We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.
Plato was a great many things; teacher to Aristotle, student of Socrates, and he is even written about in some remote blog on the edges of the commercially dominated ethosphere some 2400 years later. Plato was influenced by the best philosophy the world had to offer up until this point; Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus and, Socrates (the 'Wisest Man'). Plato continued their similar lineage. He, in turn, influenced Philosophy for generations. His philosophy is full of mysticism and has a religious aura. This is a beautiful hark back towards our origins and forwards to the Catholic Church. On many things, people still agree with Plato, reality itself is eternal and made up of only that which can be observed with the senses. This last part is illusory and non-permanent. There is a multitude of strangeness as well, as is known to come with such a wild path.Less agreed upon is his operation of 'the Good' which like reality, is eternal, overshadowing the senses. 'The Good' is like the Oort cloud, existing somewhere just outside our observation. To be good, you must know 'The Good'. While that makes perfect logical sense, Plato states that it is only found through the intellect (if you are lucky enough to be born with such) or moral discipline (if you are a dullard by birth). That does not include that fact that no matter what, you must be constantly educated in order to distill what Plato calls 'wisdom' and 'good' from the everyday phenomenal world. This seems quite difficult for both the common person and the rich, for in our century the common man has not the money, and the rich has not the time. Where could one find the time for such vigorous study for moral aptitude, let alone in the tumultuous era that Plato lived. Most of our society now does not grasp how to be moral (see here, here, or here), and becoming a gentleman is a full time job when cultivating gravity, decorum, and courage. I think this view is a bit extreme. Education in schools is required in tandem with a more natural, outside education involving physical activity and survival (camping). I would never learn how to create a fire in a school classroom, or if I did they probably did not like it all that much.
This leads Plato to discussing 'Utopia', specifically Plato's version (his own form of schoolboy fires). This version is horrific, rigidly censored, and full of practices that humans today find very immoral (ironically). Plato starts by discussing how to treat children. It goes horribly, as you can imagine. You must never show children evil or death, like that in Homeric poetry (doh). If they are eventually to serve, they must not be afraid of death (they must be ignorant of it). True, but inhumane. They must never been shown weakness or vice, no mourning, no weeping. Plato even goes so far as to claim Utopia shouldn't have 'loud laughing' and it therefore should be forbidden. No gratuitous display of emotion is something I totally understand but these reactions are involuntary in social life. They would probably give me shackles on day one, it makes me laugh to think of my more dramatic friends. There is much more that is forbidden, but just these facts outline a Utopia with which we are far too familiar in the political climate of the modern world.
This Utopia of Plato appears to me only as an incubation, a tyrannical cocoon to protect from extreme feelings. To create a dependence on these wide spread lies, a truth that is completely removed from 'Truth'. This wolf in nationalist clothing can be seen in most modern nations; U.S., Russia, China, and North Korea, just to name a few. All they request is you sing the national anthem, conform to societal norms, and teach these 'alternative facts'. It truly disgusts me and stagnates new thought, progressive action, and the very dreams our forefathers had for this great nation.
There are some, admittedly, more communist portions of Utopia. It is most likely that Marx pulled some of his ideas from these very passages. This includes the use of communal goods, training both boys and girls (together), common houses and meal halls, even wives are communal. The last was thought to help free the children of knowledge regarding their parentage thus creating in them unlimited potential. This also allowed for the creation of simple eugenics (the leaders could pick people to mate for specific qualities or attributes). While alone, some of these ideas are great, together they combine into a totalitarian government so complete it would frighten the Nazi's. But, they studied Plato, and it is possible that this idea intrigued them.
They even got rid or poets:
"We must inform [the poet]...the law will not allow them. We shall send him away to another city."
While considered on the Platonic side to be a kindness, it is a bit fantastic to restrict thought so directly. No one would feel it towards this poet in their society. If poets are outlawed, they would be dealt much harsher treatment.
There are many reasons that I don't consider myself a Platonist, but here is the base reason.
'No one is to eat fish, or meat otherwise than roasted.' (Plus no sauces!)
After the removal of such things, fun is removed. There is a power-gap that is mischievously (or maliciously) filled with communal lies and 'alternative facts'. Grilled meat is far superior than any ideas that Plato outlines in his Utopia.
In conclusion, this Utopia is a great idea. It is well thought out and full of new insight for the developing world. But, it is stuck in the mud with everyone else. The idea that everyone together can create something was bestowed upon his student Aristotle, of him I will speak of next.
In conclusion, this Utopia is a great idea. It is well thought out and full of new insight for the developing world. But, it is stuck in the mud with everyone else. The idea that everyone together can create something was bestowed upon his student Aristotle, of him I will speak of next.
