. Additionally, in Plato’s Phaedo, Socrates describes death as a release from the body and a return to the realm of pure thought, where the soul can be purified and drink from the river of forgetfulness. [...]

The river itself is often described as having a milky-white color and is said to be shallow enough to wade through. The water is believed to have a sweet taste, and those who drink from it are said to experience complete forgetfulness. The river is also known as the “river of unmindfulness” and is believed to wash away all memories of the past. — Mythical Encyclopedia - Lethe - The Spirit and River of Forgetfulness -

[emphasis added]

Here, 'unmindfulness' means forgetfulness - a state of being unaware. This is different from its other meaning of 'carelessness' or 'heedlessness'.
https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/unmindfulness.html

Edit: Unfortunately, there is no link to the Phaedo reference. Although, I note this:

We should not forget that in the Phaedrus there is the plain of Aletheia or truth. (248b) — Fooloso4

The two words, 'forgetting' and 'carelessness' are both clearly in the account. I fault the translations that fail to convey the difference between the two. I am curious why it is ignored by many translators. The water can have two properties at the same time. — Paine

Yes. Thanks. I know the 2 different English words are used. However, I'm not clear if there are 2 different Greek words. Or if it is one Greek word with different meanings. Grateful for further help.

By way of description, there is mention of the 'river of carelessness': τὸν Ἀμέλητα ποταμόν.

Ἀμέλητα (amelta) is defined as neglectful, heedless, etcetera. — Paine

What does 'etcetera' include?

I don't have the Ancient Greek translation. Is there only one Greek translation?
What is the Ancient Greek for 'forgetfulness'?

Heedlessness is Horan's translation. Bloom translates it as carelessness. The Greek is ἀμέλητος It means, according to Liddell and Scott. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, not to be cared for.

See the note in the Perseus translation you linked to:
2. In later literature it is the river that is called Lethe.

The later literature calls the river of ἀμέλητος the river of Lethe (Λήθη) — Fooloso4

Thanks for clarifying the translation of the word ἀμέλητος.
Is that the single Greek word used with different English meanings.
Is it the same as the Greek word Ἀμέλητα ?

I did note the river is later called Lethe. But that didn't tell me much. Not sure whether I can rely on this from wiki:

In Greek mythology, Lethe (/ˈliːθiː/; Ancient Greek: Λήθη Lḗthē; Ancient Greek: [lɛ̌ːtʰɛː], Modern Greek: [ˈliθi]) was one of the rivers of the underworld of Hades. Also known as the Amelēs potamos (river of unmindfulness), the Lethe flowed around the cave of Hypnos and through the Underworld where all those who drank from it experienced complete forgetfulness. The river was often associated with Lethe, the personification of forgetfulness and oblivion, who was the daughter of Eris (Strife).

In Classical Greek, the word lethe (λήθη) literally means "forgetting", "forgetfulness".[1] — Wiki - Lethe

And now, I read of the Lethe as known as 'river of unmindfulness'.
How confusing :chin:

Paine:

I fault the translations that fail to convey the difference between the two. I am curious why it is ignored by many translators. The water can have two properties at the same time.

I understand that a river, or the water in a river, can have at least 2 different physical properties. However, this concerns a single Greek word and concept. The name of a river. The meaning of the name. What idea is being conveyed.

Translators will differ as to the importance of differentiation. Depending on how they interpret the sense of the word in context.
If most go with 'river of forgetfulness', then that is what makes sense to me. It fits with my initial intuition or impression.
But I've said this before. Moving on...

The question of 'drinking too much' oblivion reminds me that the mythology of Hesiod and the Orphic mysteries have the role of Lethe set over against the role of Mnemosyne (or Memory). — Paine

I wish I had your knowledge! I had to look this up:

Mnemosyne also presided over a pool in Hades, a counterpart to the river Lethe, according to a series of 4th-century BC Greek funerary inscriptions in dactylic hexameter. Dead souls drank from Lethe so they would not remember their past lives when reincarnated. In Orphism, the initiated were taught to instead drink from the Mnemosyne, the river of memory, which would stop the transmigration of the soul [...]

Mnemosyne, on the other hand, traditionally appeared in the first few lines of many oral epic poems [8]—she appears in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, among others—as the speaker called upon her aid in accurately remembering and performing the poem they were about to recite. Mnemosyne is thought to have been given the distinction of "Titan" because memory was so important and basic to the oral culture of the Greeks that they deemed her one of the essential building blocks of civilization in their creation myth. — Wiki - Mnemosyne

Sipping the water of Mnemosyne is not given as one of the options in the Er account. That is interesting considering that Plato uses the mythos of Recollection (amnemesis) or call to mind, in different discussions of learning. That suggests to me that the role of recollection is principally the activity of the living soul. — Paine

Interesting, indeed! :up:

I wonder if Plato didn't include this as an option because he was arguing against the use of poetry?
And, yes, I did have a vague memory of Plato using recollection in the ways we learn...

In Plato's theory of epistemology, anamnesis (/ ˌænæmˈniːsɪs /; Ancient Greek: ἀνάμνησις) refers to the recollection of innate knowledge acquired before birth. The concept posits the claim that learning involves the act of rediscovering knowledge from within oneself...

Plato develops the theory of anamnesis in his Socratic dialogues: Meno, Phaedo, and Phaedrus. — Wiki - Anamnesis

I do not think Plato uses words heedlessly or carelessly. — Fooloso4

I agree. Quite the opposite. Each word counts. And it is why I wonder at the change from 'Heedlessness' to 'Forgetfulness'. When it seems clear that the purpose of the drinking from the river is to forget, rather than to become 'careless'. I think it is the word choice of the translator rather than a fault of Plato.

The 'thirst' of souls can't be physical, can it? So, a spiritual need?

***

Does knowing ourselves save us from ourselves?
— Amity

If to know yourself is to know what is and is not good for you then you are saved unless you are heedless and do things that are contrary to what is good for you. — Fooloso4

Yes. Unfortunately, it is not always known what is and is not good for us. Facts are not always facts but opinion. Science changes what we know about our body, brain, the world, the universe, everything.
And since we are human, we are not always wise or have insight about our selves and behaviour.
I don't believe we can be 'saved' from either the hell or heaven in life as bodies or souls.
Perhaps, we can turn our minds from 'madness' to relative 'sanity'.
So, we can do the best we can with the knowledge we have and the wisdom gained through life experience. That usually entails moderation or keeping a sense of balance.

Just as in the Horan translation:

He will do all this so that he is able to make his choice reasonably, between the worse 618E life and the better one, by looking to the nature of the soul, and calling the life that leads soul to become more unjust, the worse life, and the one that leads it to become more just, the better life. All other studies he will set aside, for we have seen that in life and after death this is the supreme choice. 619A

“He must go then to Hades holding to this view with an unbreakable resolve, so that even there he would not be dazzled by wealth and other such bad influences, fall in with tyrannies and activities like that, inflict a whole host of incurable evils, and experience even greater evils himself. He would decide rather that he should always choose the life that is midway between such extremes, and flee the excesses from either direction as best he can in this life and in all that is to come, 619B for that is how a human being attains the utmost happiness.

It is about attaining utmost happiness by choosing a 'happy' medium.
What concerns me is the reference to 'all other studies' being set aside.
This speaks to me of a clear and understandable bias for philosophy. And the almost obsessive focus on the degree of 'justice' of the soul, or in one's life. It doesn't seem balanced and excludes other qualities, virtues or knowledge from other areas.

***

What is a 'certain measure'?
— Amity

I am not sure. Perhaps enough so that we forget what has transpired but not so much that we forget yourself. — Fooloso4

So, it is about 'forgetfulness' not 'carelessness'.

Or are some born with it?
— Amity

Some will be born with it if they did not drink too much. — Fooloso4

Hah! Wisdom in a bottle.

***

We must pay the utmost attention to how each of us will be a seeker and student who learns and finds out, from anywhere he can, who it is who will make him capable and knowledgeable enough to choose the best possible life, always and everywhere, by distinguishing between a good life and a degenerate one.
(618 b-c) — Fooloso4

[emphasis added]

This is in contrast to the previous 'all other studies' to be 'set aside'. It is assumed that philosophy is the answer as to how to distinguish between the good and the bad. We all know the different versions of the 'truth' don't we? The continual arguments, the endless Dialogues - started by Plato. Even if we seek answers, there is no certainty. Ain't that the truth?

Behaviour once judged as 'degenerate', 'bad' or 'mad' is now better understood and treated.
Some judgements pronounced against women in particular were prejudiced.
Thinking 'hysteria'. Just the tip of the iceberg of structural injustices in society.
Plato's Republic not at all helpful...given the different interpretations and meanings used to support extreme political agendas. Mentioned previously by @Metaphysician Undercover.

Reading Plato need not preclude reading other things. In part it depends on what appeals and resonates with you. — Fooloso4

Of course we can read other things. But that is not what is advised, here, is it?
There is a continual focus on 'justice' and who can best decide the what, who, how and why.
But yes, I realise that it is not all philosophical argumentation but involves poetic narrative.
Repeated patterns and themes bring home the message. Some might call that 'brainwashing'...

I have a strange and strong sense of déjà vu :chin:

Edit #2 I found Horan makes the distinction: — Paine

Yes. I think that is the translation used earlier by @Fooloso4.

From your Jones and Preddy translation:

By way of description, there is mention of the 'river of carelessness': τὸν Ἀμέλητα ποταμόν.

Ἀμέλητα (amelta) is defined as neglectful, heedless, etcetera. I will look around for a translation that expresses this distinct usage. For now, it should be noted that two different words are in play here. — Paine

Yes. Already noted. Now we can add 'carelessness' to the mix.

It doesn't make sense to me. However, 'river of forgetfulness' does.
The question is why must they drink the water. I thought it was to forget their previous lives and also the current process of re-birth.
To start again, in a new circle of life. Without memories of any lessons learned.

Why was it important to drink a certain measure, if everyone similarly forgot their previous life experience? Or were some memories retained or 'saved' by the wise who took the correct dose?

Because of the heat and harsh conditions of the Plain of Forgetfulness it is necessary for the souls to drink from the River of Heedlessness. (621a) In his closing comments Socrates refers to the river as the river of Forgetfulness rather than the river of Heedlessness. — Fooloso4

This differs from other translations. From Reeves:

They camped, since evening was coming on, beside the river of forgetfulness, whose water no vessel can hold. All of them had to drink a certain measure of this water. But those not saved by wisdom drank more than the measure.

there they camped at eventide by the River of Forgetfulness,2 whose waters no vessel can contain. They were all required to drink a measure of the water, and those who were not saved by their good sense drank more than the measure, and each one as he drank forgot all things. — Perseus Tufts - Plato's Republic, Book 10, Section 621a

No mention of a River of Heedlessness.

What is the connection between heedlessness and forgetfulness? — Fooloso4

Why does it matter if it is the same river? The same water.

Those who are prudent are not heedless. They are made prudent by the study and practice of philosophy. — Fooloso4

Are you sure about that? Doesn't it depend on the definition?

Forgetfulness is forgetting yourself. To act heedlessly is to forget yourself. — Fooloso4

Are you sure about that? Doesn't it depend on the definition?

we can come to know ourselves as we actually are. — Fooloso4

Hmmm. The word 'actually' bothers me. It can mean 'according to one's beliefs, views or feelings'.

There is no certainty that we can be so thoroughly objective.

The mythological truth lies in recollecting and heeding the message of the story. In this way we may be saved. — Fooloso4

If there is a 'mythological truth', it can vary according to person and interpretation. Not all myths or stories are heeded or recollected. Historical myths, even if remembered, will not always 'save' people.
Whatever that means? What is the message from either Plato or Socrates?
To be good, to care, to think, to be wise, to be just, to study and practise philosophy?
Does knowing ourselves save us from ourselves?

To ask silly questions about confusing texts? Like:
If no vessel can hold the river's water, then how can it be properly measured? What is a 'certain measure'? Handfuls are of different size and capacity. Some water slipping through fingers.
And what if they drink from different parts of the river. Will some become heedless rather than forgetful? Or are they already heedless?

To be 'saved by wisdom' or 'good sense' - does it take philosophy? Or are some born with it? Re-born?
How wise is it to keep reading Plato - as opposed to any other philosophical, religious, psychological texts or works of literature? Knowledge of the sciences? How to live and be as well as possible.

I think I'll stop reading and writing about politics. It gets me nowhere fast. Before I leave:

Thanks to @Wayfarer for this post: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/940092
The latest in a 7yr discussion about Trump. More dangerous than ever. Escalating threats to his political opponents calling them 'evil'.

It doesn't seem to matter that what he says or its implications. He has his believers or 'patriots'.
He also appeals to those not in the core pack.

If they vote for him, there will be no trouble. So, will people vote for 'peace' and protection by Trump.
Will they be fooled or frightened enough. This is reminiscent of Mafia tactics. Trump being the epitome of a fascist dictator. Another promise: if they vote for him, they won't need to worry about voting again.

From the same article in Wayfarer's post:

After being asked about Mr. Trump’s suggestion of turning the military against Americans, Mr. Youngkin replied that he didn’t believe that was what the president was saying. The network, he said, was “misinterpreting and misrepresenting his thoughts.”

"I’m literally reading his quotes to you,” Mr. Tapper replied. — The New York Times

People see what they want to see.

Music on my mind. The Why rather than the What.

Yesterday, I needed a counter-balance to Death and its Aftermath.
I turned to music and Classic FM where the Barcarolle was playing. It immediately brought back memories of Mum who loved it and the Vienna concerts. It will be the 8th Anniversary of her death, soon. :flower:

Why play or listen to music? It can affect our mood and behaviour.

Then, I read of the outrage of Trump's use of it at his rallies. How he swayed to his playlist for 40 minutes. Apparently, switching away from questions after 2 people fainted due to heat.

The resort to music in place of angry, provocative rhetoric was not without its ironies. A long list of musical artists – including Celine Dion, Abba, Neil Young and Bruce Springsteen – have denounced or taken legal steps to stop the Trump campaign playing their songs at rallies.

On Tuesday, Rufus Wainright responded to Trump’s use at the Philadelphia rally of Wainwight’s cover of Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah by posting on Instagram that he was “mortified”, adding: “I’ve been supremely honored over the years to be connected with this ode to tolerance.

Witnessing Trump and his supporters commune with this music last night was the height of blasphemy.” Wainwright said before the 2016 election that he would not sing the song again unless Trump lost. — Guardian - Trump 'Let's Listen to Music' during campaign rally

Later, I watched 'Waco: the Aftermath' -

Coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the tragic events at Mt. Carmel that began on February 28, 1993, WACO: THE AFTERMATH focuses on the fallout of the Waco disaster: the trials of the surviving members of the Branch Davidian sect and the rise of homegrown terrorist, Timothy McVeigh. The five-episode limited series also provides a broader context for the escalation of the American militia movement, which foreshadows the infamous attacks of the Oklahoma City bombing and the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

The images of David Koresh, Waco and its aftermath, are disturbing to say the least.

Why is it that I see Trump in the same light. Someone who has been President and hopes to be again. A cult leader using religion and encouraging hate groups - his Proud Boys and more.

The Proud Boys is a North American all-male, far-right, neo-fascist militant organization that promotes and engages in political violence.

Domestic terrorism dancing to pop music. Seen as a Saviour by some 50% of American voters.

Amongst other things, Trump should be treated as a dangerous, domestic terrorist. He is an appeaser and fan of autocratic leaders. If he wins then he will be a tyrant. If he doesn't he will be a tyrant. All hell will break loose. To the sound of 'Hallelujah!'...

You say I took the name in vain
I don't even know the name
But if I did, well, really, what's it to you?
There's a blaze of light in every word
It doesn't matter which you heard
The holy or the broken Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah

As I understand it, what is meant by philosophy here is something different. I will have more to say on this in connection to the River of Forgetfulness. — Fooloso4

OK. :up:

I read the role of 'assignment' in this passage as meaning that much more is required for our life to happen than the initial choice. Those requirements, however, do not allow us to "blame the gods" for our choice. — Paine

:up: That makes sense.

Thank you for further explanation from places other than Book10.

The relationship between the choosing and the daimon seems to be an assignment by a daughter of Necessity:

“So when all the souls had chosen their lives, according to the draw they approached Lachesis in order and she gave each the spirit (daimon) they had chosen to escort them as protector through their lives and as fulfiller of their choices.
— ibid. 620d — Paine

Thanks. Following the process has not been easy for me. I confused the 'soul' with the new life and then the choosing of a new 'spirit' (daimon). Soul and life seem to be used interchangeably.
- see underlined bolds below.

I didn't understand the daimon 's role or how the spindle of Necessity fitted in. Also, missed the prophet as intermediary.

From Reeve's translation, 617d:

When the souls arrived, they had to go straight to Lachesis. A sort of spokesman 29 first arranged them in ranks; then, taking lots and models of lives from the lap of Lachesis, he mounted a high platform, and said:
“The word of Lachesis, maiden daughter of Necessity! Ephemeral souls. The beginning of another death-bringing cycle for mortal-kind! Your daimon will not be assigned to you by lot; you will choose him.
The one who has the first lot will be the first to choose a life to which he will be bound by necessity.
Virtue has no master: as he honors or dishonors it, so shall each of you have more or less of it. Responsibility lies with the chooser; the god is blameless.”

After saying that, the spokesman threw the lots out among them all, and each picked up the one that fell next to him—except for Er, who was not allowed. And to the one who picked it up, it was clear what number he had drawn. After that again the spokesman placed the models of lives on the
ground before them—many more of them than those who were present.

Note 29: Prophêtês: a prophet. Here in the sense of someone who speaks on behalf of a god.

[emphasis added]
I don't quite understand what is being said here of Virtue. However, this might relate to my earlier confusion: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/939791

620d When all the souls had chosen lives, in the same allotted order they went forward to Lachesis. She assigned to each the daimon it had chosen, as guardian of its life and fulfiller of its choices. This daimon first led the soul under the hand of Clotho as it turned the revolving spindle, thus ratifying the allotted fate it had chosen.
After receiving her touch, he led the soul to the spinning of Atropos, to make the spun fate irreversible. Then, without turning around, it went under the throne of Necessity. When it had passed through that, and when the others had also passed through, they all traveled to the plain of Lethe, through burning and choking and terrible heat, for it was empty of trees and earthly vegetation. — As above

[emphasis added]

I need to put the theory of reading slowly and carefully into practice. Especially here.
Even then, I welcome insight, clarification and advice from those more experienced with Plato.

What we call "the laws of nature" present us with one's "lot in life", the circumstances of one's being, and this is presented by Plato as random chance, with some sort of "necessity" lurking beneath it, which drives it. That sense of "necessity" is some how comparable, or related to the "necessity" which is "the means to an end", but the relation is not really intelligible to those people involved in that discussion because they have a primitive understanding about the laws of nature and determinist forces. — Metaphysician Undercover

[emphasis added]

Thank you for your post. Interesting to consider. The understanding of the Cosmos. How it was made intelligible by Plato.
As far as possible.

In the eponymous dialogue Timaeus he identifies two kinds of cause, intelligence and necessity, that is, Nous and Ananke. Given the earlier emphasis in the Republic on the Forms, the introduction of ananke is both surprising and significant. Here at the end we must, by necessity, begin again. Forms and their imperfect images do not tell the whole of the story. — Fooloso4

Checking out the Timaeus, I think I begin to understand:

In the Timaeus Plato presents an elaborately wrought account of the formation of the universe and an explanation of its impressive order and beauty.

The universe, he proposes, is the product of rational, purposive, and beneficent agency. It is the handiwork of a divine Craftsman (“Demiurge,” dêmiourgos, 28a6) who, imitating an unchanging and eternal model, imposes mathematical order on a preexistent chaos to generate the ordered universe (kosmos).

The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological: the universe as a whole as well as its various parts are so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects. For Plato this arrangement is not fortuitous, but the outcome of the deliberate intent of Intellect (nous), anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits it to be. — SEP - Plato's Timaeus

[ emphasis added]

So, not random but deliberate. 'Necessity' driving it. We might not be convinced by the story of a divinely created universe. However, there is no doubting the force of Plato's imaginative description. How we can enter into it; admire the images and probe its concepts. The process of philosophy is well on its way. Just what he wanted or needed. Intellect and imagination working together in dialogue.
Philosophy and poetry dancing...as one.

Escaping from Ancient Greece and Plato. To Vienna, Austria and the park of Schönbrunn Palace.
A beautiful baroque setting for summer night concerts. La magie en plein air.
Vienna Philharmonic – Offenbach: Les Contes d'Hoffmann: Barcarolle (SNC 2020)


The themes of love and beauty are from Jacques Offenbach’s opera “The Tales of Hoffman”. The opening lines set the tone:

Belle nuit, ô nuit d’amour
Souris à nos ivresses
Nuit plus douce que le jour
Ô,belle nuit d’amour!

Lovely night, oh, night of love
Smile upon our joys!
Night much sweeter than the day
Oh beautiful night of love!

https://beatcrave.com/w3/the-meaning-behind-the-song-barcarolle-from-the-tales-of-hoffman-by-offenbach/

619d He was one of those who had come down from heaven, having lived his previous life in an orderly constitution, sharing in virtue through habit but without philosophy.
Generally speaking, not the least number of the people caught out in this way were souls who came from heaven, and so were untrained in sufferings. The majority of those from the earth, on the other hand, because they had suffered themselves and had seen others doing so, were in no rush to make their choices.

This does not make sense to me. If people were in heaven, then they will already have been judged as good. Even if their virtue is through habit, it is part of their character, formed and informed by life experience and doesn't mean 'without philosophy'.
There is an assumption that they are 'untrained in sufferings'.
However, Life and others within are the trainers. No academic philosophers required. In fact, arguably, they are the least qualified.

Unlike most souls who made their choice based upon the habits of the previous life, (620a) Odysseus now chooses a life of moderation. The suggestion seems to be that although he has chosen last he is an example of someone who has attained phronesis, someone who engaged in philosophy, consistently, in a sound manner. — Fooloso4

I am not sure this is correct. Choices were made by those from heaven. Of different character and ways of thinking. Odysseus' soul made its choice, not because of unthinking habit but:

Remembering its former sufferings, it rejected love of honor, and went around for a long time looking for the life of a private individual who did his own work, and with difficulty it found one lying offsomewhere neglected by the others. When it saw it, it said that it would have done the same even if it had drawn the first-place lot, and chose it gladly.

620d.

This is a set-up to enhance the virtues of philosophy. There seems to be an assumption that the ordinary individual will not be troubled by sufferings or thoughts of being honourable. What kind of love would the ordinary person have? And how would it be regulated...if necessity or rulers required...

Plato’s concept of necessity differs from ours. What is by necessity is without nous or intellect. Necessary causes can act contrary to intelligible causes. What is fixed and unchanging cannot serve as the cause of a world of change, contingency, and chance. It should be noted how often necessity occurs in this story. The various cases helps to give us a better sense of the scope of what necessity means and what it entails — Fooloso4

I don't see where Plato's concept differs from ours. What is needed or must be done by the rulers is intelligible. Human needs are only fixed in as much as nature is fixed. If such needs (biological/erotic) are seen as bad for a city, then rules of law need to be initiated. So, needs cause change.

I didn't notice the frequency of the word 'necessity' as I read Book 10. However, I searched for it in the pdf. of the Republic.
It is mentioned 18 times, including some in the Bibliography and the name of the Goddess Necessity'.

I've just read from Book 5 458d about the breeding programme: the selection of mates. Socrates suggests both females and males are driven (naturally) by 'necessity' to have sex with one another.
He asks Glaucon if he thinks the word 'necessities' is right here. G. says they are not geometric necessities but agrees they are erotic ones.

The discussion turns to how unregulated sexual intercourse would not be a 'pious' thing in a city of happy people. And how to solve this problem by breeding humans in their prime. Mating the best to the best is good. The worst to the worst is bad. The offspring of the best to be taken away and reared by special nurses in a separate part of the city. The inferior or disabled will hide in a secret, unknown place.

All of this can only be achieved by subterfuge by the rulers. The 'drugs' of lies and deception by lottery.
All to keep the race of guardians pure.

Just as MU says:

...there is really intelligence behind the scene which creates the appearance of random chance for all those being selected from, and only a distinct class of people are privy to that information. — Metaphysician Undercover

The Myth of Er.
Here comes 25 mins of a slow and clear narration with amazing illustrations each step of the way. :fire: :100:

@Paine and others. This is mesmerising. A slow and clear narration, illustrations included. :fire:
:100: Excellent.
The Myth of Er - Plato's Republic - Book 10

Just wanted to say I respect C.D.C Reeve's translations. I prefer others for different reasons, but he is very consistent in his use of phrases. — Paine

Yes, so far I find him easy on my eyes. I'm only 'sticking' with one translation to make it easier, for me.
I appreciate other interpretations. Widens the scope for improved understanding. A joint endeavour :sparkle:

The humble beginning of this elaborate image connects this process with the techne emphasized at the beginning of Book 10, where the carpenter makes usable beds and chairs.

When the souls are choosing their future habitations, Epeius selects:

After her he saw the soul of Panopeus’ son Epeius entering the nature of a female craftworker.
— ibid. 620c — Paine

Clever work. Connecting the dots. Fascinating to observe the various 'returns' in Book10.

The myth, the spiritual aspect of Socrates/Glaucon final conversation mirrors the beginning of the Republic. From Book1:

I went down to the Piraeus yesterday with Glaucon, the son of Ariston, to say a prayer to the goddess,1 and also because I wanted to see how they would manage the festival, since they were holding it for the first time.

:up:

I think I have come to a better understanding of the spindle. It is not used as in loom weaving.
It is hand-held, as in the depiction of Ananke: The Goddess of Necessity and Mother of the Fates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananke

The spindle revolved on the lap of Necessity. On top of each of its circles stood a Siren, who was carried around by its rotation, emitting a single sound, one single note. And from all eight in concord, a single harmony was produced. And there were three other women seated around it equidistant from one another, each on a throne. They were the daughters of Necessity, the Fates, — The Republic - trans. C.D.C Reeve

The are some seemingly impossible features of the subsequent descriptions of the whorls within other whorls I won't try to wrap my brain around right now. Maybe in the coming week. — Paine

Yes. Somewhat convoluted. My understanding is limited to this:
These are smaller, inner circles nesting within the main circle circumference of the whorl. Looked at from above or below. They correspond to the Orbits -the distance between planets. Struggling to see beyond...

There is a helpful Note, p357.

Plato’s description of the beam of light and the spindle is difficult.

He compares the light to hypozomata, or the ropes that bind a trireme together. These ropes seem to have girded the trireme from stem to stern and to have entered it at both places. Within the trireme, they were connected to some sort of twisting device that allowed them to be tightened when the water caused them to stretch and become slack.

The spindle of Necessity seems to be just such a twisting device. Hence, the extremities of the light’s bonds must enter into the universe just as the hypozomata enter the trireme, and the spindle must be attached to these extremities, so that its spinning tightens the light and holds the universe together.

The light is thus like two rainbows around the universe (or the whorl of the spindle), whose ends enter the universe and are attached to the spindle.

The upper half of the whorl of the spindle consists of concentric hemispheres that fit into one another, with their lips or rims fitting together in a single plane.

The outer hemisphere is that of the fixed stars; the second is the orbit of Saturn; the third of Jupiter; the fourth of Mars; the fifth of Mercury; the sixth of Venus; the seventh of the sun; and the eighth of the moon. The earth is in the center.

The hemispheres are transparent and the width of their rims is the distance of the heavenly bodies from one another.

A convincing discussion is J. S. Morrison, “Parmenides and Er.”The Journal of Hellenic Studies (1955) 75: 59–68 — As above

***

I found suggestions for visualisation. You can download as PDF.
Plato's Myth of Er : The Light and the Spindle by Griet Schils
https://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_1993_num_62_1_1163

One thing that strikes me about the myth of Er is that the reassignment of souls requires a level of election by the self where a man could become a woman, a human an animal, and vice versa. An equality of all possible fates. — Paine

:up:
I've now read the Myth of Er. See: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/939277

It is striking in so many ways.

'The Spindle of Necessity'. Plato's description is not easy to follow or visualise.
He naturally assumes that the reader knows what an Ancient Greek spindle looks like and how it is operated. And then, there is the whorl of the celestial spindle with its 8 orbits. Wiki helps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_Er

Following my response to @Paine here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/938479

The Myth of Er
Starts at p354 of the pdf Reeve translation, 614B. Ends p361, 621c.

SOCRATES: Well, it is not an Alcinous-story I am going to tell you, but that of a brave man called Er, the son of Armenias, by race a Pamphylian.

Once upon a time, he was killed in battle. On the tenth day, when the rest of the dead were picked up, they were already putrefying, but he was picked up still quite sound. When he had been taken home and was lying on the pyre before his funeral on the twelfth day, he revived and, after reviving, told what he had seen in the other world. — The Republic - trans. C.D.C. Reeve

Returning to Plato's Republic and @Jamal 's reading and lecture recommendations in his thread:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15484/poets-and-tyrants-in-the-republic-book-i/p1
Putting this here, so I can easily find it again:



I've decided to stick to one translation. Jamal recommended:
Plato, Republic, translated by C. D. C. Reeve, Hackett (2004)
Free online version is available.

Thanks. Most helpful. I've responsed to that and your addition in your thread. I've bolded the important part for me:

I'll add that those involved in the dialogue do not know where it will go or how it will end. We can imagine ourselves to be participants of the dialogue and add our responses to what is being said. — Fooloso4

A most generous and helpful response to my concerns.

We can imagine ourselves to be participants of the dialogue and add our responses to what is being said. — Fooloso4

I read that with a sense of relief. No pressure. If and when...

Imagine. I can do that...and know that you welcome curious minds.
I can also appreciate being introduced to the deeper levels. Simply by listening.

OK, then...over to you :sparkle:

Thank you for the friendly response.... — Paine

:up: and thanks for the clarification.

Unfortunately, my last post to @Fooloso4 was a bit 'short' in every sense. I guess it reflected my frustration and I could/should have done better. Apologies to Fooloso4 :yikes:
Returning to this, with a bit more patience:

The city Socrates creates in speech suffers the same problem as the bed made by a maker of images. You can't sleep in this bed or live in this image of a city. In addition, far from being ideal such a city is in its first iteration first, in Glaucon's words, a city of pigs. (372d) Glaucon wants a more conventional city, one with couches, tables, relishes, and desserts. (372e) Socrates goes along in the making of this "luxurious city", but although it accommodates some of our human desires, it it far from ideal. Even with the compromises away from what Socrates calls the "true city", a "healthy one" (372e), it is not one that any of us would want to live it. — Fooloso4

Thanks for further explanation and references. I appreciate all your time and effort, as I think you know. I'm taking myself out of here, until I read/listen to the Republic:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/938996

I look forward to hearing more from you and others. :sparkle: :flower:

I decided rather than continue with @Fooloso4' Book 10 discussion that I need to read the whole Republic. To place it and @Jamal's Book1 thread in context. To try to understand what it's all about.

I wondered about the best way to approach The Republic. And something that would provide me with much-needed motivation. To engage with a bit more background.

How to Read Plato's Republic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=ZhFXMwVEF6c

I enjoyed this. Some of my notes:

To read slowly and carefully as an active conversation with the author.
To ask what is the ruling principle of the philosopher you are reading. It is suggested that Plato's most important issue concerns 'How to Live'. And this is a learning exercise.
To feel free to disagree. To relate the Dialogue to real life. Current politics. To reconnect with the curiosity of a child. To enjoy asking questions. We are all born philosophers.
To use imagination to read the Republic as a novel, a play.
To consider the ideas of Utopian/Dystopian literature. The speculative building of a just city, the macro level of justice and morality - how it relates to the micro level - the just individual. Is it even possible?


***

And since I need to take care of my eyes, I looked for an audio version.
To relax for a first listen. To take it slowly. To take in the overall panorama:




Edit: The video is a condensed version. From the Comments, a helpful contents guide:

Book I - 0:35
Book II - 42:00
Book III - 1:16:27
Book IV - 1:32:30
Book V - 1:58:30
Book VI - 2:33:20
Book VII - 3:04:59
Book VIII - 3:22:21
Book IX - 3:42:30
Book X - 4:27:40

Hi, Paine. As always, thanks for putting in the time and effort to explain your perspective. I'm still listening but will hang back for now. :sparkle:

Analyzing a specific aspect, in isolation, usually will lead to confusion, because the ties, associations, required to develop the intended meaning are dropped. — Metaphysician Undercover

I understand that there are many specific notions and fictions tied together in different books of the Republic. And yes, it does lead to confusion.

If you consider the selection process, you'll see that the men are selected as "baby producers" just as much as the women are. — Metaphysician Undercover

Please point me to where it tells of the 'selection process' in this fiction.
The males don't go through the travails of repeated pregnancies.

Notice, Plato compares the guardians to dogs, and makes an analogy with the breeding of dogs. Advances in science have brought us into a new realm of husbandry known as GM. — Metaphysician Undercover

I did note the dog breeding analogy. How perfect is that. Not.

Health ought not be a problem. There is nothing to indicate that a person would be less healthy in Plato's type of state. In fact, Plato describes the means to physical health through gymnastics, and mental health through music. And happiness, in relation to the breeding program, is ensured by the "noble lie". — Metaphysician Undercover

Health will always be a problem for women if treated like bitches.

Physical health through gymnastics. Didn't that involve being naked?
Imagine a pregnant woman riding bareback...

Must go now. Late for an appointment.

Taylor treats the 'ideal' city as a kind of governance in the way being discussed in Book 8. The focus there is that particular kinds of people predominate in particular kinds of Cities. In those accounts, there are many discussions of the roles of men and women and children. — Paine

[emphasis added]

If you say so. I clearly don't have the same degree or depth of knowledge or experience as you and @Fooloso4 who has read, re-read, reflected and taught this to students, over many years.
It is also clear that I shouldn't have engaged with a Book 10 discussion without reading the whole Republic at least once! I should follow @Jamal 's lead.

I don't know about Book 8. Taylor references Book 5

Republic V contains two revolutionary proposals for the social organisation of the ideal state, the first that the function of guardianship is to be performed by men and women alike (451c-457b), the second that for the guardians the private household and therefore the institution of marriage is to be abolished (457b-466d), since the guardians do not own property and the care of child — The Role of Women in Plato's Republic - C. C. W. Taylor

Starting here:

[451c ] But maybe this way is right, that after the completion of the male drama we should in turn go through with the female,1 especially since you are so urgent.”
“For men, then, born and bred as we described there is in my opinion no other right possession and use of children and women than that which accords with the start we gave them. Our endeavor, I believe, was to establish these men in our discourse as the guardians of a flock2?” “Yes.” — Plato, Republic, Book 5, section 451c