William Miller 's ' The ' Of The Soul '

940 Words4 Pages
tyrant would each be the most erotic men in the world, so that pure justness as well as its opposite can be sought in a complete form. Cooper’s ideas concerning this desire seem to fit a model Plato would readily accept as this interpretation of wholeness is fleshed out in greater detail certainly seem Platonic especially as this idea of wholeness is presented in a speech in the Symposium, and it is of intrigue as to why it never became a part of the soul Plato set out to define. Perhaps it was too much for him to interfere with the parallel between the city and the soul that he describes earlier in this work and their reliance on three parts. Or, as Cooper asks, was Plato meaning to leave a discussion on the eros under the surface of his work in the Republic? (pgs. 350-61). Regardless, discourse concerning eros in the Republic has taken place and one such example of that is David H. McNeill. He argues that human eros cannot involve the desires of something other worldly, at least in the Republic which he contrasts with the Phaedrus. Of the two works, art is something approached very differently and is a part of a philosophical orientation that Plato is assigning to each, according to McNeill. The problem is that each discuss it by very different means. In the Republic such things as poetry and paintings are dismissed fairly easily as imitations while the Phaedrus gives an account that suggests divine inspiration for these things. McNeill uses this to suggest that human
Open Document