Lessons from Plato's Republic

The Republic of Plato is a sacred text. For anyone interested in political philosophy or philosophy in general there is no more important text for study. As Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) said: “Western philosophy is just a series of footnotes to Plato.” Because Plato is so important to an understanding of philosophy, we are working through The Republic of Plato in a series of ten lectures over ten months in Adult Sunday School before FORum.

Each of us is born into this world tabula rasa, a blank slate. Every generation must completely relearn all the lessons of history. Our present educational system does not value the lessons of Plato and so, if we are to learn from this source of human wisdom—the most important—we have to choose to do so as adults. In order to persuade you to direct your soul in the direction of wisdom, I offer these few lessons from The Republic of Plato. Just a taste.

Lesson 1 (Cephalus): Cephalus (328c-331e) is an old man whose interrogation by Socrates begins the dialog with the question, what is justice? Socrates says, “I am really delighted to discuss with the very old,” a notably rude opening. Cephalus responds to Socrates inquiry about what it is like to be old by saying that he, Cephalus, is glad to be rid of “many mad masters.” The “many mad masters” are the various human desires like sex, honor, victory, money, freedom, love, and, as we shall see, wisdom. Cephalus, talking about his great wealth, observes that “the possession of money contributes a great deal to not cheating or lying.” Socrates takes this as an assertion that justice is the truth and giving back. Socrates refutes the definition (which Socrates himself imposed upon Cephalus) by counter example. “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.” Being refuted, Cephalus departs with the words, “It’s already time for me to look after the sacrifices.” Cephalus is not an erotic man. His desires (the many mad masters), being an old man, have faded. Cephalus is not suited for philosophy. The lesson is this: Philosophy is an erotic desire and requires for its pursuit erotic young men and women. Only men and women of extraordinary erotic desire are suitable for philosophy.

Lesson 2 (Cleitophon): Here is a lesson from Plato that is completely overlooked except by careful study. Cleitophon (340a–340c) is a character who appears briefly in Book I. He enters the dialog hoping to save Thrasymachus, the sophist, who has asserted that “justice is the advantage of the stronger,” from dialogic defeat by Socrates. Thrasymachus has proposed that justice is doing what the ruler commands, in other words, justice consists simply in following the law, a position known as legal positivism. Socrates gets Thrasymachus to admit that sometimes the ruler makes a bad law that does harm (an injustice in this definition) to the ruler. Thus the conclusion follows that such a law does not advantage the stronger and the justice test fails by internal contradiction. Cleitophon proposes to modify the definition of justice to state that justice, or the advantage of the stronger, is simply “what the stronger believes to be his advantage.” In other words, there is no reality (there is no real “advantage of the stronger” to which Socrates has gotten Thrasymachus to admit), just opinion. Cleitophon is a complete relativist. “If I say that this beer mug is a hammer, then it is a hammer,” says the complete relativist. Even Thrasymachus dismissed Cleitophon with four words, “Not in the least.” Cleitophon is never heard from again in the dialog. The lesson is this: complete relativists exist, but they cannot be admitted into the sacred presence of philosophy. When a relativist is identified in our midst, do not give him the time of day! There is no point talking with the complete relativist as no meeting of the minds (“What’s a mind?” he might ask) is possible, except for nihilism, the belief in nothing, but even that cannot be pinned down precisely.

Lesson 3 (justice defined): “The practice of minding one’s own business … is probably justice.” Book IV, 433b. While the entire dialog (327a-621d) must be understood to fully appreciate the definition, I find Socrates’ conclusion extremely appealing. Justice, using my own language, is the protection by government of private property by law. The business of government is to protect the rights of individuals, including the rights to life, liberty, and property. The business of the individual is to secure his own life and property under law using his reasoning mind, and the labor of his own body. The method the individual uses to secure his own life and property is productive work and trade. The lesson is this: mind your own business. Oh, happy words!

Lesson 4 (education defined): The entire work is an exercise in education. Socrates is educating, mainly Glaucon, but certainly all of his auditors and interlocutors. Plato is educating his readership. “Education is not what the professions of certain men assert it to be … that they put into the soul knowledge that isn’t in it, as though they were putting sight into blind eyes.” Rather, the capacity to learn “is in the soul of each, and that the instrument with which each learns—just as an eye is not able to turn toward the light from the dark without the whole body—must be turned around from that which is coming into being together with the whole soul until it is able to endure looking at that which is and the brightest part of that which is. And we affirm that this is the good, don’t we.” “There would … be an art of this turning around, concerned with the way in which this power can most easily and efficiently be turned around, not an art of producing sight in it. Rather, this art takes as given that sight is there, but not rightly turned nor looking at what it ought to look at, and accomplishes this object.” Book VII, 518c. This holy passage tells us that education is the art of turning around the soul of a man from the particular to the general, from instances to concepts. Plato urges us to find the principle of a thing and to act from that principle. The lesson is this: education is the art of turning around a soul from the instances of things (“that which is coming into being”) to the principle of things (“that which is”).

Lesson 5 (the art of education): “The free man ought not to learn any study slavishly. Forced labors performed by the body don’t make the body any worse, but no forced study abides in a soul.” Book VII, 536d. The Republic of Plato is a dialog. It is a play. Plato is teaching us by play. He is playing with us. Among the playful things in the work are these: (1) The suggestion that we must do away with Homer (The Iliad and The Odyssey: “We’ll beg Homer and the other poets not to be harsh if me strike out these and all similar things.” 387b) (2) The suggestion that the population must be told a noble lie (all men are brothers born of the earth with different proportions of gold, silver, iron and bronze defining the classes of rulers, guardians, and workers. 414c) (3). The suggestion that private property be abolished (“No one will possess any private property.” 416d) (4) The suggestion that women and children must be held in common (“The possession of women, marriage, and procreation of children must as far as possible be arranged according to the proverb that friends have all things in common.” 424a). (5) The suggestion that the best and brightest young people must be tricked into proper breeding by a fake lottery (“Certain subtle lots must be fabricated so that the ordinary man will blame chance rather than the rulers for each union.” 460a) (6) The suggestion that all persons over ten years old must be ejected from the City (“All those in the city who happen to be older than ten they will send out into the country.” 541a) None of these suggestions are truly intended. These outrageous ideas are whacks on the head, jabs in the gut, and slaps across the jaw designed to “turn us around” so that we will see the light of truth. The lesson is this: Education comes best through play.

Lesson 6 (Plato never wrote out his philosophy): This lesson comes from reading other dialogues, most importantly the Phaedrus. Socrates: “You know, Phaedrus, that’s the strange thing about writing, which makes it truly analogous to painting. The painter’s products stand before us as though they were alive, but if you question them, they maintain a most majestic silence. It is the same with written words: they seem to talk to you as though they were intelligent, but if you ask them anything about what they say, from a desire to be instructed, they go on telling you just the same thing forever. And once a thing is put in writing the composition, whatever it may be, drifts all over the place, getting into the hands not only of those who understand it, but equally of those who have no business with it; it doesn’t know how to address the right people, and not address the wrong. And when it is ill-treated and unfairly abused it always needs its parent to come to its help, being unable to defend or help itself.” 275e. The lesson is this: philosophy is not for everyone.

Philosophy is not for everyone. She is not for those who have lost the eroticism of youth. She is not for those who cannot take a joke. She is not for those who do not have time for her. She is not for those who are too rigid to be “turned around.” She is not for those who do not recognize the existence of a reality beyond the present content of their own limited souls.

If philosophy is for you, She is ready, willing, and waiting; and She is beautiful.

Naked Body Scans by the TSA

Response by Martin L. Cowen III to “The TSA is Keeping the Skies Safe” by Gabriel Schoenfeld

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Schoenfeld’s defense of the TSA’s new, intrusive security measures.

Like all new legislation, the new rules are about money and power. The so-called necessity of any new rule or law is always hidden behind a rationale of the form: “Save the children (or whatever)!” The airlines get the money by transferring the cost and responsibility for passenger and property security to the Government as well as the cost of a catastrophic loss in the rare case of failure. The Government gets the power by subjecting innocent people to strip searches and full law enforcement pat downs. If the “herd” of airlines passengers will accept this, they will accept anything, thus unlimited power to the TSA. This argument will not persuade my readers, though, because the fact of legislation is so common and obvious, like the air we breathe, that it will not be noticed.

Neither will the argument from the Nazis, that is a favorite of mine, persuade many readers. I have always wondered how the Nazis got an entire population of Jews to submit to slaughter by walking into gas chambers. One answer, I imagine, is that their human dignity was degraded in a series of small humiliating abuses over many years. How much farther can the TSA go in human degradation now: rectal exams, vaginal searches? There is almost no further violation of human dignity that I can imagine that does not involve the infliction of actual pain. I am thinking of waterboarding passengers prior to takeoff. I do not think that even apologists like Mr. Schoenfeld would tolerate waterboarding to screen out potential terrorists, even though it would improve his sacred safety.

Perhaps more persuasive will be pointing out that picking the two hundred passengers (there were only 40 passengers on Flight 93) on an airplane to protect with excessively intrusive measures seems odd. Perhaps there is something in the human psyche relating to death in a small space from which there is no easy escape that strikes particular fear in the human heart. We all remember the little girl, “Baby Jessica,” rescued from a well in October 1987. Action adventure fiction provides many examples of victim rich targets for extermination by terrorists that are not airplanes. Thankfully, the mall does not do body cavity searches, yet.

And, how often is this argument heard? The passengers on Flight 93 fought back and thwarted the terrorists. The three other flights of 911 passengers did not. The passivity of the other 911 passengers, whose planes reached the terrorists’ goals, is a direct result of the policies of the Federal Government. In the absence of the “one size fits all” Government mandated “passive approach” to hijackers, there might have been Todd Beamers (one of the Flight 93 heroes who fought back against the terrorists) on the other 911 flights. The Government wants passive, obedient passengers. The Government does not like “Todd Beamers.” The passivity of passengers willing to accept any abuse by authority, legitimate or not, is precisely what is being counted on by the TSA to win the current battle to enforce its massive degradation of human dignity. The several recent victories (the underwear bomber and the shoe bomber) against airline terrorism have been the result of aggressive passenger response to suspicious behavior, not something favored by the bureaucrats at the TSA. Mr. Schoenfeld is the spokesperson for the passive. Being a bureaucrat means never having to say you are sorry and we can be sure that no bureaucrat will be sorry for having created a passive airline ridership, thus allowing 911 to be as effective as it was.

I have a dream. I dream that the escalators leading down to the passenger transportation tunnel at ATL are free from TSA employees and equipment. I dream of free people, traveling freely at the Atlanta airport, some with tickets, some without, who just enjoy the hubbub of people moving about and like watching the airplanes.

The scaredy-cats wonder, how can we ever travel safely without the TSA? The answer is this: Do not disempower the Todd Beamers among us. You scaredy-cats like Mr. Schoenfeld, who know your profound inability to provide for your own self-defense or action in defense of others, do not make up the entire population. There are a great many Todd Beamers among us. They will protect us. In fact, the only reason you scaredy-cats count at all is the fact that you have a vote. You are no use to people who want to live freely. You are of use only to politicians who want to exploit your weakness and your fear (“Save the children!”) in order to obtain your vote. You do not care about limitations upon your freedom. Only the Todd Beamers, those who are capable of independent living, care about their freedom.

My final argument is an argument from morality, which will persuade almost no one! Plato defined justice as minding your own business. The business of Government is to provide for defense against foreign invaders, to provide courts for the resolution of disputes, and to provide a police force to arrest wrongdoers. The task of emergency self-defense, in our homes and businesses, belongs to each of us as individuals. The business of protecting its passengers and its property belongs to the airlines. Front-line personal property protection is not a Government function. If these principles were applied, all airlines would be responsible for providing their own security. The extremes of action might be two different types of airlines, one called “Noble Airlines,” for the Todd Beamers of the world, and the other airline called “Sheep Airlines,” for Mr. Schoenfeld and his ilk. Those like Mr. Schoenfeld, who live in fear, could travel Sheep Airlines and be subject to body cavity searches. The Todd Beamers of the worlds, who are capable of self-defense, could travel Noble Airlines, where we could board and travel the wide world unmolested and with full human dignity. The market place would determine which airline would be successful. However, these two choices would not define the only options. Human ingenuity would provide dozens, perhaps hundreds, of innovative solutions to airline security, most of which we cannot even imagine. None of which will be realized so long as Mr. Shoenfeld’s views prevail.

The sheep of the world, like Mr. Schoenfeld, currently rule the world. Sheep have more votes. My only choice is to avoid flying all together. I was greatly offended by having to remove my belt and shoes to board the airlines. Electronic strip searches and full law enforcement pat downs exceed the limit of my toleration. A thug is still a thug, even when he is smiling, recites his TSA script well, asserts that it is for my own good, and is of the same sex during the assault. I will drive from now on, take the ship, or stay at home. Unfortunately, I am confident that the sheep will not miss me.