The Republic, Plato Intimates, And The Realm Of Knowledge

Plato’s Theaetetus starts off with Euclid of Megara by speaking with his friend Terpsion about a dialogue he has between Socrates and Theaetetus. He says, that the dialogue was from when Theaetetus was young. Euclid of Megara’s conversation with Terpsion acts as the structure for the dialogue itself. The other participants of the dialogue are Socrates, Theodorus, and Theaetetus. The question that the participants are asking is “what is knowledge?” Theaetetus gives four definitions to the question “what is knowledge?” The first being that knowledge is arts and sciences, the second being knowledge is sense-perception, the third that knowledge is true judgment, and the fourth being knowledge is true judgment with an account. But Socrates was

Plato is remembered as one of the worlds best known philosophers who along with his writings are widely studied. Plato was a student of the great Greek philosopher Socrates and later went on to be the teacher of Aristotle. Plato’s writings such as “The Republic”, “Apology” and “Symposium” reveal a great amount of insight on what was central to his worldview. He was a true philosopher as he was constantly searching for wisdom and believed questioning every aspect of life would lead him to the knowledge he sought. He was disgusted with the common occurrence of Greeks not thinking for themselves but simply accepting the popular opinion also known as doxa. Plato believed that we ought to search for and meditate on the ideal versions of beauty, justice, wisdom, and other concepts which he referred to as the forms. His hostility towards doxa, theory of the forms, and perspective on reality were the central ideas that shaped Plato’s worldview and led him to be the great philosopher who is still revered today.

In the end of Plato’s Republic Book I, Socrates and Thrasymachus who had just finished a set of vigorous arguments on what the definition for justice is and whether the just or the unjust life is the best life to live, come to a conclusion. Regarding the true definition of justice, at the end of Book I, Socrates mentions that their discussion have not led them to the true definition of justice (Republic 354b). On the other hand, their discussion on which life is more profitable does come to a conclusion, “So the just man is happy and the unjust man is miserable…but being miserable is not profitable, whereas being happy is” (Rep. 354a) Socrates says, indicating the just life tends to be more profitable than the unjust life. Following their

“If the truth of all things always existed in the soul, then the soul is immortal” (The Philosophical Journey 89). This states that since the soul has all knowledge integrated, one recollects this knowledge through situations in an individual’s life and use one’s reasoning. With the dialogues of the Meno and Phaedo, Plato discusses the ideas of recollection and immortality of the soul in general. As well, the Republic, through the three different situations shown, Plato shows the ideas of the forms and what is real and what is not.

In The Republic Book 3, Plato uses a fictional character named Socrates to argue that people in society must be handpicked to rule as well as also handpicking people to become ruled in order to confirm there will be no disagreements over who is leading. He essentially claims choosing what every citizen does with their life is necessary for creating a steady and working structure in society. This theory of telling people what they were destined to do in life is known as the “noble lie.” It tells everyone a “religious lie” that people all originate from the same place and are siblings of each other, an attempt to convince everyone to get along regardless of their social class. Personally I do not believe that Plato’s arguments in his book are correct and that the use of a “noble lie” would not work in society.

In the Republic of Plato, the philosopher Socrates lays out his notion of the good, and draws the conclusion that virtue must be attained before one can be good. For Socrates there are two kinds of virtue; collective and individual. Collective virtue is virtue as whole, or the virtues of the city. Individual virtue pertains to the individual himself, and concerns the acts that the individual does, and concerns the individual’s soul. For Socrates, the relationship between individual and collective virtue is that they are the same, as the virtues of the collective parallel those of the Individual. This conclusion can be reached as both the city and the soul deal with the four main virtues of wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice.

Philosophy is a Greek word meaning "love of wisdom." Throughout Plato's Republic, wisdom plays an important role. According to Plato, education is wisdom. In the passage, 518d, Plato discusses the true meaning of education vicariously through Socrates. Some literary mechanisms can be found in the passage and I will show how they fit in the text and how they contribute to the main themes of Plato's Republic.

This paper discussed The Allegory of The Cave in Plato's Republic, and tries to unfold the messages Plato wishes to convey with regard to his conception of reality, knowledge and education.

Socrates might be a wise philosopher but one of his ideas strikes me as particularly naive. In the allegory of the cave, he tells Glaucon that "in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort [·] and that this is the power upon which he [the intellectual] would act rationally" (517b-c). In other words, he seems to be implying that knowledge of goodness is a sufficient condition for being good. A person who has seen what goodness is will henceforth act in a way that is good. Is this belief justified? For instance, we sometimes do things that we know are not good but we do them nonetheless and feel guilty after that. If, as such cases

Socrates continues the conversation with Glaucon and now focuses on the obligation of the guardians and philosophers to serve the people as a result of their education.

“the having and doing of one’s own and what belongs to one would be agreed to

believes that the son will realize to be just is only worth it if you can get a

Plato's Republic is often read as a political work, as a statement of some sort on government, society, and law. This is certainly not a rash reading of the dialogue; it is called the Republic, and over half of it is devoted to the construction of a city through speech, a city complete with a government structure, a military, an economic system, and laws. However, I believe that to read the Republic as a political statement is inaccurate. Although Socrates and his companions construct a city out of speech as they attempt to define justice, the dialogue repeatedly frames justice as something that cannot be established through a fixed system of morality, let alone through a rigid

workers, so that they do not desire to be in the ruler's position. It is seen

The physical world only has one constant - change. The human senses give an idea of the present reality. However, seeing is not believing. The perception we develop through the senses (seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, and hearing) does not consist of real truth. Real truth is not what is in front of us, but of absolute concepts and unchanging truths. Plato encouraged looking past what is directly visible in order to find truths that exist independent of the physical world. The understanding of the idea of reality through the discussion of the Divided Line and the allegory of the cave directly contributes and proves his theory of Forms and lie at the heart of his philosophy, which I think is convincing because of the extent of his discussions through experimental-based and direct evidence.