Great Minds - Part 1 - Plato's Republic I: Justice, Power, and Knowledge

[Music] Plato's Republic is arguably the greatest achievement in Western philosophy and it's also one of the greatest achievements in Western literature it's surely the high point of the ancient political tradition and it's naturally enough the high point of Platonism as well in this lecture I'd like to examine the first book of the Republic there are ten books and the reason why I think that the first book is particularly interesting and deserves particular examination on our part is because the main themes of the Republic are stated there and these main themes of the Republic are the main things of themes of platonic philosophy and the Republicans at least the first book of the public in some ways is a self-contained cabinet or area within the dialogue it is believed by some German scholars and I don't know that it's a certain certainly correct belief but there's been a conjecture that the Republic that the first book of the Republic was written as a separate dialogue called the racemic as' and possibly later on it was reworked so that it could be the kind of beginning of a huge and enormous ly important dialogue the Republic and because of that fact because of the fact that the first book of the public seems in some ways to be self-contained and in other ways seems to be setting up the argument and the thought and the drama of the Republic it's particularly worth our close examination now Socrates narrates the Republic to an unknown audience and what he says in the first paragraph or in the first page in some ways is the most important paragraph the most important page in the whole dialogue or all perhaps in all the Platonic dialogues it's here the Socrates states the basic themes of the Republican in some Ray's the best basic themes of platonic political and moral philosophy and you might compare the Republic book one to a symphony in which themes are being stated early on that will be developed and articulated and then we will fold these things back into a conclusion at the end so the basic themes the Republic get announced in that first sentence that first paragraph that first page the first scene so there's a sort of microcosm expansion into a macrocosm that we see when we move from the first part of this of Republic to the body of the Republic itself now what happens in the first scene well Socrates says down I went to Piraeus moving up and moving down once we get to the divided line and the myth of the cave in book six and seven we're gonna find are loaded with philosophical significance whenever you're low or down you're in the dark you're at the bottom of the cave so when Plato's that when Socrates says down and I went to Piraeus what he is is foreshadowing the philosopher Kings move down from the realm of philosophical knowledge to the the people the demos of Athens the Piraeus incidentally is the center of democratic politics in Athens in other words it's the place where most foreigners are and it's the place where the the shipping goes on and those are there's a lot of interchange with the external world and it's a Democratic stronghold so when Socrates says down I went to Piraeus what we see there is the philosopher coming down that's just the first line what happens when he gets down there is that he and Glaucon his companion go to see a festival and to pray in other words they go for two reasons one for entertainment to become spectators theorists in the original Greek sense and also for reasons of piety they want to see the torch the parade for the goddess and they want to see the various rights that are going on and after observing these rites they go back up they intend to move back up symbolically to a level of philosophical sophistication Glaucon is certainly the most admirable and impressive of the interlocutors in this dialogue so Socrates and Glaucon are about to go back up when a slave boy comes up and says stop you cannot go anywhere now the slave boy belongs to polemic as' an acquaintance of Socrates his father is also known to Socrates father's callous and the slave boy orders them to wait and Glaucon takes the initiative and says yes we'll wait and then polemic this eventually comes up with a number of other Athenian gentlemen and they say and there's a very important interchange in that first page of the dialogue what happens is this the gentlemen that are accompanying polemic 'us come up to Socrates and Glaucon and say we want you to come to our house don't go anywhere you cannot get away you know we want you to come with us and Socrates says well we had really planned to get away we really hadn't expected to spend much time here down in Piraeus he says none that see how many of us there are see how few of you there are either prove stronger than us or come with us now what we have here is the establishment of the basic theme of the Republic the dialectic between power and knowledge the people with the power don't know what they're talking about they're not philosophers the one philosopher the man that has real political knowledge is the one that is subject to the many so we have here is the imbalance between power and knowledge that theme gets stated again and again and again the interaction between force and persuasion Socrates says well isn't there one more possibility that we could persuade you to let us go and one of the men that have come up to to arrest them to stop their progress says well could you persuade us if we don't listen think about that in terms of the apology think about that in terms of the death of Socrates think about that in terms of Socrates placed within the polis his function as something within the city but also external to the city he's an alien in the city of his birth so when all these framing dialogues when the first part of any of the dialogues happens give those special care in this particular case because this is the greatest of the Platonic dialogues the framing scene the first scene is of the utmost consequence because all symbolically all the greatest things the Republic of being represented there the connection between force and knowledge the place of the philosopher in the city the relationship between the philosopher and the Deimos are all represented there it's this disjunction between power and knowledge that makes the Republic necessary that makes an inquiry into the nature of a good political order absolutely necessary so at the end of this little discussion and no one goes for about a page when they decide to go to Kepha Lissa's house socrates doesn't want to go he doesn't want to associate with these guys he wants to go back up again and when we get to book six and seven you'll find out what up and down mean in this but he's intense to move up to the realm of the Sun he doesn't want to talk to these people but as we find out in book seven of the Republic as well the philosopher must be made to come down among the people because that's good for and it's good for the people as well the philosophy may not enjoy it but there's a sort of moral obligation now the moral obligation in this case is submerged under the obligations imposed by force but one overlaps the other in this case so at the end of this little dialogue or this little vignette this is this framing scene they say well there are lots of them and there's only two of us and Glaucon says well okay we'll go at this point what's very important is that Socrates doesn't make any decisions Glaucon is making decisions for himself and for Socrates why well because in an unhealthy state in a badly organised political entity inferior men make decisions for philosophers right now there's all the symbolism is going on this is only the first page into it so what you will want to do after you read the Republic he's read this first book again and read this first page or two three or four times you the Republic is a funny sort of a book I always tell my students when I lecture on this that you can't really read the Republic for the first time until you've read it two or three times strangers that may seem in order to really get yourself in a position where you could appreciate what's going on where you can begin to ask the intelligent questions you have to pay your dues and slog through it twice or three times in particular this first book is of great importance for that so at the end of this little decision they take a vote and of course Socrates says I guess I've got to go with him everybody's voting to take me on to catalases house the idea of this spot of this group of men spontaneously turning into a democracy is of great significance why because it means that we're going to make a whole series of comments about Athenian democracy and we'll talk later on about various kinds of regime and one of these kinds of regime will be the democratic regime and will find that polemic is the gentleman who says you stay here you're coming with us he turns out to be at least initially the archetype of the democratic man so the city is like the man will be one of the key themes of the book and when we go back we'll find out the connection between the city and the man is being forged much earlier than you might have guessed on a first reading so take my word for when you are reading the Republic you must go back and read it more than once but in particular this first scene in this first book of crucial to your understanding of this well they get too polemic Issa's house and his father careless is there careful this is a very aged man and he has just finished the sacrifices he has a wreath of a ceremonial wreath on his head and he comes in and he warmly greets Socrates and he says Socrates we don't see very much of you down here in Piraeus of course when we when you read the words prayers you're supposed to think here in the Democratic stronghold of Athens because after all democratic Athens killed Socrates all right the man who claims to know more claims not to be the equal of every other man and that means in some ways it's a fundamental antagonism between the philosophical project and the Democratic City so when carefully says we don't see you much down here in Piraeus this the Democratic stronghold what he's saying is that wow this is something unusual philosopher among the people Socrates engages in a very short interchange with carefulness but it's symbolically very significant careful is has just come in from doing the ancestral sacrifices and Socrates says you know Callas you're an old man and it's not that I'm so young but you're certainly a good deal older than I am a generation or so please what's it like to get old in other words there's not much more that I would want that Socrates might want to find out from Catholics because he's not a great thinker but he does have some experience that Socrates doesn't maybe it'll be edifying for all these other young men what's it like to get old do you like it has it been good or bad what do you think of it you know a lot of people complain about it what's your word on it and Kepler says that's not so bad you know at one time III thought that it would be terrible but I found that old age is bearable provided you have money and Socrates says well why do you need money he says well you know here's a problem that I've had when I was young I was a lot I was a real sport all right I like sex and wine and money and power I like the sort of allurements of the external world you know there's in his younger years keffe list was what might be called an erotic man not erotic in this limited sense of just sexually erotic but he had lots of desire he wanted things and he was not terribly scrupulous and the way he got the things that he wanted because good sensation or our pleasure seemed to be the best thing that one could obtain according to chemists so he said I did that all my younger years and I had quite a good time I lived the good life I made some money and you know I I've been happy living here in Athens particularly because I'm not a citizen you know he's a foreigner what's called a medic and Kevlar says now that I've gotten older you know I start to worry about the gods and divine retribution in other words I did something perhaps I'm not proud of nowadays and I look back on my life and you know I used to laugh at these stories about Hades and the bad stuff that happened to you after you die but now you know I've started to contemplate my own death and it turns out at least implicitly the contemplation of death is salutary in other words it starts to think about the fact that he's not going to be here forever and the gods may been like adding all his up and saying that you're gonna pay after you die so kathlynn says now I've started to worry about that so here's the good thing about money gives you a happy old age you can take that money and pay back everybody that you're stolen from right you know do kind of deal there so that look I know that I got over on you and I know that I and I swindled you but here's some money back what do you say we call it even so you can make amends with human beings and also this is crucial you can bribe the gods you know the gods are still going to be ticked off at you but if you do the right sacrifices and you say the right prayers and you go through the right ceremonies the gods are going to give you a get out of hell free card well I should get it you know it's like monopoly you don't have to go to Hades and have terrible things happen to you now this is important because this is the kind of thing that motivates catalyst in other words he's a superstitious erotic sort of a man and he's gotten to the point where his eros has diminished so that the reasoning part or at least the the part that has a conscience can become important if not take over because he's he would clearly be a neurotic man now if his body hadn't collapsed right he gives a wonderful quote from I believe Sophocles someone came up to Sophocles when he was an old man and said Sophocles can you still have sex with a woman are you still you know or have you become impotent as an old man and Sophocles says nay man I was very glad to become impotent it was like getting away from a harsh and cruel master I'm much better off not getting involved with sex thank God this has been taken away from me and carefulness approves this he says you know that's about the best thing that could happen to you not to have erotic drives at all it makes you nice to the people it makes you nice to yourself it means that you could possibly be a moral human being this is symbolically significant as well as quite funny the symbolic significance is that the Republic to a great extent is about the organization and direction of human desire arrows the arrows for sex or the arrows for knowledge or the arrows for power or the arrows for honor we'll be the distinguishing characteristics in the various sorts of souls and in the various kinds of regime so in other words what you love what you want what you desire will be the characteristic sort of pull of your soul and of the city that corresponds to a given soul calf Alissa City is clearly the city of unrestrained desire right while he still has a young man's desires he behaves in an immoral way when the young man's desires wane and he now has the the kind of limited partial desires of an old man and then he says you know what I like speeches a lot more now than I used to and Socrates must be thinking well look if I could have done anything for you I would have had you'd like speeches 20 30 40 years ago so you could have lived a good and virtuous life now you're an old man you're about to die and now you tell me you like speeches it's too late now my friend so Socrates doesn't say this of course Socrates says well what can you tell me about justice and money and how they're connected and Socrates and Kepler says to him well it helps you avoid the wrath of the gods it helps you not do injustice to any other man and it may be very hard to be poor and virtuous I mean because he can't imagine a virtuous man not having any money but think of Socrates but Kepler says well so long as you're moderately good and you have some respect for the gods and you have some money old age is really quite a bit quite bearable well it's not good he's asked him about the nature of justice you know what what's involved in justice and Catholics tells me two things involved in justice one to tell the truth which is probably not the strongest of calluses early adventures and two it's to give back what is owed in other words careful s has a very pedestrian sort of mind he's been in business all his life and he says look if you borrow something from somebody you should give it back to them that's justice and if you tell somebody something it should be the truth that's justice now it's not that those things aren't parts of the truth but what one can imagine circumstances in which it might be just not to give something back or not to tell the truth and you can imagine other things that might be included in a more elaborate and a more detailed conception of justice in other words careful is's definition of justice is very unsound it's limited and it doesn't completely overlap the true form of justice as we'll find out later well Socrates says we'll look you tell me that it's just to give back what is owed but you borrow a sword from somebody and the guy goes crazy you have to give him back the sword then now think about the reason why he chooses this example and again this is another thing you're gonna have to look at very carefully when you read the Republic but also when you read the dialogues as a whole nothing happens by accident and Plato never chooses an example from nowhere the examples are always intended to show you something about the character the character or the soul of the person being talked to all right the reason why he chooses a sword in the case of Catholics his catalyst has come almost completely selfish and a sword if you give it back to someone that's crazy he may kill you with it so the reason why you ought not to give back a sword when you borrow it from someone that's insane is because of your own self-interest all right and that immediately appeals to Catholic if Allah says okay yeah you're right you shouldn't give back a sword of somebody that's crazy that's not justice right so that was very carefully chosen and there's only a three or four page interaction but there's a lot of symbolic business going on there he's introducing some of the major themes now just as we get to this point Kevlar says well okay I guess my theory of Justice is not quite adequate but I gotta go take care of the sacrifices you know I'm in the midst of doing these religious rituals look at my soul's got all these sins on it I want to go take care of business so I leave the argument to my son polemic is a couple of points here number one we have to get rid of carefulness why because he represents ancient ancestral piety it's superstitious and it's not morally good but it's not morally completely corrupt either we have to get rid of the old man and the old ways in the old religions before we can embark upon our real discussion of justice so we'll state the themes in a light and airy way in the early part of the dialogue but first things first we're gonna have to get rid of the established usages particularly the established religion so his son Telemachus is going to pick become quote the heir of the dialogue like all the other property that kelas has and kelas and plumbers are very interested in property he says you're my son plumb because you take it up I'm gonna go do the sacrifice so he's out and he's not going to come back for the rest of the dialogue this is important because we have to clear the slate before we embark on our expedition in search of justice so let's get rid of all the established usages it would be impiety include kefla sin this calf an old man has done the best he could to improve his soul it's not gonna get any better the best thing you can do is to step back let him go show respect and then bring in move from antiquated religious beliefs to living philosophy let's get the young man that can still be changed that his laws of life and I ahead of him polemic Asst then first thing he does is appeal to semana DS he says at least if some oddities is to be believed justice is giving back is a is giving what what is due and Socrates says well that's a very interesting thing a couple of points here the only time that cat that polemic ass or anybody else and for the rest of the dialogue is going to appeal to Authority is right here in other words the after we get rid of old established religious convention the next thing we're going to get rid of is appeals to Authority so Socrates is going to go in inquire into what polemic is has to say and he's going to say to a polemic Asst well first of all what does what does some of these mean when he says that justice is giving what is due and polemic is says well I think it's doing help to friends and others helping your friends out that's what to do and Socrates is well that's interesting I mean I can believe that you you should help your friends so what sort of things should you do to help and what should you do to enemies what happens then it's and well polemic just thinks he knows he says well here's what you should do you should do good things for friends help out your friends and do harm to your enemies injure your enemies well that turns out to be a problem it turns out that first of all justice which is supposed to be the most important of virtues and everyone praises because it to be useful in contracts for example if you agree to perform a certain contract then you go and do it later on the difficulty is is that it seems that if you are able to perform contracts accurately and justly justice will also allow you to perform them unjustly if it allows you to preserve wealth it allows you to steal wealth if it allows you to do some good to friends it also allows you to do some hurt to friends how do you know that justice is only morally good and how do you know that justice demands that we do harm to enemies well polemics gets a little flustered he restates his argument and then he says well okay I think that leave some oddities out of it first of all all right it pulls away it starts to think for himself she was an important step in the dialogue and Socrates says well if you want to find out the real nature of justice you have to find out what you owe other people and what sort of things are due to them now let's take it as agreed that we have to do help to enemies we have to benefit oh what we have to do help to friends we have to benefit our friends but what should a good man do to an enemy does a good man have any enemies well polemarchus says yeah you should injure them or harm them socrates comes back and goes after him in the following way he makes the following sort of an argument he says well look if you wanted to to do something just or virtuous for horses you would improve the horse right you wouldn't make it worse in other words and you had to prove it with reference to the virtue of horses in other words here we bring in the word arrete which can be translated as virtue can be translated as excellence but the idea is that when you want to do it when you want to treat a horse well when you know about horsemanship what you do with things that improve the air at a of the horse you prove the virtue of the horse as a horse you don't want to give the horse the virtue of a table or the virtue of a sheep you want to give it the virtue particularly and exclusively appropriate to it same sort of argument applies when we're dealing with human beings when you want to treat a human being just Lee you don't do diminish them with reference to human virtue you have when you want to deal with people justly you improve them in human virtue socrates then makes the argument that the good man does no one any harm the good man does exclusively good things both the people he considers friends and to whoever it is that might be considered his enemy there's an argument to make that the good man has no enemies that there are people that may feel evilly disposed towards a good man like Socrates or like some other good man but that Socrates himself has no enemies he benefits those people that like him but he also does his best to benefit those people that don't like him and Socrates conception of benefit is tied up with this conception of virtue since virtue is knowledge for Socrates the benefit that you owe to those who like you and to those who don't like you the benefit that you owe to all men is education so the point of Socratic interaction of Socratic dialogue is the improvement of the people he's speaking to through this dialectical education and that Socrates will do this both to people that consider themselves friendly and to people that consider themselves enemies the best example will be through Simic astir Simba cos thinks himself as being Socrates antagonist but all through the dialogue Socrates when he refers to through Simic who says look there's amicus Allah and I have just become friends but we were never enemies the good man has no enemies the good man is exclusively devoted to the idea of improving all fellow human beings all right that'll link up with Socrates idea of piety piety real piety his service to the God by improving your fellow man alright so what he's gonna try and show polemarchus is that the good man does no one any harm all right there are many sort of Christian overtones to this but I think that Socrates does it not because of some sort of mystical obligation but because he's convinced that to be just means to wish justice and thus improvement and this benefits to everyone in the world being just is what makes a man truly a social animal being completely unjust pulls you out of society makes you an animal that's it that's a social Socrates in some ways is the most social of animals the most social of men because he understands that he has universal moral obligations educational obligations to everyone an example of what he's doing or the kind of obligation he has is his benefit of polemic is in this argument right he takes this young kid that thinks he knows what justice is and says look son first of all the things you think are completely insufficient not only are they insufficient but you know I no longer want you to appeal to Authority from now on I just want you to think on your own I want to hear less quotes and more thinking that comes directly from you and when you and I work through the argument we will find that what I'm doing to you now improving you morally by teaching you something that's what you owe to all men right that's what that's giving what is owed because that's what's truly that's your true obligation well after this kind of Universal benefit in this argument that the good man does no one any harm gets established through simha cos the key figure in this argument makes his approach makes his attack now through Symmachus all through is compared to an animal to a wild animal to a wolf to a lion the idea is that through Simek is first of all is an anti social individual he is the Sophists he is the tyrannical man he is the man that thinks that desire is a good thing and the more you gratify your desires the better off you are all right he is the spiritual antipode of Socrates and Socrates is going to be kind of a philosophical lion tamer Socrates is going to go after his argument and if not completely refuted because the arguments that he uses offici right he will do sufficient damage to the argument or he will call the argument into question sufficiently to silence through some occurs that's the secret of true Symmachus and all the Sophists they're ultimately nihilistic I think and nihilism ultimately collapses back down into silence you don't refute us office you quiet them down and by reducing them to the silence from which they came that's the best you're likely to do with this office there's one or two exceptions to that rule but that pretty much is the way it works this pure power politics this pure ego gratification is ultimately nihilistic mimimi and what you do is you collapse that down because solipsistic ation and towards individual satisfaction is not only antisocial but it tends to make language breakdown as well as victims Don pointed out to us language is intrinsically a social enterprise and it's something we share it's something we have in common when you try and isolate yourself both morally and politically and linguistically the result is silence a collapse of discourse that's why they prefer rhetoric and long speeches to dialectic Sophos never want to get involved with dialectic there's too much give-and-take there's too much community these tyrannical men are the are in opposition to community both linguistic and political so Socrates says well Symmachus I don't mean to you know to play games with you I mean if you didn't like my criticism of polemic is I mean please we'd be happy to have you explain it to us and he says no no I'm gonna pin you down this time Socrates you give me an answer you tell us all directly what justice is and don't tell me that it's the needful or the helpful or the advantageous or the useful or any of that sort of thing give me some specific concrete thing the Justice is now first of all it's tells us a lot about throws images he's a concrete specific kind of a guy he doesn't like these air a platonic abstractions that the realm in which the south is never deal very well you very rarely with the exception somebody like Hippias do you see its office talking about mathematics they like tables and chairs they like political power they like the gratification of immediate desire so sir simcha says look don't tell me it's useful needful advantageous any of that stuff Socrates says well look I can't answer you I mean you're a lot smarter than I am you know a great deal more than I do this is the the favorite Socratic move of taking a step back all right and then say bring it on right right this is saying the fools rush in Socrates teaches is that you don't rush right into an argument and tell people what you think you're much more likely to sustain your argument if you retreat a little bit think about what you're trying to say and then go for the the block rather than attacking directly it's much easier to defend than attack so when their stomach this makes his attack and through semuc its thinks of rhetoric thinks of verbal interaction as being something like a Homeric battle right he's been nurtured on the Homeric on Homer and as a result he wants to do something heroic where Socrates ones will also want to do something heroic but it's a different conception of heroism all right so through simha kiss is a tyrannical man he thinks tyranny is a good thing he thinks gratifying desires is a good thing and he wants to speak but first he wants to have socrates speak so he can go after socrates so you can pick it apart socrates takes the posture of irony says well I really am NOT competent or capable you're wise there Senecas I knew and and he gets you really started to lay the irony on pretty thick he says well you best of men know far better than I do and you understand these things far greater than than most men and all that sort of stuff and what through symbolist does is very interesting he says look socrates suppose I can give you a better answer about Justice than you've been giving to anybody what do you think you deserve to to suffer suffer when soccer doesn't make anybody suffer except when he makes him squirm under dialectical inquiry he says well I should suffer what any man the cygwin should suffer I should suffer the pain of learning all right again ironic because that benefits you doesn't make you suffer and for somebody says yeah I mean sure you should not suffer the pain of learning but pay a fine and money too this is very important the Sophists speak for their own benefit Socrates speaks for the benefit of people who are listening to him Socrates never takes money for an argument Socrates doesn't charge for through civic estate because he wants reputation but also because he wants to make a few dollars so or whatever it is coins that they had then so Socrates says well I'll tell you what if you show me a better argument about justice than I have I'll pay you money when I get some now of course that's doubly ironic because Socrates has never had a job that paid in his life Socrates is you know extremely poor and he's never gonna have any money because he's never gonna make any money cuz never gonna charge anybody for the wisdom that he kicks out so this Amica says you know that's not what I came here for and vaucan steps up coz Glaucon as they say is most brave and all things very courageous man a little bit impetuous but block accepts up and he says look he has some money I'm a rich guy and I and my friends will put up some money for Socrates now this emic is for the sake of money speak and for some money talks it's so did stir silicates there's some because that's okay here's the answer justice is the advantage of the stronger they claps for himself I guess and this is clearly taken from something like or it's in the same intellectual tradition as something like through Citadis I remember the million dialogue any of the power politics that happened or that are found in Greece during the age of the Peloponnesian War the idea is that politics and morality are completely separate completely different morality has no application of politics there's only winners and losers in politics in some ways through some kisses argument that justice is the advantage of the stronger is a prefiguration of the kind of political stance that will be taken by Machiavelli or Nietzsche or in some ways in a more attenuated weight Hobbes the idea being that the physical world is I mean are that the political world is a subset of the physical world and it knows no moral law all right this is gonna be exactly the opposite of the argument of Socrates is going to make throughout the republics we're just our politics is ethics writ large well if for three mcus it's not that this there's no connection at all between politics and ethics politics is purely amount of power a question of power and getting power and getting control of the state so justice is the advantage of the stronger the shamika's is the spa for the status quo all the cities that empirically exist in Greece have a regime that makes the laws and for through Simic Asst Justus is the same thing as legality it's something close to being like legal positivism right you make a law that's what you're what justice is you obey the law and every city makes different laws and all the different cities that make different laws are making different kinds of justice because it's strictly a power relationship so Ximena says justice is the advantage of the stronger whoever's running the city justice is doing what you tell them well what they tell you now he wants to walk away after that he wants some praise and he wants the money but snockered he says well stay awhile and explain this to us you know you now you have to submit to dialectical inquiry I'm gonna take this apart and have a look at it so we can all understand it better and the first thing he says is well suppose hypothetically that the people that rule a city don't know what their interests really are which happens all the time people make mistakes about who their friends and who their foes are they make mistakes about what's good for them and what isn't suppose they lack that knowledge of what's really good for them so legislating in what they think is their interests they legislate against their own interests what happens then through semuc assists there's a little colloquy then between polemic rest's and quite a fun the Cardiff on isn't gonna come back in these remember there are 11 people in catalases house at the time only six of them talk and actually only two of them Glaucon a Tomatis the real important interlocutors with socrates in this dialogue but there's a small colloquy here at that point between Clara fond and polemic 'us trying to support their favorite heroes in other words polemic is has been made a Socratic just in that earlier discussion he says you know Socrates is a smart guy I'm able to learn something for him I'm gonna support his half of the argument I'm gonna lend a little hand there clarifying is a hanger-on of through Simic as' and they have a little colloquy they're important later on polemic risk will be admitted into the argument just once at the beginning of book 5 and quite a fun will never be allowed to talk again right and there's a reason for that I'll try and explain what that reason is but the point is it little colloquy and then through some occurs resumes the argument what specific it says is this it's not the case that when a group a person or a group people are legislating for the city and for themselves if they don't know what their good is if they don't know what what's really in their interest well I don't mean those people are true legislators the true legislator is the man or group of men that knows what is bet what his interests are and legislates in those interests in other words it's a funny sort of a move that through some occurs makes here he's moving from a description of the way in which cities actually work and he's moving from the descriptive treatment to a normative treatment in other words every city every legislator ought to legislate in their true interest and if they don't well then they're not the real legislator and obviously he's pulling a page out of Socrates book here the real doctor is the one who knows how to cure the real shoemaker is the one who knows how to make shoes and apparently through some because is now trying to take this empirical descriptive idea and make it normative the real legislature for the Symmachus is the person that knows their interest and legislation to get what they want now Socrates is gonna give this a hard time he says a couple of things here first he says well does the any kind of art any kind of in this case and what we mean by are here the translational artists technique which involves crafts and arts all those activities that work according to certain rules or principles that are governed by rules you would just oppose art technique to things like poetry where who knows how a poet gets his inspiration where's you can explain to someone how to make shoes or how to be a doctor so here we're going to talk about the art of politics and we're going to connect politics with the other kind of techniques the those rule governed activities okay so he says uh is the political art that kind of art apparently it is and here's a funny thing in every case the art that governs a particular domain in the same way that met in the way that medicine governs the domain of body is sick or healthy bodies and in the same way that shoemaking governs shoes either made or you know not yet made any given art is interested in the domain of its art not in the good of the artist in other words as a doctor a physician is someone that heals bodies not someone that takes care of himself that makes money as a shoemaker assuming a cobbler is someone that makes shoes not someone that takes care of himself as a shepherd alright um Shepherd is concerned with the good of his flock not with his own benefit so Socrates makes the argument that in every case any techne is concerned with the benefit of its object or subject not the person that is that not the technician well Theresa Mika says well then through some case when he gradually gets reduced to silence goes ad hominem you'll find that it almost all the dialogues when a Sophos doesn't get his way when a sawfish doesn't like the tender van or the tendency of an argument they do one of two things they shut up and they get real petulant there's the beginning be hey vlack spoiled five-year-olds right they won't talk to you and then the next thing that happens if they start to lose face because again these men are very concerned with their status they're not going to get money from being great speakers if Socrates makes them look foolish so they either become quiet and withdrawn or they become petulant and spoiled Certificates does both he says Socrates do you have a wet nurse she should wipe your nose now this is not done in the best circles you know in the great platonic interlocutors never go ad hominem against Socrates because well it's like it's taste as well as kind of intellectual strength and through supper he says well what are you talking about what do you mean he says well look don't tell me that the Shepherd supervises the Sheep in the interest of the Sheep he supervises the sheep because he's interested in consuming lamb chops so he does it for his own benefit don't tell me that you're going to get this that the techniques supervises the thing that it applies to in fact every techne serves the interest of the technician and only the technician as long as the doctor gets paid it doesn't make any difference whether he cures bodies or not as the idea as Socrates thinks about that for a second ago well please for some because don't go away like the bath man yet in in Athens when you took the bath someone would pour in a warm water in and then walk away there's no because we was walking away like a bath but Socrates let's hold on for a second now come back and let's have a look at that let's think about that argument says I need to know something you say that that the unjust man tries to get the better of everybody it's not the case and that that's what makes him such a great kind of heroic sort of a figure in some ways he's like the figures in the Homeric poetry well this hold this this unjust man that's wise and smart and capable okay yes something like Machiavelli and vir - all right well this unjust man he tries to get the better of his opposite which is the just man and he tries to get the better of all the other unjust men in the world in other words he tries to make himself king of the hill is not the case there's my guess their maker says yes of course that's the case he wants to get all the good things for himself he wants to have lots and lots of desires and satisfy them as much as he can he wants me something like I guess Achilles you know any of the great Homeric heroes well he says think about this through some against everyone who really is knowledgeable about an art that really understands some sort of technic do they want to get the better of everybody or do they just want to get the better people who don't know what's going on true so MCUs doesn't immediately catch on because it's not an obvious argument since we'll think of it this way for a person that doesn't know a technic aren't they the ones that want to get the better of everybody whereas a person that really thoroughly knows the technique only wants to get the better of people who are different who are who don't know what they're doing rather than those who do let me give you a concrete example make it a little more obvious imagine a doctor cardiologist knows all about hearts now if someone has a heart attack and a real cardiologist goes up and starts doing the appropriate medical thing to him well then suppose the second cardiologist walks in and sees that the guys had a heart attack and sees this that the cardiologist is doing something good for me am a cardiologist in this case as a man who knows the techne the medicine of hearts well the second cardiologist says well no that's the right procedure that's the right treatment I don't want to do anything I don't want to get the better of him said get off him I'm gonna do the right cardiac thing as long as the firt as long as both doctors really understand this techni really understand doctoring well then the second physician doesn't want to get the better of the first now consider in a second SEC circumstance someone has a heart attack and a quack doctor comes in first and he starts some procedure that's completely inappropriate to someone that has a heart attack because he's a quack doctor doesn't know anything now our cardiologist comes in again has a look at what's going on here and says get away from him you're gonna kill this guy he's having a heart attack and here you are doing some ridiculous procedure that has nothing to do with the knowledge of medicine what this means or the what I'm taking this as an instantiation of his the idea that the true knower the true technician or the true craftsman artist something like that in this case the art of doctoring doesn't want to get the better of people that know doctoring they see look he's a real doctor he knows his business he's handling this right I don't have to do anything but he certainly wants to get the better of the quack doctor because he's going to harm the patient and remember this doctor who has the second one who has the technique is interested in the benefit of the patient all right so now we make this analogy move from the doctors art to the political art does the real politician does he want a rule does he was mostly see he comes to a city that's well-run that has a real lawful king who has real political knowledge and it's running this is the city very well does he want to usurp that power no in the same way that the doctor doesn't want to take over from the other doctor he's doing just fine on the other hand when a city is badly run by people that don't have political knowledge that make foolish laws or foolish decisions and a real politically knowledgeable person comes in a political philosopher comes in does he want to get the better of that city yes that's analogous to the case of the quack doctor so in every case Socrates makes the argument that the knower only wants to get the better of the ignorant and only for the for the benefit of the person who's going to be harmed by the ignorance but the ignorant man always wants to get the better both of other ignorant men and of other knowledgeable men and that respect make the world worse and harm the thing that this technique applies to whether it's medicine to bodies or political theory to cities the argument then is this socrates shows through Simic Asst that every art is interested in the domain that it covers and that the true artists in the sense the true technician of the true craftsman wants to supersede only those who don't understand the craft if you do understand the craft all the other craftsmen in the world are on the same side and you can look at the craft of medicine or the craft of politics one is dovetailed into the other now through C MCUs is silenced at this point and the key thing here one of the great great small snippets in all the plate it's in Section 350 D through Symmachus blushes it's beautiful oh yes Thurston Waqqas has been sweating profusely through this grilling from Socrates because he got to he was forced to stay and he wants to look good in front of all these young men because he's an outsider and he wants to make money selling his sophistry to the young men of Athens so he stays and does battle with Socrates and Socrates shows him that not only do you not understand politics but you don't even understand how to talk Socrates ties him all up and at the end there Simic is candy can't talk anymore he blushes and then he gets even more petulant now sir Simic is blushing and sweating right shows that Socrates grilled him and grilled him well on the other hand even though through Simba kiss is silenced he's not refuted the reason why is that many of these arguments are fishy many of them are quite dubious and Socrates is doing this on purpose you see here's another thing you have to think about when you read the dialogues when Sacher do it first of all when you think Socrates is making a bad argument the chances are that he's making a good ottoman and you don't understand it that's number one all right I know it's if any time you think it's a bad argument look through it again usually if you reread it or think it over more thoroughly you will come to the collusion this is a better argument than you thought that's problem number one but there are other times when there are legitimately bad arguments in Plato there my argument is that generally speaking these are intentional perhaps not always because Plato like anyone is going to make mistakes but these dialogues have put together with a remarkable and almost unbelievable amount of care and logical precision and when you find a bad argument in Plato usually what it means is that Plato is making a mistake instructively in other words when you really find an argument that doesn't make sense he's doing one of two things one is trying to gesture it's something else happens occasionally or two even more interesting he's setting up the further the development of the argument now at the end of book 1 Socrates has met and stopped the discourse on justice produced by three people callous polemic as' and through some occurs all three of these people are non citizens rights Catholics and his son Telemachus of both medics their resident aliens they're some because it is a transient teacher of rhetoric look to which is what's being set up here is going to be is gonna start out the dialogue between Socrates at a mantis and Glaucon Adam Montes and Glaucon are both native Athenians that both talented men they're both smart and they're all both up-and-coming young men who are thinking about careers in politics the real point of the Republic is the battle over the education of these noble Souls well through Simic iSpy the educator or will Socrates the reason why Socrates meets through Simic astone li with inferior arguments is that he's trying to bait the young men into starting a big discussion about the nature of justice and the nature of virtue and the only way that he can do that is by defeating force images but not defeating him so thoroughly that the argument is wrapped up he wants to bring the boys in and say look and have them radicalized the argument the idea being that the defeated force images will lead to a more detailed complete discussion of justice based upon the radicalization of their Simek is argument by Adam Montes and Glaucon Adam Montes and Glaucon are the real object of this discussion Socrates wants to take over their education and he can only do that first by defeating through some ACCA's and second by igniting their curiosity about the nature of justice

Channel: Michael Sugrue

Views: 44,692

Rating: 4.9558501 out of 5

Keywords: Michael Sugrue, Dr. Michael Sugrue, Lecture, History, Philosophy, Western Culture, Western Intellectual Tradition, Great Minds, The Latter Wittgenstein, The Philosophy of Language

Id: 8rf3uqDj00A

Length: 46min 22sec (2782 seconds)

Published: Mon Jul 20 2020