Hardcore

After an extended break from the Great Books, I've returned to my not-quite-pretentious obsession. Previously, I've read:

Apology (Plato)
Crito (Plato)
The Clouds (Aristophanes)
Lysistrata (Aristophanes)

And now we return to Plato with The Republic. Or Books I-II, anyway: The Republic is a mammoth ten-book composition that takes up about half of the portable Plato I've been carrying around. Sadly, there's no analogy of the cave here, but here's a brief rundown of what we do get:

--An extended discussion of whether justice or injustice is better.
--A proposition on the benefits of injustice
--A construction of Socrates/Plato's perfect State
--And the origin of the phrase, "necessity is the mother of invention".

You may think it very risky-- or perhaps unnecessary-- to post a "review" of what is arguably one of the greatest works of literature. (It is, after all, part of the "GREAT BOOKS OF THE WESTERN WORLD" collection.) I say to you, pooh-pooh. I'm going to talk about this on its own merits, and relating to its relevance in society today. Plus, if it's good enough, then it won't need your defense, right?

Indeed. Plato is hardcore writing. The first book of The Republic is the more entertaining of the two, with Plato's protagonist Socrates shutting down nearly every argument against justice in a humorous way. Should it be up to the physician whether someone gets his medicine? Of course not. A discussion of the nature of the Arts (meaning any area in which one can excel) features prominently, too.

There are more problems with logic in Book II of The Republic. Part one is in defense of injustice, as observers wait for Socrates to retaliate. The defense is so fleshed-out that Socrates only has time to begin his defense of justice in a State in the remainder of the book, but he can at least put forth his view of a perfect state. There is no argument here: only Socrates's observers confirming his beliefs. That said, it was interesting (having not read The Republic before) to note that Socrates (and Plato, who puts the words in his philosopher's mouth) advocates a society built around the pillars of capitalism and monotheism. Plato notes that a perfect society should be one in which nothing bad can originate from God, and therefore everyone behaves themselves. He also relates that since the necessity of a State is based mainly around the trade of arts that people can provide, the laws of a State keeping justice should be ones built around the continued benefit of trading. Even if Plato's points have been altered a little in the USA, they are still there, and it's ridiculous how relevant large parts of the discussion really are.