Sunday, April 24, 2016

Seminar paper Book X

Kyle McAlpin
Dr. Thomas
PHI 360
25 April 2016
            Plato’s use of the Afterlife to Appeal to the Masses
            In The Republic of Plato, Plato writes a dialogue between Socrates and the interlocutors that discusses the ultimate questions: what is justice, and if justice itself is better than injustice? The Republic analogously answers what justice is in the soul through Socrates’ examination of justice in the city, and his defense of justice against injustice. Book X ends with a discussion between Socrates and Glaucon about the immortality of the soul and how the gods favor the just. Plato, using Socrates’ interlocutors akin for his own audience, writes that the gods favor the just because he realizes that the only way the average person will seek perfect justice in the soul is if there is an otherworldly reward for doing so. Most humans will never become a philosopher as it goes against human nature and in mentioning the Myth of Er, Plato, just as those in the cave, is casting a shadow by adding the reward of the gods to justice.
            Justice is the highest virtue a soul can achieve and it is only possible if the soul is able to harmonize its calculating, spirited, and desiring parts. Socrates’ objective is to teach how justice in the soul can be achieved analogously through the search of justice in the city. Justice is something that, “we like both for its own sake and for what comes out of it” (Book II 357 c). Plato uses Socrates’ views in The Republic of Plato to attempt to create a more just and happy city: “in founding the city we are not looking to the exceptional happiness of any one group among us but… that of the city as a whole” (Book IV 420b). For a city to be just, the citizens must seek out justice in themselves; however, most humans refuse to follow philosophy. As a means to get the average person to consider justice, a reward must be presented.
            After answering what justice is and whether or not justice is in itself better than injustice, Plato chooses to end the Republic with the discussion of the immortality of the soul: “Therefore, since it’s not destroyed by a single evil-either its own or an alien-it’s plainly necessary that it be always and, if it is always, that it be immortal” (Book X 611a).  By stating that the soul is immortal, Plato is setting up his premise that there exists an afterlife and a reincarnation of sorts. Once he establishes the concept of an afterlife Plato can then build off of his idea that the gods are watching man, “And if they don’t escape notice, the one would be dear to the gods and the other hateful, as we also agreed at the beginning” (Book X 612e). If the gods exist and care whether or not a man is just, and there is an afterlife, both provide a reason for the average man who is not a philosopher king to turn towards justice. Some of the unjust in a society would start to analyze themselves and their soul, and seek harmony of their soul if it meant that they would please the gods and be rewarded in the afterlife.
            Plato goes into further detail about the afterlife and how the just soul is rewarded in the Myth of Er, which tells the account of a Pamphylian warrior’s journey through the afterlife after being killed in battle. A key point in this myth is that it sets up the concept of there being two different paths a soul could be sent depending on how just it was: “He said that when his soul departed, it made a journey in the company of many, and they came to a certain demonic place, where there were two openings in the earth next to one another, and, again, two in the heaven, above and opposite the others” (Book X 614b-c). This separation of a good and bad afterlife provides another reason besides those Plato had previously mentioned in The Republic as to why justice is favorable. A stronger motivation for a human to follow justice than the promise of a heaven is the fear being in hell for a thousand years: “For all the unjust deeds they had done anyone and all the men to whom they had done injustice, they had paid the penalty for every one in turn, ten times for each” (Book X 615a). There will always be those in a society that completely neglect justice, but Plato puts this form of a bad afterlife to try and stray anyone away from falling into injustice without hesitation or fear of punishment.
            The last part of the Myth of Er tells of what happens to the soul once it has served its thousand years in heaven with the just or in hell with the unjust souls. Once the sentence was fulfilled all the souls were brought together and given lots at random to choose their next life:

This is the beginning of another death bringing cycle for the mortal race. A demon will not select you, but you will choose a demon. Let him who gets the first lot make the first choice of a life to which he will be bound by necessity. Virtue is without master; as he honors or dishonors her, each will have more or less of her. The blame belongs to him who chooses; god is blameless. (Book X 617d-e)
When choosing its next life every soul will choose a new life based on what it had experienced and learned in its previous life or incarnation. Often times, the souls that we rewarded with heaven chose hastily, without fully considering the lot choice. They chose the slots that seemed virtuous on the surface, but that really lead to tyranny. The laborers, on the other hand, since they had experienced suffering on earth, were more likely to carefully choose a truly virtuous lot. The incarnation cycle of the soul leads to a “exchange of evils and goods for most souls” (Book X 619d).
Souls would then theoretically choose the life that they think will provide them with the most happiness, except for the philosophers, who would choose a new life that allows for the continuation of the pursuit of wisdom or a just life. Human nature is to give into desire and it is abnormal for a human to completely bypass desire for wisdom. Even if a soul was warned that it was making the wrong choice, it would still make the choice based on the desires it had in its previous life. Some souls, such as Odysseus’, do make good slot choices, but these are different from the slot choice a philosopher king would make. Odysseus’ soul chose “from memory of its former labors it had recovered from love of honor; it went around for a long time looking for the life of a private man who minds his own business” (Book X 620c). The souls who chose well are the ones that analyzes their past lives and injustices, and chose a slot that will provide them a more virtuous life of justice. The philosopher king however, would chose the slot that would lead to the greatest justice, the continuation of wisdom. They would have to keep to the “upper road” and forever philosophize in order to stay just. Plato says that God is blameless because even if a soul regretted its decision, there is no one to blame but itself.  A complete harmonization of the soul to where one would become a philosopher king is highly unlikely, humans are flawed and will always give into temptation.
            The Myth of Er teaches, through the soul’s lot choice, that most humans follow whatever they believe will provide them with the greatest amount of happiness. They will believe that the gods favor the just, if it means that they will experience happiness in the afterlife. Human beings exhibit the characteristics of those imprisoned in the “Allegory of the Cave” and it is next to impossible that one will truly ever escape and become a philosopher. Humans typically choose the path in life that is easiest or produces the most pleasure: “And if they were somehow able to get their hands on and kill the man who attempts to release and lead up, wouldn’t they kill him?” (Book VII 517a). Plato acknowledges that human nature is to resist the philosophical awakening even if that meant living in a world of shadows, content playing the game of acquiring false knowledge. If ever freed, the prisoner from the cave will be exposed to truth and wisdom, but he never explains how the first man is released or breaks free from the chains. Prisoners in the cave would choose to stay there forever if it was not for an accidental freeing. The last part of chapter X was included in The Republic because Plato wants society to try and search for justice but he also realizes how unlikely that is, and how they need another reason, besides wisdom, to even consider justice.
            By telling the Myth of Er and creating an afterlife in which the gods judge men based on how just they were, Plato is casting a shadow on his audience just as the ones behind the fire do in the cave. In the cave there are people who are creating the shadows for those imprisoned: “Then also see along this wall human beings carrying all sorts of artifacts, which project above the wall” (Book VII 514b). Plato, by giving this ulterior motive for justice, is appealing to the masses because he wants society to at least try to be just but understands that only a few will every truly harmonize their soul and become a philosopher. Trying to harmonize the three aspects of the soul will make an individual better even if they never attain the level of harmonization of a philosopher king, and if everyone is attempting justice then the city will be stronger. However, by appealing to the masses Plato is, in a sense, imprisoning them into a new cave where he is the one creating false images. If someone blindly tries to follow justice because of the reward it will give them, then they are being imprisoned into a cave of justice. The only way to escape this new cave is if a true just philosopher frees them. However, just as in the first cave, the average man will refuse to be enlightened and will hold onto the idea that if they try to be just they will get the favor of the gods.
            Another approach to this is that in The Republic, Socrates’ is trying to teach Glaucon that it is very possible for humans to harmonize their souls. That it is possible through questioning, just as Socrates did, to get individuals to fully look inward and become a philosopher king. Although only the guardians can become philosopher kings in Plato’s argument, if Glaucon can move past desires and do it, so can all the interlocutors: “Unless… the philosophers rule as kings or those now called kings and chiefs genuinely and adequately philosophize” (Book V 473d). The only was a just city could exist is if the rulers philosophize and follow wisdom. Humans although flawed, once freed from the cave will grow to love wisdom and go back and free the others.  
            Book X of The Republic of Plato presents an ulterior motive as to why a human should be just. In stating that the soul is immortal and that the gods are judgmental, Plato is appealing to the average human by giving the incentive of a heaven. To get the masses to even consider justice and try to harmonize their soul, he needed an otherworldly reward. He must do so because philosophy completely goes against human nature, which is to give into desire. In writing the Myth of Er, Plato creates a new cave of justice, in which he is the one creating the shadows, and his prisoners are exposed to more philosophical truth than they were before.










7 comments:

  1. From our class discussion today, I thought the questions about the gods placement in the cave was interesting. Initially, I had always thought the gods were outside of the cave since they were watching the people. Logically, if one is watching someone else, they are in a higher position. However, Dr. Thomas made the point that the gods could also be the shadows on the cave wall. The imagery of the gods watching still applies here. The shadows are in a sense watching the prisoners because they are right in front of them. Perhaps, there is one true god outside of the cave that is watching all and once the prisoner escapes, he too realizes there is one god instead of the many gods as depicted by the shadows.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hearing this placement of the gods as the shadows at the bottom actually made a lot of sense to me. If you want to read a lot into this, these shadows could be any of the numerous gods that have been created over history. We now know most of these gods to not exist as pretty much fact, but at one point they were believed to be real. It makes sense for them to be the misrepresented shadows because the gods and the shadows represent the same thing, a false image used to give meaning and possibly hope to your situation.

      Delete
  2. The question about where the gods were in the cave really hit me. I never really thought of them in this model because I was always focused on perfection and justice in the cave. It made sense that they would be outside of the cave but the idea of them being inside through me for a loop. Is it possible for them to be in both places? Maybe the shadows are the misinterpreted gods and the outside are the understood gods?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I found this topic to be really interesting and a connection that i didn't make the first time reading book 10. This class discussion about the fear of punishment or the reward in the afterlife leads the individual to lead a just life is where I want to focus my comments. The fact that this seems to be an early base model that some of the christian idols come from really shocked me and I think this would be a good path to follow with this paper. I believe that the gods in the original model would have to be the very top of the metaphor that you placed on the board. I think this is the biggest question to answer before pursing that christianity gathered some of their ideas of afterlife from text like this.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think the questions you ask about the gods are very important to understanding Platonic philosophy. I was most interested in where the gods are in the cave analogy. I completely agree that I think the answer comes from the third book. As the cave is a model on how to become educated, I think that how the gods fit into the education system is very important. From this, the gods seem somewhat clinical, not changing, and impenetrable to error. I'm not entirely sure where this places the gods, as I'm not entirely sure of what it would mean to consider them as shadows. But it still seems to me that he's re-writing the traditional mythology/religion, of which we clearly see the roots of other religions.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You have done an excellent job introducing the justice cave today in class. I was really interested because book 10 is my favorite.

    Good discussion today in class!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I found this paper to be very interesting, especially about how you suggest that we seek justice for a reason and not simply to have a good soul. This idea of rewards and punishment is definitely something that many people can relate to and makes the argument Plato suggests for having a good soul a reasonable one. It would make sense that we would strive for perfect justice in hopes of attaining that reward or to avoid punishment. I never really saw the Republic as answering questions about religion but this argument really brings the question of the gods and spirituality in perspective with the soul.I would also agree with you that Plato through his dialogue is creating shadows for us to follow however, I don't think that the Republic is necessarily his cave but rather it is something external (similar to the Good).The dialogue is meant to guide us, not chain us down.

    ReplyDelete