Short Essay #2

Heidi Park

15 March 2016

Dr. Thomas

Short Essay #2

The Ascension of the Pseudo-Philosophers

            It seems that when people are put into positions that are not suited for them, the person or the situation changes. For instance, a person who is put into power after being starved of power is more likely to allow that power to consume him. The person begins to change because he is now in a situation that is not necessarily suited for him. With this idea of a person being inappropriately placed into a situation comes the development of different perceptions. In the Republic, Socrates and Adeimantus at one point discuss the perception of the person who enters into the philosopher role even though that person is not suited for it. This type of person, pseudo-philosopher, develops characteristics that are perceived to be vicious because their nature does not suit the position. People develop these perceptions because the actions and nature of the person is not correctly reflecting the position. The philosopher is supposed to be one whose nature is “a rememberer, a good learner, magnificent, charming, and a friend and kinsman of truth, justice, courage and moderation” (487a), but the pseudo-philosopher’s actions are inconsistent. Therefore, in the Republic, Socrates emphasizes the discordance arising from the the conflict of one’s nature, action, and position through the true and pseudo-philosophers.

            Before Socrates and Adeimantus discuss the pseudo-philosophers, Socrates first needs to establish that philosophers are good. He needs to do this so Adeimantus and the others can determine if a good philosopher really exists and why they are considered good. If Socrates does not define philosophers to be good, then there would be no need in discussing the nature of the true or pseudo-philosopher. In essence, philosophers are good because they are “always in love with that learning which discloses to them something of the being that is always and does not wander about” (485b). Because they seek truth, their soul is “concerned with the pleasure of the soul itself with respect to itself” (485d), meaning the rational part is in control and they are just. Once a person is just, then they are good. Also, when someone is good, it means their nature is in accordance with whatever action they are partaking in. For example, the philosopher’s nature is in harmony with his action of ruling the city because he knows what is best for the city. So, there is a sense of unity and mutuality between the philosopher’s nature and his position as a ruler. Having set this foundation of the nature of the philosopher, the discussion begins to shift toward pseudo-philosophers and their natures and actions.

            Realizing Socrates’ definition of a philosopher, Adeimantus is unconvinced that such a person exists in reality. He tells Socrates that in speech there is no contradiction, but in deed there is some inconsistency. Adeimantus specifically says that “those who start out on philosophy…most become quite queer, not to say completely vicious; while the ones who seem perfectly decent…become useless to the cities” (487d). Adeimantus has just raised the question that there seems to be two sorts of philosophers, and both are useless to the city because one is too dominating and the other is too submissive. With this distinction, the discussion shifts to focus on the nature of the pseudo-philosopher.

            In order to understand why the nature of the pseudo-philosopher is in conflict with the position of the philosopher, Socrates directs the conversation to the image of the ship of state. In this image, the pseudo-philosophers are the sailors trying to obtain the position of captain although they do not have the nature to be the captain. The sailors could be an allusion to the pseudo-philosophers because they are trying to fit into a position that is not suited to their nature. The sailors’ nature consists of manning the ship and being in charge of the technicalities regarding the ship. However, discord arises when the sailors want to go outside of what their nature allows them to do, which is to be the captain. In reality, the sailors have no idea that there is a method to navigation and a knowledge that comes from being the true captain. The position of captain should go to the person who has the nature of the captain, which includes the ability to navigate the ship and understand the seas.  Therefore, the sailors who are striving to be the captain are perceived to be foolish or useless. Foolish because they will cause the ship to sink because of their lack of knowledge or useless because they are not the true captain. In essence, the sailors are useless in the position of the captain because their nature does not allow for their actions to be acceptable in the position of a captain instead of a sailor.

            Not only does Socrates make this distinction through the ship of state, but he also seems to mention it earlier on in the text. When discussing the myth of metals, Socrates says sometimes “a golden child [is born] from a silver parent, and similarly all the others from each other” (415b). If the golden child stays with silver or bronze parents, his nature will not go in accordance with his position as a “golden” person. Therefore, he is taken away and raised where his nature will best suit his position. Although with this situation the child’s nature is the same in the sense of him being a child, his nature is different when considering if the child is gold, silver, or bronze. Thus, Socrates might not officially declare the inconsistency of the pseudo-philosopher until book six, but he does hint at this idea from the beginning of the text to the very end.

            Overall, Socrates is explaining to Adeimantus that the true philosopher is rare to find because of the restrictions society has placed on him, thus leading to the ascension of the pseudo-philosopher who does more harm than benefit. With the explanation of the shortcomings of the pseudo-philosopher, Socrates is hoping to bring awareness to the message that pseudo-philosophers exist, but they are not helping the city or soul. The only one who is truly fit to rule a city is the true philosopher whose nature is in accord with his actions.

Word Count: 1048