Getting started with political philosophy

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Post Reply
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

Georgeanna:
I don't understand why you say Plato never says anything. It is not my argument that Plato speaks in the dialogues. However, it is he who writes and puts words into the mouths of the players.
Yes, he is the author of the dialogues, but he never speaks in his own name. When we read Plato we only know what his Socrates and Glaucon and others say. He let’s us know that he is present in some of the dialogues, but he never says anything. I would think when he was actually with Socrates he was not always silent. So why is he silent in the dialogues?
There may well not be a treatise on Plato's philosophy written by him. This clearly is not his chosen method - but dialogue is.
It is not just a matter of his personal method or style. It is because philosophy is different than other branches of knowledge. It is not about doctrines or theories but a way of life and suitable only for those who are willing to live this way.

In the Seventh Letter Plato says (Here he speaks in his own name. It is a private letter.):
It is thus, and in this mind, that such a student lives, occupied indeed in whatever occupations he may find himself, but always beyond all else cleaving fast to philosophy and to that mode of daily life which will best make him apt to learn and of retentive mind and able to reason within himself soberly; but the mode of life which is opposite to this he continually abhors. Those, on the other hand, who are in reality not philosophic, but superficially tinged by opinions,—like men whose bodies are sunburnt on the surface —when they see how many studies are required and how great labor,and how the orderly mode of daily life is that which befits the subject, they deem it difficult or impossible for themselves, and thus they become in fact incapable of pursuing it; while some of them persuade themselves that they have been sufficiently instructed in the whole subject and no longer require any further effort. (340d-341a)

… none, I say, of these will ever learn to the utmost possible extent the truth of virtue nor yet of vice. For in learning these objects it is necessary to learn at the same time both what is false and what is true of the whole of Existence,62 and that through the most diligent and prolonged investigation, as I said at the commencement; and it is by means of the examination of each of these objects, comparing one with another—names and definitions, visions and sense-perceptions,—proving them by kindly proofs and employing questionings and answerings that are void of envy—it is by such means, and hardly so, that there bursts out the light of intelligence and reason regarding each object in the mind of him who uses every effort of which mankind is capable.

And this is the reason why every serious man in dealing with really serious subjects carefully avoids writing, lest thereby he may possibly cast them as a prey to the envy and stupidity of the public. In one word, then, our conclusion must be that whenever one sees a man's written compositions—whether they be the laws of a legislator or anything else in any other form,—these are not his most serious works, if so be that the writer himself is serious: rather those works abide in the fairest region he possesses. (344b-c)
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Fooloso4 wrote: September 16th, 2018, 9:55 am Georgeanna:
I don't understand why you say Plato never says anything. It is not my argument that Plato speaks in the dialogues. However, it is he who writes and puts words into the mouths of the players.
Yes, he is the author of the dialogues, but he never speaks in his own name. When we read Plato we only know what his Socrates and Glaucon and others say. He let’s us know that he is present in some of the dialogues, but he never says anything. I would think when he was actually with Socrates he was not always silent. So why is he silent in the dialogues?
[/quote]

Plato was only a lad, who'd written nothing by the time Socrates was put to death.
This means that Plato is using Socrates as a literary device to have him say stuff that Plato does not have to take direct responsibility for. I do not think it takes much imagination to figure out why, after Socrates was put to death, Plato might not be very keen on using Socrates in this way!!
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by ThomasHobbes »

I think the phrase 'no brainer" might come into play here.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

TH:
Plato was only a lad, who'd written nothing by the time Socrates was put to death.
Plato was born about 428 or 427 BC. The trial of Socrates was 399 BC.
I think the phrase 'no brainer" might come into play here.

Here is a succinct statement of what is at issue
How one answers this Platonic question [Plato's mask] determines whether one interprets the Platonic corpus as aporetic or dogmatic. Plato mentions his own name only twice in the dialogues and never as the voice of the author or as a speaking character. The problem is underscored by Socrates’ ironic refusal to put forward his own positive doctrines but willingness to convey those of others … (Denis J.-J. Robichaud, "Plato's Persona: Marsilio Ficino, Renaissance Humanism, and Platonic Traditions".)
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Fooloso4 wrote: September 16th, 2018, 2:40 pm TH:
Plato was only a lad, who'd written nothing by the time Socrates was put to death.
Plato was born about 428 or 427 BC. The trial of Socrates was 399 BC.
I was working from memory. But I think 'only a lad' is accurate.
But the fact is that no one actually knows when Plato started writing, nor when he was born. Earlier estimates put his age at Socrates death at around 24 yo. And there is no doubt that the majority of his work was after Socrates' death. And the reasons I gave for putting his thoughts in the mouth of another stand.
We might also consider a comparison with Xenophon who also used Socrates as a literary device, offering us a completely different view of S, which suggests that the 2 authors are more keen to put their own views rather than paint an accurate picture of S.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

I find this totally intriguing; as have philosophers down the centuries. Interpretations or speculations surrounding Plato abound; some have read and understood more than others. Some have gone down deep, others not so much.
One thing seems certain is that nobody knows for sure.
Here is one paper I found - discussing Plato's use of characters, with a useful introductory paragraph - by David Sedley, Cambridge

https://www.britac.ac.uk/sites/default/files/85p003.pdf

We could continue down this road comparing, contrasting and considering various interpretations and picking at details.
However, this takes us way off course.
If this is what you wish to pursue, then please start another thread or one will be started for you; and posts moved there.

Reminder: we have now moved on to Lecture 5.
I would like to complete the Introductory Course on Political Philosophy by the end of the century.
Your cooperation would be appreciated.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

The Open Yale course is perhaps too lengthy for a single thread. Consideration is being given to splitting it after the lectures on the Republic.
See the syllabus here:

https://oyc.yale.edu/political-science/plsc-114

We would then be following Aristotle, Politics.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

Georgeanna wrote: September 17th, 2018, 4:50 am The Open Yale course is perhaps too lengthy for a single thread. Consideration is being given to splitting it after the lectures on the Republic.
See the syllabus here:

https://oyc.yale.edu/political-science/plsc-114

We would then be following Aristotle, Politics.
Or perhaps, any splitting off would best follow the course structure:

1. The polis experience ( Plato, Aristotle) - lectures 1-9
2. The sovereign state ( Machiavelli, Hobbes) - Lectures 10 -14
3. Constitutional government ( Locke ) - Lectures 15 -17
4. Democracy ( Rousseau, Tocqueville ) - Lectures 18 - 23
5. In Defence of Politics ( references Kant, Bernard Crick, E.M. Foster, and Carl Schmitt ) - Lecture 24

Any thoughts welcome.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

After some thought, I have decided to take an extended break from the forum.
This thread can continue with or without me, depending on level of interest.
Georgeanna
Posts: 436
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Georgeanna »

Georgeanna wrote: September 17th, 2018, 9:13 am After some thought, I have decided to take an extended break from the forum.
This thread can continue with or without me, depending on level of interest.
Oh, should have said - thanks to all who participated and gave so generously of their time, knowledge, expertise and energy.
Thank you.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

Georgeanna:
Here is one paper I found - discussing Plato's use of characters, with a useful introductory paragraph - by David Sedley, Cambridge

https://www.britac.ac.uk/sites/default/files/85p003.pdf
See footnote number two. This is the same issue I cited in the quote from Robichaud - whether the dialogue are to be read as aporetic or dogmatic. Sedley takes the position that we can find Plato’s doctrines in the dialogues, but notes that there is an opposing way of reading the dialogues.
We could continue down this road comparing, contrasting and considering various interpretations and picking at details.
However, this takes us way off course.
If this is what you wish to pursue, then please start another thread or one will be started for you; and posts moved there.
I have not wish to continue down this road, but if one is interested there is an extensive literature on it. Anyone who thinks is it not simply a “no brainer” can read about it and think about it and draw their own conclusions after doing the work.

What is at issue is how we are to read Plato. Knowing Smith’s background I have no doubt which side he is on.
After some thought, I have decided to take an extended break from the forum.
Sorry to hear that.
This thread can continue with or without me, depending on level of interest.
My interest is in reading Plato and discussing Smith’s excellent lectures, but with you gone there seems to be no one left who is actually interested in reading Plato. So unless someone who has been sitting on the sidelines posts something substantive, this may be my last post on this thread.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Burning ghost »

Look forward to your return Georgeanna. Hopefully when you find time to return they’ll be some interesting things to read here.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Burning ghost »

Fool -

I’d like to continue with this a little. I’m going to reread it anyway so may as well add something.

The difficultly I find with The Republic is the vague translations used for terms not present in modern English. Give that in the first 2 parts of book the main topic to hand is “justice” and “injustice” I find it hard to figure out where and when the term is bekng used differently.

The argument starts off proper with dispute over what is “beneficial” and the position put forward that “injustice” is of the most benefit ... from the get this is already refuted in how they frame the meaning of “justice” as being that which brings about the “good”. The question of stealing some fruit from a filthy rich no good low life to feed a dying child and save their life cannot be both “just” and “unjust” by the definition laid out in parts 1 & 2.

All seems to be set out is to say that if an “unjust” act gives rise to “justice” then it is not an “unjust” act.

If that isn’t worth mentioning then I’ve moved onto the “Education” of part 3 now. From the get go the same kind of problem arises with the misunderstanding of what “education” means here. Essentially what we’re talking about are the “Muses” of which the same problem of “advantage” and “good” arise without the reader fully understanding the context of the mythos involved in how the “truth” and “lies” of the gods are to be told and what should be shielded from children - the gods wrongly being represented as dispensing “good and evil” in Plato’s eyes. Obviously there is a parallel here many have talked about in term of how Christianity took up the Greek mythos and build fro Plato’s ideas, or ideas like his, in part (although the Old Testament “god” does portray a more tempestuous nature compared to the New Testament renditions.)

Within this we can see well enough Plato’s attempts to frame ideal scenarios to build from.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Burning ghost wrote: September 19th, 2018, 12:58 am Fool -
. Obviously there is a parallel here many have talked about in term of how Christianity took up the Greek mythos and build fro Plato’s ideas, or ideas like his, in part (although the Old Testament “god” does portray a more tempestuous nature compared to the New Testament renditions.)

Within this we can see well enough Plato’s attempts to frame ideal scenarios to build from.
It's more like Greeks invented Christianity, since Greek thinking was the dominant ideology and Saul the "Separated" (Paul) who invented "Christianity" did so in Greek words with Greek concepts. Being a "Pharasee" he was probably looking around for a set of events to re-think religion when he discovered the Jesus story - and the rest is history.

However the Tempestuousness of the God figure of the Hebrews was not unfamiliar with other Gods at the time. I think Paul had a hard job offering a weak minded God to the congregation.
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Getting started with political philosophy

Post by Fooloso4 »

BG:
The difficultly I find with The Republic is the vague translations used for terms not present in modern English. Give that in the first 2 parts of book the main topic to hand is “justice” and “injustice” I find it hard to figure out where and when the term is bekng used differently.
The Bloom translation attempts to be literal and consistent in the use of terms. I linked to a PDF in an earlier post.
The argument starts off proper with dispute over what is “beneficial” and the position put forward that “injustice” is of the most benefit ... from the get this is already refuted in how they frame the meaning of “justice” as being that which brings about the “good”.
The argument starts off here:
"But as to this very thing, justice, shall we so simply assert that it is the truth and giving back what a man has taken from another, or is to do these very things sometimes just and sometimes unjust? Take this case as an example of what I mean: everyone would surely say that if a man takes weapons from a friend when the latter is of sound mind, and the friend demands them back when he is mad, one shouldn't give back such things, and the man who gave them back would not be just, and moreover, one should not be willing to tell someone in this state the whole truth.

"What you say is right," he said.

"Then this isn't the definition of justice, speaking the truth and giving back what one takes."

"It most certainly is, Socrates," interrupted Polemarchus, "at least if Simonides should be believed at all."

"Well, then, " said Cephalus, "I hand down the argument to you, for it's already time for me to look after the sacrifices. (331c-d)
The argument goes on to consider several different formulations. Each of them raises other questions and problems, but each may touch on something that is not simply rejected.
All seems to be set out is to say that if an “unjust” act gives rise to “justice” then it is not an “unjust” act.
That is not a conclusion that Socrates would support.
From the get go the same kind of problem arises with the misunderstanding of what “education” means here. Essentially what we’re talking about are the “Muses” of which the same problem of “advantage” and “good” arise without the reader fully understanding the context of the mythos involved in how the “truth” and “lies” of the gods are to be told and what should be shielded from children - the gods wrongly being represented as dispensing “good and evil” in Plato’s eyes.
The discussion at the end of book II is about the gods and lies. It raises the question of the usefulness of lies, a topic that will be taken up again with the "noble lie".
Obviously there is a parallel here many have talked about in term of how Christianity took up the Greek mythos and build fro Plato’s ideas, or ideas like his, in part (although the Old Testament “god” does portray a more tempestuous nature compared to the New Testament renditions.)

Obviously the Republic says nothing about Christianity. Nietzsche said that Christianity is Platonism for the people (or masses), but what this means is something better left until after both the Republic and Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil have been read. It also requires understanding the difference between Plato and Platonism. An interesting topic but the topic at hand is the Republic itself, not its historical influence.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Politics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021