Please watch for watch time thanks - Plato, The Republic

[Music] let's finally review Plato there Republic why am I doing this how did I go from Ukraine it's cringe for you me to even bring it up but like I used to scream at horror games anyway I'm new to philosophy and I have always been told that I should always start with the Greeks and no thank you i always say i would rather read there but finally I picked up Plato's symposium because it was fairly short and I thought why not but I was very happily surprised it was very good it felt like looking through a window of time where you joined the dinner table of ancient Greek philosophers discussing through the night there are thoughts on eros their desires and it was very nice so naturally led me to read one to read the Republic which is arguably Plato's greatest work if not one of the greatest political western philosophies of all time what a title everyone and again I was very happily surprised how much I enjoyed it for those who don't know it's a it's a dialectic it's a dialogue between two people or a couple people with different views and somehow coming to some form of conclusion and I find this style of writing to be so much more engaging and immersing seem like I described with the symposium Plato's writing is about coming to a conclusion together and Plato himself self-admittedly doesn't have all the answers that's why I picked this book because I think it could be interesting to discuss because of all of these things that I just said how do I make videos sorry this will be a very long video but that's strap on and put on your vlog seatbelts and let's freakin do this please keep watching I need the watch time just put put on the video in the background I don't care just keep we have some couple important notes before we begin Plato the Republic is a very controversial piece of literature it challenges fundamental ideas not just around society but also how we review our own lives in ways that might feel a bit uncomfortable it probably should make you feel uncomfortable and I think that's a lot of times the point as a way to challenge ideas I don't know if that's true or not I just threw that in there but most importantly I just want to say here early on big disclaimer I do not agree with every single idea that this author has a necessary 20:19 disclosure everyone I think most people wouldn't agree with all the ideas of Plato and Plato himself doesn't agree with all his ideas so we get later on he'll disc criticize his own thoughts basically I am NOT an expert I am not pretending that I know everything about this I will just give my own summary and thoughts around the different topics discussed and I highly encourage you to do your own study and research to fully get that proper grasp of this book this is going great first of all I think it's important to understand why this book was written to fully understand where the ideas came from to properly critique something you you need more than just the ideas you need to understand where the ideas come from and a lot of the more crazy ideas of Plato that a republic will make a lot more sense with these things in mind I think at least so some quick background basically Plato lived in 428 did I get that right that's right 428 BC in Athens Greek in Greece Greece Athens and the ancient Greek as I'm sure a lot of you are already familiar with defined a lot of our Western civilization babe had massive leaps in not just philosophy but our literature biology architecture politics and much much more all this while simultaneously fighting two wars the Persian War and the Peloponnesian War this has relevance we will get there I promise just keep the video going in the background so during the Persian War where the Greeks were vastly outnumbered I always imagined like the movie 300 even though that's clearly not what happened at all but the Greeks were vastly outnumbered but the way they defeat the Persians was from coming together all the different city-states of greece came together ancient greece back then was very different from how we know brief is it Greek or Greece it's really annoying me how I don't know this it was very different from what it is today it's been north and I think even across Italy all these different areas I don't know exactly the their Geographics okay but it was bigger okay and the old estates came together and just be like no Persia go away and they did it but after this word after defeating the Persians instead of all the states coming together they broke apart and they fought against each other in a civil war known as the Peloponnesian War where they fought against who should be the ruler of the city-states it was a very it was a very brutal war which you can tell just from how long it lasted 27 years and eventually Athens lost play to live who lived during this time he saw the effects of this war he people close to him that passed away and I think and I think keeping this in mind is important for some of the more crazy ideas that are proposed in the Republic because Plato wanted to avoid civil war at all cost and I think keeping that in mind is important to have an open eye open mind for the discussion the second reason I think is because Athens at this time was a democracy and that was something that the Athenians were very proud of it's something that was part of their character that they had that they lived in a democracy and it was something that they greatly upheld but in 399 BC 399 so Cortez I'll never forget that number so Curtis the philosopher was executed under this democracy and I think this is something that really affected Plato and also shaped ideas for the Republic so the Peloponnesian War and the fact that Socrates was executed I don't know if this is correct I'm just saying okay so then what was Plato's and Socrates relationship we haven't even started with the book review yet Felix this is just an essay at this point I just think it's necessary to establish early on why their relationship I didn't really know it I mean I think most people have heard of so Curtis maybe not of Plato or vice versa I don't know but so cthis was a philosopher he is a historical figure that that did exist the thing is that he never wrote down any of his work and it was Plato who basically did this but Plato writes his work in the Republic as a dialogue where Socrates is the main character and obviously we can't know for sure to what level of accuracy the dialogue actually occurred most likely it wasn't that accurate but again we don't know but it is a little bit confusing because Plato is the author and but Socrates is the main character who presents all these ideas some compare Socrates and played this relationship as a sort of teacher-student relationship which is inaccurate because so Kurt has never taught he'd spoken people listened but it also kind of fits the picture as well I like to see it as a senpai and kohai kind of relationship so then what is the Republic about you might ask how long have I recorded Oh God well Socrates is famously not interested in finding relative solutions he wants to find absolute truths if we don't know what something is then how can we properly understand it and so curtis is famous for trapping his opponents with his what is it question to give it give a definition of something and the Republic begins with such a question such a what is it question in Brooke one the novel begins with Socrates he is walking home from a religious festival and he stumbles into some acquaintances who convinced him to come over to their place he sort of half reluctantly accepts there's a couple of people in this group but let's focus on cephalus first syphilis is an older man and the dialogue begins with this what is it question coming from a soccer test who as cephalus what's it like to be so old this could be seen as a very rude question to ask someone but Socrates once to spark a conversation not about making people feel good despite the very rude question cephalus responds in a composed manner of saying that well I enjoy being old I no longer feel controlled by arrows my desires doesn't control him anymore he looked forward to being rewarded in his next life because he's lived an honest life and lived up to his legal dues so he thinks well I may be old I may be dying soon but I still will be rewarded in the next life and Socrates goes godom you just gave me a definition of justice living in an honest life and living up to your legal dues that's the definition of justice that you just gave me even though that's not my question and then to stomp over settle his argument that he never even intentionally made Socrates challenges cephalus view England further and says well if justice is living up to your legal dues then let's say for example I don't know if this is not the example he brings but let's say you borrow an axe from a friend because you need to chop some wood and then later on your friend demands to have the axe back but the friend has gone completely insane would you still give the axe back to him obviously not you you wouldn't give a weapon to a crazy person so in that's regard no justice is not living up to your legal obligations and you are just wrong in this argument that you never even made cephalus who's old is not interested in this conversation and he bids his farewell and leaves the group but there are some younger remaining people in the group who has been listening and they give their opinion on instead one of them being Chris amicus who is a sawfish Sophists were teachers I think back in ancient Greek where they would be hired by rich people to teach their sons they are the enemy of Plato and Socrates you can say because they are not interested in finding absolute truth and they're just more interested in winning an argument basically and go into whatever stretched to do so so there's images this office says gives his definition of justice and says justice is the advantage of the stronger he admits that this is not really a definition but he's saying that it pays off more to be unjust than to be just and people who are are unjust naturally progress in society and justice is a restraint put on us stopping our natural desires to progress Socrates then responds by saying well if justice is in the advantage of the stronger do people make mistakes and through simcha says yes people make mistakes and then Socrates asked well-to-do rulers make mistakes and of course recent mexico says yes rulers can make mistakes and then he finishes by saying well I don't remember if this is the exact example but let's say for example if you are a ruler and you put up a tax policy that will benefit you you will get more money from the people and you'll raise the taxes but the ruler is doing what they think is just because they have the advantage and they gain from this but let's say then that this new tax policy basically bleeds the city dry there's no more money left and eventually it will end up hurting the ruler because he's left with less than what he had from the beginning and you know longer acquire anything from its citizens therefore justice is not in fact in the advantage of the stronger because rulers makes mistakes through Simic has response then by saying well I need to win this argument justice is what the ruler thinks is in the advantage of the stronger and very interestingly their Simba cos sort of just disappears from the book at this point he could very well still be part of the group and listening silently but it's not worthy how he disappears at this point because he brings up the subject he brings up the the relative argument and so Curtis just isn't interesting interested in it that's not the reason of this dialogue he wants to find the ultimate troop of what is justice Socrates has now defeated his opponents more or less but the rest of the group is not entirely satisfied golovkin who is another member of the party wants a better definition of justice is just life superior to an unjust life it's a question that they ask and they want Socrates to prove it and maybe you were thinking while finding the definition of justice that's really not that interesting at least first when I heard about it I wasn't completely engaged but when you think about it and a broad broad sense it it really shapes everything in our lives what is good and what is bad what is right and wrong is being it's being just better than being unjust why should you live an unjust life instead of an unjust life I think it's a very interesting topic that I've never asked myself before and gakuen brings up a very interesting example kokom says that justice is social bond a contract between people which I think can make sense he expressed as much like her Simic has said that we have a natural desire to wanting to gain more and the only reason we don't act unjust is because we don't want unjust things happened to ourselves and if the whole world acted unjust then everyone would just stand to lose from it so therefore it's a social contract his view of Justice so therefore in his view justice comes from weakness and it comes from fear and he brings up this example of the ring of guy G's which is a magical ring so he brings up this thought example of if you had a ring that could render you invisible would you still act just I think I've played around with this idea and maybe you have as well where if you had something where if you could do something unjust and no one would know about it would you do it and Glaucon argues that anyone with this ring even the most just person would still act unjust because if you're invisible no one will know about it you could rot rob a bank or you could I don't know and do all kinds of things I'm not gonna bring up their example whenever people ask me what my superpower ability would be I always thought okay well what superpower could I get that would benefit me the most and not face any consequences so I think this definition fits in pretty well and I think it fits in with actually what a lot of people look at justice it's a pretty I think a common common way to look at it but we may maybe we've never actually thought about it Edda man just join us into the conversation as well with who is glaucon's brother I think and he says that justice itself isn't desirable and that we only act just because we want to be rewarded in the afterlife so therefore element is in Vulcan want Socrates to prove to them that justice in itself is desirable and that living a just life is better than living in a unjust life and Socrates warns Adam enticing glaucon that this is gonna be a very long journey to get through and I will warn you in case you made it this far in this video that yes in fact it will be very long video but they are up for the task they're young and they're excited and they they want to find the answer I also think it's interesting how Socrates purposely wanted to hear everyone else's argument at this point he hasn't really expressed his own views he's literally he's actually just picked apart what other people's ideas are but this is really where the book begins all of its own topic to find the definition of justice and the way Plato or Socrates does this I think it's very surprising and very interesting to prove that justice is superior he brings up the analogy of the human in a macro perspective of a city it's called the city Sol analogy and basically it means that to prove that a just city is happier than an unjust City the same analogy can be drawn between a just man and an unjust man what a just man is happier than an unjust person and so begins the very long journey of the Republic I will brush through some points just to save time and I also still don't understand all of it to be honest I guess I'm just too old so to craft this society so curtis says that each person in this city must specialized to maximize the efficiency of the city he wants a shoemaker to focus solely on making shoes a doctor to solely focus on doing doctor things and that a shoemaker who specializes will always be better than a shoemaker that doesn't specialize and the shoemaker will always be better at making shoes then a doctor can make shoes and a doctor will always be a better doctor than a shoemaker ok I think you understand what I mean so this city will initially just start off with farmers craftsmen doctors the city will live with just what is necessary and and won't go beyond that and Socrates calls that this city is healthy because of this but how come however has a very different view on it he says that this is he calls it a city of pigs ironically he thinks that people have a natural desire for more people have a natural desire for luxury better entertainment better food so he argues that they will want to eat meat in this city which is a seemingly small distinction from what the city previously has been but it makes all the difference because to have meat in the city you need more land and to have more land you need to go to war and therefore they both agree that this is a natural progression Glaucon and socrates agrees this is a natural progression and that war is inevitable in this city and therefore a new class of people is introduced in the Republic which is the Warriors by socrates idea of specialization warriors can only be warriors and nothing else and he describes his highly spirited individual and these highly spirited individuals make for great warriors but they are hard to control you want to be able to control them so they don't become thugs and break the laws but you also don't want them to become too wimpy as well so Socrates proposes that the best way to contain these warriors is through education so it's important that these warriors are educated to act on the will of the city how do we do that well so Curtis explains what stories will be available in this city and what stories won't be available I think more importantly he says that the classic legends of Homer will be forbidden or send third in the city because the stories in Homer and other works show that dying as something really bad and that's not beneficial for the city Warriors needs to be able to die for their state and therefore they cannot allow that these work of fiction to be shaping the souls of the Warriors so Christine goes through in great detail what will be allowed not just in literature but also music what kind of instrument and even what type of notes will be allowed or at least what will be the most effective you can look at it the same way of the type of music that is played in in military it's very similar with the drums and then the type of tunes but this all falls under a very interesting topic of censorship it's something that we've all been affected by ever since growing up our parents censor certain things from us when we are children and they do this for a good cause they do it to protect us and I would argue that so Curtis sees the city and its people in the same way where the city would be a mother censoring certain things for their child censorship is a topic that is still widely discussed even today I think there's three points that can be brought up against censorship I mean III myself has been highly affected by it I would would even say I think the number one point against censorship is that there's a natural curiosity towards things that aren't allowed I think most people can relate to wanting to do something more because they weren't allowed to do it and and the desire to wanted to do it Eve being even stronger because of it another example could be if a parent for example lies to their child let's say a parent a mother might be a such a bad example if a mother is a stripper and maybe they don't want their child to go through go through the same career path then they might lie about what their job is before they go to work it they might say I'm going to I don't know the bank instead to protect their child they do this to protect their child because they don't want them to follow the same path but eventually let's say a couple of years down the line the child finds out the truth and this sort of trust between a mother and a child has been broken because of their censorship and maybe the damage would have been the damage of that is much more than what would have been if the parent had just said the truth a lot of times you could argue it's the negative effect of what's being censored really more than what is positive just video games really cause violence and I think by censorship you are in playing that you know better you know for a fact that this needs to be censored because I know it has a negative effect and I think that's a lot of times is said without much evidence I think it's a really interesting topic some people are arguing that censorship is good some people arguing that it's always bad and here we are 2000 year later still discussing it there's also many examples of in history of progression of humanity being held back because of censorship we had Galileo a famous example must be getting tired at this point whose famously his ideas were censored because he challenged the Christian view what's your right what's your opinion of censorship are you still with me hello the next topic of the Republic is another controversial idea in this city that Socrates describes there will be doctors of course but these doctors will not treat anyone if you get wounded in battle of course the doctor will treat you but any form of self-inflicted injury will not be taken care of let's say if you injure yourself from eating or drinking too much as an example sorry that time and resources will not be wasted on you which kind of makes sense a little bit but then it gets a little darker so Curtis would probably argue for a euthanasia if you have a chronic illness you are then just costing this city a bunch of money and resources and therefore you will be thanked for your service in the city but you will also be pissed I think obviously now we have a very different view of life and I'm not saying I agree with it we obviously we know a lot more than we did back then we don't have the same view of the afterlife as well but I think what's interesting here is the distinction between a good and a bad like a fundamental belief from when we're grown-up is that everyone is born equal and we have the same should be we should all be treated equally and I agree with that of course but I think we're I think it's interesting is if the distinction between a good and a bad life and I think we treat all life as good when that's not necessarily the case I hope that isn't taken in a weird way by anyone all right let's move on this is too controversial the third controversial idea three in a row is the the myth of metals which is another idea proposed by Socrates and he explains this in the almost embarrassed manner he knows how ridiculous this sounds is metal metals but basically it's a lie told by the city to its citizens that they don't have any mother or father and that they came from the earth that's right and I I think the purpose of this is pretty obvious it's so that you would look at this state as your parent and Socrates finds is very useful for the sake of hey patriotic view of the state and and loyalty to the state and there's similar ideas around housing people should live together in this common areas instead of and private households will not be allowed by anyone even its rulers so there's some pretty crazy ideas being proposed here it's like Plato created communism not Karl Marx but perhaps the silliest bit out of the myth of metals which is that everyone is born not just from the earth but into different categories so you will be born either there into bronze silver or gold category and depending on that which will determine what sort of job and what group in society you fit into and now at this point you might think well this sounds pretty awful I don't want to live in this city and neither should anyone and I think you're right to assume that the whole concept of this city is not with the mindset of the well-being of certain individuals it's it's the mindset of the well-being of the whole state and I think it's pretty interesting how completely opposite our ideas around individuality is today and there's obviously good cause for that and good reason for that but I think there's examples of today of individual focus that almost seem comical there's a lot of famous dystopian x' written around this sort of ideas I think we have dystopian novels such as 1984 brave new world we buy as a mutant who may have inspired all of these and these were authors who lived to see the effect of communism and to tell it to tell it arianism and probably written as a reaction to that we have brave new world which really fits into the Socratic idea of the myth of metals where all the people in this novel are born from tests and labs they don't have a mother or father they they they are born in this Factory and you they also fit into these groups as well they are born into this different ranked groups in society and everyone is happy with being part of their own group Big Brother of course also with the idea of the state being this family figure almost I don't know if that really fits but you understand my point we we attend where there is no individualism you are born as a number and as the name implies itself it's oh it's all about the group and not your your own well-being basically according to Socrates there will be no money in this city which is a very interesting topic in itself as well I Dementors he loves goals he sees is that something preposterous and he says that if there's no gold then people won't the city won't be able to defend itself because no one will come to its aid if they can't pay them but Socrates claims that any neighbouring city will happily come to its aid because they have obviously the best warriors I've completely skipped a part about how they grow how they train their warriors it's very interesting but since they have the best warriors that doesn't care about money there will be everything left after the battle to plunder for themselves since this city does not permit it I think Socrates recognizes that money is not necessarily a good but it's also not necessarily something bad here we go again with boohoo millionaire complaints about money that's not the case I think I view it in a very similar way I think money is good if you spend it well but it's not as if I have a pile of money at home that I worship and that that in itself brings me joy when you have money you worry about losing money and saying you can take for example anyone at the stock market it seems like a very stressful profession and I think a lot of people have the view that if only they had money then then they would be happy but there's so many examples of people winning the lottery and then turning up more unhappy than they used to be because their whole worldview has changed in their whole whole life have changed because of month I think there's even a science and that data behind this now showing that after a certain point of money you you don't become more happy because probably implies more troubles which I can agree with more money no problem he said it the best or was it biggie yeah another interesting topic around this as well as its expansionism where socrata says this city will not expand beyond a certain point because by limiting the size of this city they can make sure that it can maintain its ruling there's so many examples of in history of we had Napoleon the the constant expanding eventually leading to its demise and I think the same thing ties in with gold as well when you have when you have it you just want more and more of it eventually leading to your own destruction Here I am making videos why now we're on book five everyone I haven't mentioned this but basically there's ten books of that Republic but they can sort of be seen as chapters instead and it gets even more strange at this point Socrates brings up the topic of selective procreation where another great light that will be told by the state which is that everyone's partner will be determined through a lottery state lottery where basically your sexual partner it's completely by chance or so they are will be told of course the state will instead put together the most desirable or admirer below that they want more of in this city to breed the best kind of people in the city and also avoid any form of incest because obviously people don't know who their real mothers and fathers are so it's also necessary for that sense I think they follow the same storyline in we said yet and savvy Athens we where everyone has their set partner in this dystopia I think it's interesting how they bring up this topic for nearly 2000 years ago of genetics and and their and reproducing we're getting to a point where we'll in the future most likely be able to I think I read in an in another book where people I think it was Stephen Hawking actually he pointed out how people with will eventually manipulate the DNA so that this superior people will come into existence we can we can change DNA in a way that we can craft certain individuals for certain purposes and Socrates was playing with the idea even 2,000 years ago I think that's interesting in book five as well we get to hear a little bit of Plato's ideas around feminism which is not the best way to put it I don't think I think most people don't think that Socrates or Plato had any sort of ideas we have today but he recognizes that men and women are different by nature but in terms of ruling who can be a ruler he sees no difference between a man and a woman and that they they are both fit for the role I think even now most people aren't too used to women being in a leadership but again 2,000 years ago Socrates recognized that there is no difference which can be seen as a sort of progressive thought to put forward especially with the mind of how poorly women were treated back in ancient Greek I think they all they had to do was stay at home all day taking care of the house and they were generally treated poorly as far as I know but then again you could also just see it as recognizing that women can get what men already have so so who then are the most fit to rule this city I'll let you get that's right philosophers I gotta say soccer today they're a little bit of an elitist it really feels like so since philosophers they seek truth above all else and therefore their rationale and their rational part of the soul will ruled the city and best ruled the city so Socrates has a very interesting view of leadership which in a way I agree with but it's also extremely pessimistic he says that if you look at how we determine a leader in democracy it is a very long process to go through with anyone that wants to become a leader is up for a tremendous task of going through a public election it's not something that anyone is willing to go through with to become a leader in our democracy you must truly want to become a leader and Socrates argues that the one most fitted to rule is the one that wants to rule the least and he brings up this example of a boat where a couple of seamen or a couple of seafarers are on this boat they're travelling to this destination but everyone is arguing over who should steer the ship was the one who is most fit to steer the ship is the one focusing on the Stars and they're looking at the Stars to try and navigate instead which is what they should be doing so the person most fit to steer the ship is the one focusing on what they need to do to steer the ship instead of arguing why they should steer the ship I explained this very poorly but I think you understand the point therefore according to Socrates the one who wants to rule the least isn't the most appropriate to rule but they will also never become the ruler because they don't seek it and this is pessimistic in the sense that it implies that the ship cannot make it to the shore even if people are arguing which is obviously not the case next up we get into metaphysics which I find a little hard to understand still and therefore I will try in my best I do understand the allegory of the cave and I think that's the probably the best way to introduce the idea of the the idea of the good as Socrates describes it Socrates recognizes the world as something that can be described beyond our senses he uses math as an example 2+2 will always be for no matter where you are in the universe when certain things according to our eyes and our vision in our senses will appear differently depending on our subjective manners colors is something it's a color red red for everyone you understand what I mean but 2+2 will always be for Socrates brings up here in book 7 the most famous metaphor in philosophy or Western philosophy at least I talked about this before on in my video and you might have heard it already which is the famous allegory of the cave it's something that I discussed in my simulacra and simulation video and I used it in the context of simulation which funny enough still applies but Socrates brings up the allegory of the cave as a way to describe education I want you to try and imagine a very dark cave and in this cave there are a couple people in a row and these people are completely immobilized they cannot move any inch of their body that cannot move their head imagine clockwork orange' style strapped down to this in this cave with chains the only thing these people can see is the cave wall in front of them now this wall has a bunch of shadows cast upon them because there is a light behind them and in front of this light there are people crossing a bridge so what the prisoners in the chains can see on the wall are just shadows all these people moving back and forth and since these people have never experienced anything else in their life for them and what their senses are telling them is that these shadows are real because they don't know any other truth so eventually in this allegory of the cave one of the prisoners managed to escape his chain and his worldview is of course then completely changed he sees people that are real he sees a whole new dimension essentially and so Kurtis describes this experience as very painful something very painful to go through but eventually a satisfying experience but he isn't the prisoner isn't completely free yet and he managed to escape the cave in itself where he eventually gets blinded by the Sun again a very painful experience but once it's calmed down he sees he recognizes the Sun the light brings all things into existence he sees the flowers he sees the trees and there's this beautiful image you can see its character embrace praising the Sun basically and this is the soccer this metaphor for the idea of the good the Sun bringing that the true forms see I'm not really good at explaining it but this the Sun represent the form of good basically and the point of Education is to drag a person out of this cave to see things how they actually really are and not just feeding information to you not everyone can escape this cave and therefore Socrates thinks that the person who escaped the cave needs to come back that philosopher-king needs to come back from the cave to rule in book eight Socrates steps back from describing the the Republic of the city and he instead takes some time to describe different forms of regimes he describes a democracy a an oligarchy democracy and finally a tyranny and I will kind of brush over this because I don't know it that well and I kind of want to say any form of time I have at this point but I think what's important here is how he notes that each one of these different rulings are are worse than the other and that in the last stage which is when democracy the most free form of city that there is will eventually fall into tyranny that most limited the least free city Socrates says that the desire or freedom will eventually lead to not having proper rulers it will give the chance for a tyrant to rise and I think it's very very interesting how accurately truckers test depicts the the rise of the tyrant two thousand years ago more than two thousand years ago he accurately depicts something that has already happened to as many times you have the example of Saddam Hussein Hussein who our last known tyrant who rose to power through democracy I think and he started off by doing a lot of good for its people much like other tyrants of our time Benito Mussolini for example who famously made the trains run on time Saddam helped modernize infrastructure he helped modernize industries health care system education different social services farming same with Hitler but I will not bring up any examples because I don't want to be taken out of context I think you get the point the tyrant starts from a democracy and and does good for its people but as Socrates describes the tyrant who is ruled by its desires will eventually get the taste of blood it will do something to an opposition he will execute one of its enemies and he will do this in the name of the people he will do it as I've done something to protect you not me and once he had the taste of blood that will just be the start of it the tyrant who is ruled by his lust and desires will not just bleed the city dry but will become paranoid and kill all their enemies this loss of blood will continue only the people that flatter the tyrant will will keep living and anyone challenged in his position will of course be executed and this is what happened to Saddam assign a lot of in the end of his regime his military power was very poor because he had executed anyone and most of his best men just out of sheer paranoia Socrates argues that the least happy man in the world is this ruling tyrant which actually starts to make a lot of sense if you think about it constantly living in this fear this paranoia driven by your your greed and lust you can't trust your friends constant fear of enemies Saddam even himself had to move where he lived every single day to protect himself so not only is the ruling tyrant the least happy it's also the worst worse ruling for a city for example Iraq used to be so much richer before before the time was saddam hussein and socrates draws the the opposite line that the just man is the happiest man and the unjust man is the least happy man so then who is the most happy man well of course you could probably guess that's right the philosopher everyone is anyone surprised again such an elitist according to Socrates the one seeking truth is the greatest pleasure of them all and only a philosopher will know this because he's experienced all the pleasures it even makes a really strange joke about it saying that the philosopher king is 729 times more happier than the ruling tyrant which obviously it's a joke you cannot quantify such a thing I think there's a reason behind the number I just don't remember it let me know in the comments Socrates also draws a conclusion between the three parts of the city at the three classes and the three parts of the soul I cannot get into it I'm sorry I just remember it didn't really made sense to me the idea of the soul from Socrates but finally we made it to the end book ten where Socrates brings up the view of the afterlife he talks about the myth of error which is a warrior who died in battle and he then goes to the afterlife with has a bunch of people in it kind of like an airport and he sees how the system works and basically people will have to serve a thousand years in heaven or a thousand years in hell based on how you lived your life that this is where you go but after serving this thousand years you will then get to pick a new life again and here again according to Socrates only this philosopher know how to pick the right life I think it's very interesting because just like this natural progression of different type of ruling so will the person the individual go through the natural progression between good and evil themselves they will not always make the right decision of what life they want to live and only the philosopher knows which life is the right choice and in the story he will have to pick last I don't know if Ava's error that had to pick but the character of this myth has to pick last between what life they can live and he finds the life eventually their life of what philosopher and he says this is the life I would have chosen even if I got to pick first and he was not very happy with this decision he picks this life of a philosopher an ordinary man who Minds his own business and that is the definition of justice according to Socrates or Plato minding your own business and not meddling with other men's concerns I think I kind of brushed over the end of how it all ties in together with the individual and the city but I think this has gone on well enough I think Plato's Republic is such a phenomenal piece of literature it makes me happy that I'm alive to even experience it just from the sake of taking part of these ideas that were written so long ago I don't know what else there exists anything like this the life of Socrates is so interesting as well and it continues in his other books as well again this is why I'm so happy I picked up literature because I think it's so interesting to take part of these discussion and ideas and and stories whether you know it's real or not I find it very very fascinating to escape into I don't know what other medium could possibly accomplish something like this and I think Republic is such a great example of that it discusses ideas that are still very much relevant today in a way that is still very engaging and exciting and I love reading this book I don't think I would have taken so much time with it otherwise and if you made it this far thank you for watching it it wasn't really much of a review I got to bring up some of my thoughts around it I would obviously give it 10 out of 10 I'll announce the next book review in as always on Twitter or the reddit and keep an eye for that I would love to hear your thoughts and discussion of the comments section or on the reddit I'll see you guys there good bye

Channel: PewDiePie

Views: 4,170,003

Rating: 4.9193149 out of 5

Keywords: SATIRE

Id: qPnTTA8BC8A

Length: 49min 14sec (2954 seconds)

Published: Mon Apr 22 2019

Reddit Comments

[u/yrugay1]

Felix, if you're by any chance reading this -> you talking about books (and about anything you enjoy, really) is the least cringey thing you can do. Do not care about what people think, there will always be dumbasses who will hate on everything you do.

You have obviously come a long way (from screaming at horror games etc.) - making book review videos and thus inspiring thousands of young people to read is one of the best and most mature things you have done on your channel and we thank you for that.

We are proud of you 💟

[u/Medeadebord]

Hey Felix, thanks a lot for this. I am a PhD student in Philosophy working on Plato (professional Plato fangirl and Socrates' lawyer) at Oxford - and I just gotta say, this was super interesting to watch. It was a detailed summary and critical discussion, on point whilst still super accessible. You are humble, and clearly you've got a good philosophical eye. And it's so cool that through your popularity, approchability and honesty you can reach so many more and different people than a university can. This is seriously so exciting!

I want to recommend you my all-time favourite Plato: the Gorgias. It's on the distinction between philosophical dialogue and rhetorical debate. In it Socrates is heavily challenged in his belief that just philosophers are the best off by a tyrannical character, Callicles, that seems to voice the ideas of Nietzsche himself! Callicles even tells Socrates that he will surely be killed if he keeps annoying people whilst knowing nothing of the way the world goes - and how could that be a good life choice? It is seriously one of the most brutal ridicule of the idea of the philosopher, and an epic dialogue between Socrates and the political rhetorician types! A lot of fun, and again an examination of what a just life would look like. I also find interesting that Plato seems to be seeing a connection between open truth-aimed dialogue and just ways of relating to people, and between debate for the sake of being right and an unjust desire to dominate others.

​

Keep up the good work, man!

[u/a-p-o-c-a-l-y-p-s-e]

I thought Felix’s take on the book was really interesting. The ideas he brought up about censorship and metaphysics in particular stuck for me.

I also thought the idea that a philosopher should rule was really interesting. Having this idea that the one person best fit to rule is the most aware and therefore hates the idea of leasing people the most.

Idk if Felix has already read “The Giver,” but I would highly suggest it as a follow up to this book. It’s really simple and kinda short, but I feel like it’s a dystopia which best displays the society Socrates describes in terms of the selection of its leaders. (and brings such a method of selection into question) Might read it again myself and just compare it on my own.

I feel like the development from leader to tyrant is also very interesting, especially in the context of pewdiepie’s channel. Youtube channels tend to run in cycles, where someone makes a lot of great content, have 2-3 years of success with their audience, and then wind up misusing their power in a selfish way. Once they get away with it once, it becomes near impossible to turn back because you have a legion of people who will do anything for you. This eventually lead the person to start turning on friends, creating drama and having the channel crash and burn. I feel like when Felix really messed up in 2017 (and broke down in 2016) he had two paths he could’ve gone down. I’m not smart enough to full explain what those were, but I feel like one of them was to become the “philosopher” to start seeking truth instead of success and validation, and I feel like that was (hopefully) the right choice for him (and the choice he made, I think) Mabey it explains how the channel has been able to live for such a long period of time and is still going strong. And I feel like using Felix as a philosopher leader Plato describes works very well: people don’t really follow/sub to Pewdiepie because he told them to; people just seem to naturally gravitate towards Felix and want to do what he says. All this “sub to pewdiepie” stuff, all the banners and hacked devices and shout outs-he never asked for those. He inspires action in people instead of commanding it.

And in that sense, Felix doesn’t necessarily want all this attention, does he? But it’s evident that he cares about our well being a lot. Not wanting or feeling like he deserves to lead us keeps him humble, which prevents him from becoming a tyrant. And that’s what I think The Republic was trying to get at: the person who is best fit to lead wants to do so the least but cares for his people the most. I feel like that’s the best kind of leader you can have.

But idk, everything I just wrote could just be a bunch of nonsense, I’m sorry for the big essay, just wanted to put my thoughts out somewhere.

But basically to sum up my thoughts I think there were some cool ideas thrown around, I think Felix is a really good leader and I suggest he reads the giver because it’s a good follow up to this book even though it’s really simple. (I intend on rereading it myself, anyway)

Peace ‎;)

[u/BeLang3]

I hate how he's always so insecure about these things... "you still watching?" "play it in the background haha" "sorry this is long" ...

BRO. Just do you. If you were to talk about anything for 10 hours, we'll sit there and watch all of it. Those who don't want to will click off the video or leave a dumb comment. You can't please everyone.

Also, book review > meme review.

Thanks for making people read more <3

[u/fznmomin]

Great review and good comparisons to historical times during Plato's time and beyond. Thank you so much for not spending 30min to talk about allegory of the cave and instead talking about the definition of justice, among other things. I highly suggest the PhilosophizeThis podcast about Plato if you want an even deeper dive into the background of Plato. Would love if you do more philosophy books or even delve into History books. Looking forward to your next book review!

​

Edit: fixed link

[u/UnbunchedBananas]

Hey gang, if you're interested in reading The Republic and want a reading buddy, I made a Let's Read video series last month. Took me forever, but here it is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb_QUiMuONk&list=PLgMdlNdu04I_ult4eqDBudS_mtDeQZYFM

[u/[deleted]]

I wish felix knew how much we actually enjoy these reviews because we truly do care and enjoy them

[u/iamalwayssilent]

Here is something I did and I want to apologize. I wanted to watch this entire video and listen to what he had to say about this book, but I didn't have time. So I downloaded the video into an audio format so I can begin listening to it when I am outside.
I also made sure that my computer in my home was playing the video in mute when I am busy over here. Had to give him the watch time.

[u/sarsina]

Awesome book review thanks