SOCRATES AND PLATO’S CAVE

R. Elliott
{"title":"SOCRATES AND PLATO’S CAVE","authors":"R. Elliott","doi":"10.1515/kant.1967.58.1-4.137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If we assume that the stages of the Cave allegory, from the freeing from bonds to gazing at the f ire, represent the typical progress of a pupil trained in accordance with the Socratic educational method, it is possible to provide a detailed Interpretation of the allegory and to discover connexions between the allegory, the Line, the doxophiüst passage) and Book 1.1 shall try to show that although Plato intended the allegory to represent the inferiority of the Socratic method of education to the new method outlined in the Republic, his more fundamental purpose was to exhibit the error of contemporary Socratic philosophers who claimed or sought knowledge of the good without postulating its separate existence; and that the allegory is the focus of a critique of Socratism which although communicated obliquely is nevertheless a major theme of the Republic. The immediate problem is that of ascertaining whom Plato intended the bound prisoners to represent, for unless this starting point is accurately determined the Interpretation will be subject to systematic distortion. Because they agree that the bound prisoners are men \"like ourselves\" and because of the difficulty in interpreting the ordinary state of man äs eikasia, Cross and Woözley suggest that the bound prisoners are the majority who unreflectively accept misrepresentations of justice etc. propagated by sophists, rhetoricians and politicians, not recognising these äs \"mere imitations of the real thing\"; and that the second stage in the Cave (looking at the images) represents the state of mind of the man who looks at the facts for himself and reaches his own conclusions about what is right and good). According to the allegory, however, the freed prisoner cannot see the images clearly or say what they are—so that it would be more appropriate to say that he is unable to reach any conclusions at all. But a more obvious objection to the view expressed by Cross and Woözley is that it contradicts Plato's own opinion äs it is stated in the Republic only a few pages before the allegory begins (514a). At 492 a—b Socrates asks Glaucon: \"... are you too one of the multitude who believe that there are young men who are corrupted by the Sophists and that there are Sophists in private life who corrupt to any extent worth mentioning and that it is not rather the very men who talk in this strain who","PeriodicalId":359228,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetics, Imagination and the Unity of Experience","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetics, Imagination and the Unity of Experience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kant.1967.58.1-4.137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

If we assume that the stages of the Cave allegory, from the freeing from bonds to gazing at the f ire, represent the typical progress of a pupil trained in accordance with the Socratic educational method, it is possible to provide a detailed Interpretation of the allegory and to discover connexions between the allegory, the Line, the doxophiüst passage) and Book 1.1 shall try to show that although Plato intended the allegory to represent the inferiority of the Socratic method of education to the new method outlined in the Republic, his more fundamental purpose was to exhibit the error of contemporary Socratic philosophers who claimed or sought knowledge of the good without postulating its separate existence; and that the allegory is the focus of a critique of Socratism which although communicated obliquely is nevertheless a major theme of the Republic. The immediate problem is that of ascertaining whom Plato intended the bound prisoners to represent, for unless this starting point is accurately determined the Interpretation will be subject to systematic distortion. Because they agree that the bound prisoners are men "like ourselves" and because of the difficulty in interpreting the ordinary state of man äs eikasia, Cross and Woözley suggest that the bound prisoners are the majority who unreflectively accept misrepresentations of justice etc. propagated by sophists, rhetoricians and politicians, not recognising these äs "mere imitations of the real thing"; and that the second stage in the Cave (looking at the images) represents the state of mind of the man who looks at the facts for himself and reaches his own conclusions about what is right and good). According to the allegory, however, the freed prisoner cannot see the images clearly or say what they are—so that it would be more appropriate to say that he is unable to reach any conclusions at all. But a more obvious objection to the view expressed by Cross and Woözley is that it contradicts Plato's own opinion äs it is stated in the Republic only a few pages before the allegory begins (514a). At 492 a—b Socrates asks Glaucon: "... are you too one of the multitude who believe that there are young men who are corrupted by the Sophists and that there are Sophists in private life who corrupt to any extent worth mentioning and that it is not rather the very men who talk in this strain who
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
苏格拉底和柏拉图的洞穴
如果我们假设洞穴寓言的各个阶段,从挣脱束缚到凝视火焰,代表了一个按照苏格拉底教育方法训练的学生的典型进步,那么就有可能对寓言进行详细的解释,并发现寓言、线条、(doxophi st段落)和卷1.1将试图表明,尽管柏拉图意图用寓言来表示苏格拉底的教育方法不如《理想国》中概述的新方法,但他更根本的目的是展示当代苏格拉底哲学家的错误,他们声称或寻求关于善的知识,而不假设它的独立存在;寓言是对苏格拉底主义批判的焦点,虽然是间接的,但却是《理想国》的一个主要主题。最直接的问题是要确定柏拉图想让被捆绑的囚犯代表谁,因为除非这个起点被准确地确定,否则释法就会受到系统的扭曲。因为他们同意被捆绑的囚犯是“像我们自己一样”的人,因为很难解释人类的普通状态äs eikasia, Cross和Woözley认为,被捆绑的囚犯是大多数人,他们不加思考地接受了诡辩家,修辞学家和政治家对正义等的歪曲,而不承认这些äs“仅仅是对真实事物的模仿”;洞穴的第二阶段(看图像)代表了一个人的精神状态,他自己看事实,对什么是对的、什么是好的得出自己的结论。然而,根据寓言,被释放的囚犯不能清楚地看到这些图像,也说不出它们是什么——因此,更恰当的说法是他根本无法得出任何结论。但是,对于克罗斯和Woözley所表达的观点,一个更明显的反对意见是,它与柏拉图自己的观点相矛盾äs,它在《理想国》中只在寓言开始前几页陈述(514a)。在492 a-b,苏格拉底问格劳孔:“……你是不是也相信有些年轻人被诡辩家腐蚀了,有些诡辩家在私人生活中也在某种程度上腐蚀了,而不是那些用这种腔调说话的人呢
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Unity of Kant’s Clive Bell’s Aesthetic Theory and Critical Practice Wittgenstein’s Speculative Aesthetics in its Ethical Context The Aesthetic and the Semantic Aestheticism, Imagination and Schooling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1