Classics and the Western Canon discussion

This is the place to share resources about The Republic.

For starters, I discovered that the Allan Bloom translation, which many scholars consider one of the best translations, is online in several editions, including HTML, PDF, and Kindle, here:
http://www.archive.org/details/Platos...
The "read online" version and the PDF version do have the Stephanus numbers; not sure yet whether the Kindle edition does also.

Here is the classic Jowett translation, but unfortunately without Stephanus numbers. If anybody finds a Jowett translation with the Stephanus numbers, please post it.

Here is the Gutenberg version of Jowett, also without Stephanus numbers.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1497

There are lots of other editions online, but most of them sadly without Stephanus numbers. If anybody finds versions that seem particularly useful, please post them.

Plato's famous Letter VII gives some history of his thoughts on politics, his travels, and other matters. The background it provides may be of interest to some. (I had thought about choosing it as our pre-Republic Interim Read, but decided not to, but to just reference it here for anyone interested.)

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/seventh...

Are there other books on political philosophy in the Western Canon that would be best read in conjunction with Republic? I know of a few: Aristotle's Politics, Machiavelli's The Prince and Plato's Laws. I'm wondering if there're others that are good for a comparative study.

I would add Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, since the Republic is as much about personal virtue as it is the virtue of the city. I haven't read Cicero's De re Publica, but it seems natural to put alongside Plato's original. And Hobbes' Leviathan, as a stark contrast. I suppose there are many more, but those come to mind as possibilities.

Nemo wrote: "Are there other books on political philosophy in the Western Canon that would be best read in conjunction with Republic? I know of a few: Aristotle's Politics, Machiavelli's [book:The ..."

Thomas's suggestions are excellent, but unless you have considerable time to commit, I would suggest that before moving to other texts, you consider a second or third reading of Republic itself, and perhaps one of the many excellent commentaries on the book. It is perhaps rich enough in its content that it will be sufficient unto itself.

If you do want to go beyond it, a few things I could suggest:

Bloom's Interpretative Essay at the end of his translation (it's included in the PDF copy I referenced earlier) has some very useful thoughts.

The Laws is a possible addition; I would also suggest Several The Apology as more relevant to the ideas of the Republic, and perhaps also the Timaeus.

Book II of Aristotle's Politics in particular contains his criticism of the Republic.

Howland The Republic: The Odyssey of Philosophy is often cited as a good introductory work for the Republic.

As you note, Machiavelli The Prince offers an alternative approach to ruling than that offered by Plato. And Marx's Communist Manifesto seems to pick up on many of the ideas in the heart of The Republic as he sees them apply to the modern state.

Thomas wrote: "I would add Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, since the Republic is as much about personal virtue as it is the virtue of the city. ..."

You're right. Nichomachean and Politics seem to be two parts of one treatise. My omission was due to a personal bias against it.

I haven't read Leviathan. I wonder whether the idea of social contract can be traced back to ancient Greek philosophy as well.

Everyman wrote: "Bloom's Interpretative Essay at the end of his translation (it's included in the PDF copy I referenced earlier) has some very useful thoughts. ...."

I downloaded the ebook. Thanks for the link, Everyman.

And Marx's Communist Manifesto seems to pick up on many of the ideas in the heart of The Republic as he sees them apply to the modern state.

If I understood it correctly, Aristotle's criticism of communism or common ownership is that it won't work because people are selfish.

Don't read Leviathan. It's not worth it.

(Actually, you probably should. but you really won't want to read it a second time)

As to the origins of the social contract, Hobbes does quote (and misquote) Aristotle to back up some of his ideas, but I'm not sure how much is actually in Aristotle rather than in Hobbes' reading of it. I've only read the Nicomachean Ethics and not the Politics, so can't reqally answer that question.

Nemo wrote: "Are there other books on political philosophy in the Western Canon that would be best read in conjunction with Republic? I know of a few: Aristotle's Politics, Machiavelli's The ..."</i>

This philosophers not made the western cannon yet. But if you want to see how modern philosophers have been influenced by, and use Plato in their work, check out [author:Cornel West. He has some interesting things to say about the Socratic/platonic tradition

@Vikz: I, for one, would be very interested if you would note some of Cornel West's ideas at the appropriate points in the discussion of Plato.

And, Everyman, I hope you (and/or others) will do the same with Marx. I haven't read Communist Maifesto and know far too little about what Marx actually believed, as opposed to the misrepresentations of his thought by both foes and putative followers alike.

Zeke wrote: "And, Everyman, I hope you (and/or others) will do the same with Marx. I haven't read Communist Maifesto and know far too little about what Marx actually believed..."

It'll have to be one of the others. I haven't read the Manifesto or Das Kapital since college, and you know how long ago that was! They're both still on the shelf here, but I probably won't have time to look into them.

David wrote: "Don't read Leviathan. It's not worth it.

(Actually, you probably should. but you really won't want to read it a second time) ..."

If it's not worth reading a second time, it's probably not worth reading at all, especially for a book on political philosophy.

Vikz wrote: "But if you want to see how modern philosophers have been influenced by, and use Plato in their work, check out Cornel West. He has some interesting things to say about the Socratic/platonic tradition..."

I haven't heard of West before. His Wikipedia page says that he "draws intellectual contributions from such diverse traditions as the African American Baptist Church, pragmatism and transcendentalism", as well as Marxism. What a hodgepodge! :) Like Zeke, I'm interested in his thoughts on Plato as well.

Here is a link to "The Clouds" by Aristophanes:

http://classics.mit.edu/Aristophanes/...

Some opening comments about the play and then a "study guide" to reading it are here:

http://depthome.brooklyn.cuny.edu/cla...

"'The Clouds' was produced in 423 B.C. (Socrates would have been about 45 at the time)."

http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/aristop...
This site also has a brief synopsis of the play.

Here is the Merriam-Webster Unabridged Online for "sophist", which I have found useful:

Main Entry: soph·ist
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin sophista, from Greek sophistemacrons, literally, master craftsman, expert, wise man, from sophizesthai

1 usually capitalized : one of a class of teachers of philosophy and rhetoric in ancient Greece who became prominent about the middle of the 5th century B.C. and impressed by the conflicting opinions of the early nature philosophers developed subjectivistic, relativistic, and skeptical arguments, were the first to offer anything approaching systematic education beyond the elementary branches, and argued for the natural equality of men, but taught also the art of successful living and partly by virtue of their unorthodox opinions and their acceptance of pay for instruction gradually fell into disrepute

2 sometimes capitalized : a learned man, thinker, or sage

3 : a person employing sophistry : a fallacious reasoner

"sophist." Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (3 Aug. 2011).

The Wiki article is interesting, but somehow it is one that I am not certain I trust:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophist

Plato's dialogue The Sophist is a purported attempt to "define" what a sophist is. It's really more of a tremendous straw man composed of all the things Socrates is against, but this is his conclusion:

The art of contradiction making, descended from an insincere kind of conceited mimicry, of the semblance-making breed, derived from image making, distinguished as a portion, not divine but human, of production, that presents a shadow play of words -- such are the blood and lineage which can, with perfect truth, be assigned to the authentic Sophist..

I expect that will be supremely unhelpful, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway. :)

Thomas wrote: "I expect that will be supremely unhelpful, but I thought I'd throw it out there anyway. :)..."

RFLOL! Yet Plato does not consider himself or Socrates a Sophist! Do I understand yet? Maybe I need that walk in the woods of Phaedrus where the teacher successively brings the discussion to the level of the understanding of the pupil!

Good start! Thx!

I felt the need to remember a bit more about the Thebans relative to Athens and Sparta. Here was a start for anyone else interested in a few lines:

"It was a major rival of ancient Athens, and sided with the Persians during the 480 BC invasion under Xerxes. Theban forces ended the power of Sparta at the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC under the command of Epaminondas. The Sacred Band of Thebes (an elite military unit) famously fell at the battle of Chaeronea in 338 BC against Philip II and Alexander the Great. Prior to its destruction by Alexander in 335 BC, Thebes was a major force in Greek history, and was the most dominant city-state at the time of the Macedonian conquest of Greece."

"The record of the earliest days of Thebes was preserved among the Greeks in an abundant mass of legends which rival the myths of Troy in their wide ramification and the influence which they exerted upon the literature of the classical age...."

There is a map here showing locations and holdings of Thebes, Sparta, and Athens at the time of the Theban Hegemony 371-362 BC -- status at the end of the period. It enlarges well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thebans

Reference dates (Wiki actually has still another slightly different set of dates for Plato, but any one of them is close enough for here. Plato is living through the rise in power of Thebes and the fall of Sparta, but he is gone by the time of Alexander -- at least if I have laid these out correctly. In 395, roughly the setting for The Republic, Thebes has still not defeated Sparta.)
Socrates: c. 469 BC – 399 BC
Plato: 424/423 BC – 348/347 BC

Patrice wrote: "I think of a sophist as someone who can make the weaker argument the stronger or, in other words, can "prove' a lie is the truth."

There is a difference between making a weaker argument sound stronger, and proving a lie to be the truth.

With argument, you're talking points of view, not facts. Who is to say which of two points of view really is the stronger? Isn't the whole point of dialectic, or argument, an attempt to establish which view is better by some sense of the term, and isn't it only an argument if there is a genuine and legitimate difference of points of view? IMO, you can only tell a lie when you're talking about a fact and know that what you're saying is false (the check is in the mail, no Mom I didn't take the last cookie).

A sophist, or a lawyer trained in sophistry as the lawyers in your group content, actually aren't allowed to tell outright lies. But they can try to persuade the jury to look at the facts, and the inferences they would like the jury to draw from their facts, the way they are paid to look at them. Anything wrong with that? :)

The historical perspective is worth keeping in mind. The Republic is set during the Peace of Nicias, a thirty-year truce agreed upon by Athens and Sparta during the Peloponnesian War. The peace did not last though, and the continuation of the war eventually resulted in the defeat of Athens. The dialogue was written after this defeat, and after both Polemarchus and Socrates were executed by the oligarchy that took the place of Athenian democracy.

The recent history of his country must have been in Plato's mind as he wrote The Republic. Was the war just? Was the Athenian form of government -- democracy -- responsible for the war? Was the subsequent form of government -- oligarchy -- responsible for the execution of Socrates? Is a better form of government possible, and if so, what is it?

Some food for thought relevant to the Republic but not directly related to it is the Melian Dialogue reported by Thucydides. This took place before the Peace of Nicias. It's worth a read if you have the chance.

http://www.wellesley.edu/ClassicalStu...

Thomas wrote: "The historical perspective is worth keeping in mind. The Republic is set during the Peace of Nicias, a thirty-year truce agreed upon by Athens and Sparta during the Peloponnesian War. The peace did..."

Very apt. Thank you.

Re: Sophists

Both Aristotle and Plato seem to share contempt for Sophists. From their pov, sophists are to dialecticians like themselves what quacks are to true professionals, hypocrites to the virtuous, illusion to reality.

The following passage from Aristotle's On Sophisitical Refutations sums it up nicely:

"That some reasonings are genuine, while others seem to be so but are not, is evident. This happens with arguments, as also elsewhere, through a certain likeness between the genuine and the sham. For physically some people are in a vigorous condition, while others merely seem to be so by blowing and rigging themselves out as the tribesmen do their victims for sacrifice; and some people are beautiful thanks to their beauty, while others seem to be so, by dint of embellishing themselves. So it is, too, with inanimate things; for of these, too, some are really silver and others gold, while others are not and merely seem to be such to our sense; e.g. things made of litharge and tin seem to be of silver, while those made of yellow metal look golden. In the same way both reasoning and refutation are sometimes genuine, sometimes not, though inexperience may make them appear so: for inexperienced people obtain only, as it were, a distant view of these things."

Thomas wrote: "http://www.wellesley.edu/ClassicalStudie... ..."

Thanks, Thomas! Made great reading while succumbing to the last pedicure of the swimming season -- along with cracking open Laura Hillenbrand's Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption . Oh, my, that reads in hurry -- I have scanned it already and look forward to returning to it. It revolves around the story of Louis Zamperini, an Olympic runner captured by the Japanese, and his comrades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Za...

That sounds like an interesting read, Lily. I have heard of Zamperini's story, but only as a chapter in another book. I'll have to keep an eye out for it - doesn't look like it's appeared in paperback in the UK yet.

David wrote: "That sounds like an interesting read, Lily. I have heard of Zamperini's story, but only as a chapter in another book. I'll have to keep an eye out for it - doesn't look like it's appeared in paperb..."

I don't believe its in paperback in the US yet, either. My book club is reading it, but we all took advantage of the promotional discounts.

I just finished Cicero's The Republic and the Laws and find it a great companion or followup read to Plato's Republic.

Nemo wrote: "I just finished Cicero's The Republic and the Laws and find it a great companion or followup read to Plato's Republic."

Good thought. I've added it to our bookshelf.

I took the liberty and added Cicero's On Obligations (De Officiis) to the bookshelf.

Nemo wrote: "I took the liberty and added Cicero's On Obligations (De Officiis) to the bookshelf."

Not a liberty -- I welcome anybody putting a classic up there for consideration. Just make sure to put it on the "to read" shelf and not on the default "read" shelf.

Been chasing works of art today. Saw this one and thought we might like to be reminded of it. (Saw another, but not certain how to get to it quickly, so ...)

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-o...

Okay, here is "Alcibiades Being Taught by Socrates" – François-André Vincent, 1777 – Oil on canvas – Musée Fabre, Montpellier (Inv. 837.1.95):

http://mini-site.louvre.fr/saison18e/...

http://mini-site.louvre.fr/saison18e/...

Here is another painting of Alcibiades and Socrates.

Nemo wrote: "Here is another painting of Alcibiades and Socrates...."

Thanks! The wiki article on Aspasia is interesting, how accurate, I don't know, but at least there are some sources if anyone wants to dig further:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspasia

Lily wrote: "Nemo wrote: "Here is another painting of Alcibiades and Socrates...."

Nice finds, both!

The apocryphal Alcibiades I and II may be another good companion read to Republic. Alcibiades, an ambitious Athenian of noble birth, was thinking of "running for office" at the time, and Socrates advised him on the qualifications for a good statesman. A must-read for every political candidate and voter. :)

“You can discover more about a person
in an hour of play
than in a year of conversation.”

Plato
(428 bc – 347 bc)

Anyone know the source of the above quotation attributed to Plato?

Lily wrote: "“You can discover more about a person
in an hour of play
than in a year of conversation.”

Plato
(428 bc – 347 bc)

Anyone know the source of the above quotation attributed to Plato?"

It certainly doesn't sound like Plato, does it?

It is apparently a misattribution:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Plato

Thomas wrote: "It is apparently a misattribution:..."

Thank you, Thomas! It seemed "out of character" to me, but I posted here rather than try to figure out another way to check. (Plato does have many sides to his personality and thoughts, so could have been.)

Article here on "The Other Socrates" may be of interest, although I don't know that it has a lot new that we haven't discussed:

http://bnreview.barnesandnoble.com/

September 09, 2011

Lily wrote: "“You can discover more about a person
in an hour of play
than in a year of conversation.”

Plato
(428 bc – 347 bc)

Anyone know the source of the above quotation attributed to Plato?"

Maybe it's not a misattribution after all, but an enhanced paraphrase. I stumbled across this in Book 7, where Socrates is talking about identifying fledgling philosophers, future candidates for education in dialectic:

"Therefore you best of men," I said, "don't use force in training the children in the studies, but rather play. In that way you can also better discern what each is naturally directed toward." 537a

This is a few lines after Socrates says "I forgot that we were playing and spoke rather intensely."

Playing, eh?

Thomas -- Thanks for the follow-up!

I used to say "playing" in (work) situations that had people looking askance. It was some of the most creative work we were doing!

Patrice wrote: "When I taught preschool there was a saying "play is the work of children". Plato is just everywhere!"

Have you ever played the association game? Once one recognizes an idea or a color or an object, one can "find" it everywhere. No magic involved.

Patrice wrote: "Is that what I'm doing? You mean Plato isn't everywhere??? ;-)"

Of course he is, if you want him to be! lol!

A thought for the day, attributed to another philosopher:

“I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong.”

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)

Lily wrote: "A thought for the day, attributed to another philosopher:

“I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong.”

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)"

“I admire you for your prudence. For your cowardice I hate you.”
Electra (Sophocles)