Mahjabeen Qazi Humane Letters- 11 B 02/12/12 Redefining Education There is an old quarrel between poetry and philosophy...

(607c) According to Plato, poetry can produce anarchy in the soul, when it is pursued without the influence of philosophy. In Platos Republic, Socrates aims at harmonizing the study of philosophy and poetry because of their influence upon the soul .In the first book of the Republic, Cephalus quotes a poet in regards to the definition of justice. Instead of learning from the philosophers, who spend their lives in the pursuit of wisdom, men are drawn towards learning from poets because of poetrys charm. While the true philosopher seeks to establish a proper hierarchy of power within the soul, by strengthening the calculating part of the soul, the typical poet feeds and strengthens the desiring part of the soul. For the many, poetry and philosophy remain at odds because poetry has the power to lead men away from truth and being. However, Plato uses the myth of Er to redefine the relationship between poetry and philosophy, showing that their unity can aid the pursuit of wisdom. Plato uses the myth of Er to defend the pursuit of philosophy. Glaucon argues that the virtues that philosophers devote their lives to understanding and practicing are actually useless. He begins by saying that doing injustice is naturally good(358e) but suffering injustice is bad, and far outweighs the good of doing it; in order to prevent suffering injustice, laws are made. He then asserts that the just iscared for not because it is good but because it is honored due to a want of vigor in doing injustice.(359a) According to his claim, there is no such thing as a true form of justice, but rather it is relative in each society, dependent on what men agree upon for

security. To further explain his reasoning, he narrates a story about the ancestor of Gyges who finds a ring that can turn him invisible. Being a shepherd himself and given an opportunity to do whatever he wants without paying the penalty, he commits adultery with the kings wife and kills the king. Glaucon declares that if a man were to get hold of such [a ring] and were never willing to do any injustice he would seem most wretched to those who were aware of it and most foolish too.(360d) Thus presenting the opinion that injustice is useful and those who choose to practice justice are foolish. He further implies that man naturally inclines towards committing injustice. This makes the pursuit of philosophy useless because according to the story, if there were no laws to punish men, vices would be considered beneficial. While philosophy is

concerned with human beings becoming good, the average man inverts the meaning of the good itself. The average man perceives true injustice as the good and true justice as the bad. There is no absolute truth that men strive to understand but rather they create their own truths and supposedly live good lives. The unjust man seems to get honored in the city and to marry whoever he wants while the just man seems to be ridiculed by the many. However, Socrates presents the myth of Er to show that philosophy is useful because the philosopher is capable of making a well informed decision in the afterlife, when he is choosing his next life. Philosophy helps men distinguish the good from the bad and thus it helps men choose the better life. Er relates the story of a man who chooses tyranny for his next life due to folly and gluttony (619b) .However, the man fails to notice the evils that this life will present; including the fact that he will eat his own children. This man is described as one of those who had come from heaven, having lived in an orderly regime in his former life, participating in virtue by habit, not philosophy.(619c-d) Although a man has led a just life and goes to heaven, if he does not know what justice truly is, he will not know how to differentiate between the just and unjust life when

he has to choose the next life. Socrates presents the threat of such men being stuck in a vicious cycle of punishment because of their choices. For example, the man who chose tyranny out of ignorance will have to pay the penalty for his evil deeds for a thousand years. After having suffered, without being educated in philosophy, he might choose the unjust life yet again and have to pay the penalty all over again. Thus the argument that Glaucon presents of injustice being beneficial is disproved by the myth of Er because the unjust man does get punished in the afterlife. Also the myth shows that justice is not relative and the man that is truly just is rewarded in the afterlife, even if he is ridiculed in life. While justice should not be practiced out of fear, Socrates uses the myth to show that practicing justice is not foolish but useful and beneficial in the afterlife. The myth also presents men with a certain responsibility when they choose to be unjust: Virtue is without a masterthe blame belongs to him who chooses; god is blameless.(617e) Men have the choice to be virtuous and pursue philosophy; and when they are punished for their deeds, they have no one to blame but themselves. Even if the unjust man is not held accountable immediately, he will be responsible in the afterlife. Although philosophy should be pursued for its own sake, the myth of Er is a response to those who look towards the utility of philosophy. At various points in the Republic, Plato presents the detrimental effects that poetry can have upon men. Socrates begins in the first book by talking to Cephalus about Cephalus old age. Cephalus says that he is quiet content with his life and is not afraid of death because he has been a just man. Socrates asks if Cephalus knows what justice is and Cephalus responds with what Simonides, a poet, believes justice is. When Socrates tries to show Cephalus the problems with Simonides definition of justice, Cephalus is quick to leave in order to sacrifice to the gods. Cephalus represents the old men who have structured their lives according to the virtues they

have learned in certain kinds of poetry. These men are not eager to find out that they have been wrong about what the virtues are and how one must practice them, because it is too late for them to start over and become virtuous men. Thus in order to feel secure about the afterlife, they choose to believe the kinds of poetry that may be false but assure them that they have lived a virtuous life. Further on in the Republic, arguments made against the just man are those of the opinions of specific poets. Adeimantus argues that the typical poet claims that the unjust man is for the most part more profitable than the just, and both in public and in private, [the poets] are ready and willing to honor bad men.(364a) Poets have the ability to charm men into thinking that injustice is better than justice and thus to cause an inclination towards practicing injustice. According to Adeimantus, the common poet also says that injustice and justice are shameful only by opinion and law (364a). Thus men have the risk of believing justice to be that which is valued by society, even though society, as a whole, may not be sufficiently educated in matters regarding virtue. Furthermore, the typical poet persuades men that even if a man is unjust, the gods can be moved by offerings and prayers to make up for the mans unjust deeds. Due to this, men think they can practice vices without consequences, even in the afterlife. Thus the man who is heavily influenced by certain kinds of poetry finds it unnecessary to pursue truth and wisdom through philosophy. The danger then lies in the separation of poetry and philosophy. Socrates says that the imitative poet can produce a bad regime in the soul of each private man by making phantoms that are very far removed from the truth.(605b-c) The imitative poet does not imitate justice itself but rather he imitates men that are just, and therefore his imitation is three times away from the truth of what justice is. In order to explain this, he presents the example of couches. There exists a general idea of what a couch is, which is created by the gods. Then there is the carpenter

who demonstrates the idea of a couch by making a specific one. Finally there comes the painter who imitates or paints the man-made couch and thus his couch is three times away from the real idea of a couch. The painter has no need to understand what a couch truly is before he starts painting the couch in front of him. Thus, in regards to the man who strives to learn from the imitative poet about the true form of justice, the man will not be successful because the typical poet himself imitates without understanding. If this man believes what he finds in imitative poetry to be absolute truth, he will not find the need to pursue philosophy for truth. This presents the risk of men believing phantoms of truth to be the truth rather than using the phantoms to search for the truth. This means that instead of a man seeing Odysseus practicing justice and using Odysseus actions as examples of justice, the man believes that those actions are the true form of justice. A man who follows this mindset has no interest in the pursuit of philosophy because he thinks he has found absolute truth in imitative poetry. Furthermore, the imitative poet can gratify the souls foolish part, which doesnt distinguish big from little.(605c) In other words, the imitative poet can promote the calculating part of the soul to be watered down while it satisfies the part of the soul that hungers for tears and lament. The soul that has not been educated by argument in philosophy is likely to feed the mournful part of his soul beyond reason. This is the most detrimental effect that imitative poetry is capable of having upon the soul because if the calculating part does not rule the soul, a man becomes unhappy and a tyrant. Socrates presents an image of the three parts of the soul in which the calculating part is a human, the spirited part is a lion, and the desiring part is a many headed colorful beast. Ideally, the human should rule and the lion should assist in controlling the beast but when this order is disrupted, the beast and lion are forever fighting with each other while the human is starving.

Poetry, when separated from philosophy, has the potential to cause such a disruption and perpetual unrest within the soul. Plato uses the myth of Er to redefine the role of poetry in society. One of the first things that Socrates tries to censor in his society is poetry because rhythm and harmony most of all insinuate themselves into the inmost part of the soul and most vigorously lay hold of it in bringing grace with them; and they make a man graceful if he is correctly reared, if not, the opposite.(401d) Socrates argues that reared in a certain way, poetry can help the education of a philosopher because it will train him to appreciate the beautiful and fine things even before he can use reason. However, he does advise yet again, that if reared the wrong way, poetry can be dangerous. Socrates only presents poetry that benefits a city with good laws, such as the myth of metals and the myth of Er. Specifically, the myth of Er charms people into pursuing the philosophic life. Although the myth is not literally true, it possesses a universal truth, which is that being just is profitable. Socrates makes use of the power of poetry in order to aid his philosophic endeavors throughout the book. It is important that Plato ends the book with a myth because it shows how much he values poetry as a teaching tool. Since Plato does not know what truly happens in the afterlife, the myth of Er helps convey his overall moral, which is that men are rewarded and punished for their deeds respectively. Socrates concludes about the myth that it could save us, if we are persuaded by itholding that the soul is immortal and capable of bearing all evils and all goods, we shall always practice justice with prudence in every way.(621c)Although men are not going to have their skins stripped off and thrown into tartarus, it is true that virtuous men will benefit somehow in the end. Finally, through the myth of Er, Plato establishes that the goal of poetry is to provide further support in mans search for truth and his struggle to cultivate virtue.

Plato is, interestingly enough, both a poet and a philosopher. In a way, the Republic as a whole represents the unity of poetry and philosophy. As men primarily strive to attain happiness, Plato uses the myth of Er to convince readers that philosophy offers true happiness. As the cave allegory would suggest, not all men are capable of understanding philosophy, or in other words, not all men can endure looking at the sun. However, poetry has the power to influence everyone and makes it easier to understand philosophy. The unity of poetry and philosophy, exemplified by the myth of Er, aids the path to a virtuous life and a harmonized soul.