[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 343 KB, 981x1600, Plato - The Republic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11846151 No.11846151 [Reply] [Original]

Having had the opportunity to read through this, I'm actually surprised that no one in a position of power has made an attempt to try some (or all) of the ideas for the ideal state outlined in The Republic.

Is there some reason for that?

Also, Plato is held up and respected as a founder of modern philosophy and reason, but at the end he goes on this wild tangent about a story some guy told him about the afterlife as if it was real. Was there some allegory I was missing there or was he trying to put that forward as being the true state of affairs?

>> No.11846156

Plato was a mystic

>> No.11846196

Yeah, he didn't know what he was talking about.
A fool who just resented the powerful.
That's all the ending was, a refusal to recognise his own ressentiment and weakness corrupting the youth.

>> No.11846206

there were actually a couple attempts in the ancient world to do it, but most didn't even make it past the most preliminary stages. i cant remember the details. one was a friend of aristotle but he was killed and aristotle wrote a poem about him, and the other attempt i heard of was i think around the time of plotinus

>> No.11846234

>>11846196

>t. Tyrant

>> No.11846236

It's a metaphor for the soul of man, yt

>> No.11846241

>>11846206

When he starts talking about the inevitable descent of Democracy into Autocracy and the symptoms a nation would experience in the process, I couldn't help but note the parallels in our time. It was actually eerie.

>> No.11846251

Will mankind ever abolish private property?

>> No.11846271

>>11846251

He advocated that didn't he...

That's troublesome.

>> No.11846277

>>11846271
Only for the guardians.

>> No.11846280

>>11846271
>This threatens my way of life
>IT CAN NEVER BE DONE
What was the point of this thread again?

>> No.11846294

>>11846277
>>11846280

If it only applies to the Guardians I think that's legit!

>> No.11846323

>>11846277
Not sure about that(can you source it?)

I'm pretty sure in Plato's ideal state there's no private property at all. Look up the definition of the just city in book IV, it's literally how marx described communism.

>> No.11846335

>>11846151
you weren't supposed to be an advocate to the city at the end, you were supposed to realize that abstract reason can't build a society. aristotle would be the one to write constitutions, remember that

>> No.11846338

The ancient authors speculated about the relation between property and virtue, a natural subject for discussion since justifying private property raises serious questions about the legitimacy of self-interested activity. Plato (Republic, 462b-c) argued that collective ownership was necessary to promote common pursuit of the common interest, and to avoid the social divisiveness that would occur ‘when some grieve exceedingly and others rejoice at the same happenings.’

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/property/

I think he was arguing for the abolition of private property across the board.

>> No.11846347

>>11846323
"In the ideal city of the Republic, Plato forbids property ownership for the guardians while he retains private property for the lowest class, including the farmers who will provide the guardians’ food."

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1812976

>> No.11846349

>>11846323
That’s true. No problem with that. It just means everyone respected each other sufficiently.

Also, the idea of interest being illegal, an

>> No.11846354

>>11846349
Was a very good idea, rather, along the same principles.

Sorry, thought I’d add that

>> No.11846360

>>11846335

I had that feeling too. It's almost like Plato was arguing against the formation of a city in the first place. There was one point where he was describing a simple state of affairs where there were no surpluses or luxuries, but the people he was talking to were against that, so he spent the rest of the text discussing, "Ok, so you want a nation-state with all the luxuries? Well what would that look like?"

Definitely some strong Spartan-state admiration vibes coming from Socrates throughout.

>> No.11846431

>everyone gets to fuck everyone's wife
Yah no ty im not a cuck

>> No.11846443

>>11846431
>Women are property
Rased and Ped-Billed

>> No.11846499

Plato tried to turn Dion into a philosopher king and Syracuse into the ideal state, but Dion couldn't learn geometry (lol) so the plan went down the drain.

>> No.11846519

>>11846431
no, did you miss the part about the rigged genetic lottery where only the uberchads get to "win" in the "random" lottery and reproduce with the women? im not making that up. it's literally in the book>>11846443

>> No.11846565

>>11846519
Nope, everyone is a part of everyone else’s family, it’s how the perfect state works

>> No.11846570

>>11846565
in terms of raising children yeah, but reproduction only happens at set times during the year and only uberchads get to do it by "winning" a state lottery. thats in the book.

>> No.11846587

>>11846570
False again, but certainly having sex wouldn’t be assigned to certain people.

They would inevitably get along and this kind of hierchical Behavior you’re talking about wouldn’t rear it’s head into the society.

What you’re talking about is like some kind of far right Nazi bullshit that they were promoting at the time of WWII. Nothing like that is in Plato’s Republic you fucktard.

>> No.11846588

Is The Symposium a good place to start with Plato? If yes, is the Penguin Classics edition good or should I read some other edition?

>> No.11846589

>>11846588
The Symposium is me and my gfs favorite book

>> No.11846597

>>11846587
lmao it's literally in the book why are you arguing with me. just read the republic, it's one of the funniest parts in the book. ive read the republic like 3 times

>> No.11846603

>>11846588
No.
It's full of resentment.

>> No.11846607

>>11846597
The Republic isn’t ‘funny’. No it’s not in the book

>> No.11846615

Is Marcus Aurelius the closest we've gotten to a Philosopher King?
Didn't Macron study Philosophy?

>> No.11846641

>>11846615
Jupiter is a brainlet though. Trump read a bunch of philosophy, so much so that his college friends gave him the nickname Titor.

>> No.11846647

>>11846615
>Didn't Macron study Philosophy?
Just because you study philosophy doesn't make you a philosopher

Archytas of Terentum is the closest thing we've had to a philosopher king. Aurelius was close too.

>> No.11846648

Plato is literally bullshit. Don't even start to read him, he is biased and twists situations and words just to make himself look smart. He is a fraud.
t.expert

>> No.11846649
File: 114 KB, 746x500, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11846649

>>11846607
lmfao, u are in some serious denial
https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Republic/Book_V
>Had we not better appoint certain festivals at which we will bring together the brides and bridegrooms, and sacrifices will be offered and suitable hymeneal songs composed by our poets: the number of weddings is a matter which must be left to the discretion of the rulers, whose aim will be to preserve the average of population? There are many other things which they will have to consider, such as the effects of wars and diseases and any similar agencies, in order as far as this is possible to prevent the State from becoming either too large or too small.
>We shall have to invent some ingenious kind of lots which the less worthy may draw on each occasion of our bringing them together, and then they will accuse their own ill-luck and not the rulers.
>And I think that our braver and better youth, besides their other honours and rewards, might have greater facilities of intercourse with women given them; their bravery will be a reason, and such fathers ought to have as many sons as possible.

>> No.11846695

>>11846615
There can be no philosopher king.
There is no truth.
Only power.
Anything else is resentment.

>> No.11846702

>>11846695
um no sweetie, plato already refuted that in book I of the republic

>> No.11846801

>>11846649
He’s just proposing broad ideas, but being virtuous (ie not espousing some kind of bastardized version of Social Darwinism like you’re doing) would make you more ‘worthy’.

He did the same thing in Laws. You were only supposed to have so many children and the population was supposed to be kept so constant that no new housing development was to occur within the city. Population control was something very important for this man.

But he picture isn’t as you’ve painted it, or interpreted it