Scan barcode
gijshuppertz's review against another edition
4.0
Plato's republic is genuinely an exciting and relatively easy read. While your attention is definitely required, it is a book that everybody who is slightly interested in philosophy can pick up. The Socratic dialogues read easily and the topics are relevant and gripping.
That being said, the book is a classic, does not mean that all the parts are equally well written. Some argumentations are lacking and it is easily visible that the book is from a distant time. This is also one of its major plusses, it is amazing to realize that you are reading a work that has past generations upon generations and is now in your hands.
In my opinion, some of the most imaginative books were books 2-4 (on the soul and how it is connected to the state), the allegory of the cave, and lastly his regimes.
I disliked books 2-4 quite a bit because, in the previous books, Plato seems to have found the cardinal virtues out of thin air and just leaves it at that (wisdom, courage, justice, and temperance). However, in 2-4 he tries to investigate how these virtues are reflected in the state. Thereby making up his different classes of rulers, guardians, and workers. Although he relies quite a lot on the idea that a person can only be good at one job, thereby limiting every citizen to only one occupation, it is interesting how he envisions an efficient and happy society.
What I found particularly interesting, was Plato's thoughts on art, myths, and education. While sometimes being a bit over the top with his negative attitude towards art. It is provoking to hear his argumentation regarding the influential workings of art and how it can break or shape people. Even in the current day and age, one can make a convincing argument that some types of art (or media) can have a negative effect on one's mood, attitude, and behavior. Thereby making the decision to cut out these types of media. One can think of the use of TikTok as an example of this.
Plato's allegory of the cave and his discussion of different regime types are classics. In general, interesting reads, and especially the allegory of the cave was fantastic to read once since it makes up so much of later philosophy.
Lastly, I wanted to note that I do not fully agree with the critiques (especially of Karl Popper) that Plato was a totalitarian thinker or that he lead the fundaments for later totalitarianism. While yes with the knowledge of our age, we can see some parallels, this does not mean that we can interpret Plato as consciously knowing or wanting a totalitarian state. For people interested in how to genuinely interpret historical texts I would like to recommend Quentin Skinner's Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. Furthermore, in the text, it is emphasized multiple times that the organization of the state is developed with happiness for most people in mind. I would like to think that if we could debate Plato on this thought and how it might develop later on, he might have changed his mind.
That being said, the book is a classic, does not mean that all the parts are equally well written. Some argumentations are lacking and it is easily visible that the book is from a distant time. This is also one of its major plusses, it is amazing to realize that you are reading a work that has past generations upon generations and is now in your hands.
In my opinion, some of the most imaginative books were books 2-4 (on the soul and how it is connected to the state), the allegory of the cave, and lastly his regimes.
I disliked books 2-4 quite a bit because, in the previous books, Plato seems to have found the cardinal virtues out of thin air and just leaves it at that (wisdom, courage, justice, and temperance). However, in 2-4 he tries to investigate how these virtues are reflected in the state. Thereby making up his different classes of rulers, guardians, and workers. Although he relies quite a lot on the idea that a person can only be good at one job, thereby limiting every citizen to only one occupation, it is interesting how he envisions an efficient and happy society.
What I found particularly interesting, was Plato's thoughts on art, myths, and education. While sometimes being a bit over the top with his negative attitude towards art. It is provoking to hear his argumentation regarding the influential workings of art and how it can break or shape people. Even in the current day and age, one can make a convincing argument that some types of art (or media) can have a negative effect on one's mood, attitude, and behavior. Thereby making the decision to cut out these types of media. One can think of the use of TikTok as an example of this.
Plato's allegory of the cave and his discussion of different regime types are classics. In general, interesting reads, and especially the allegory of the cave was fantastic to read once since it makes up so much of later philosophy.
Lastly, I wanted to note that I do not fully agree with the critiques (especially of Karl Popper) that Plato was a totalitarian thinker or that he lead the fundaments for later totalitarianism. While yes with the knowledge of our age, we can see some parallels, this does not mean that we can interpret Plato as consciously knowing or wanting a totalitarian state. For people interested in how to genuinely interpret historical texts I would like to recommend Quentin Skinner's Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. Furthermore, in the text, it is emphasized multiple times that the organization of the state is developed with happiness for most people in mind. I would like to think that if we could debate Plato on this thought and how it might develop later on, he might have changed his mind.
starofthelakereads's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
2.0
I would never ask Plato write me an objective research survey
muhavipi's review against another edition
5.0
Five stars are for books that get me to think and/or change a perspective. Plato/Socrates can certainly do that. The Republic is a necessary read to understand underlying elements of Philosophy and Christian theology.
emily0mcguire's review against another edition
2.0
Made it about a third of the way through. So. Dry.
athousandgreatbooks's review against another edition
4.0
Nothing beautiful without struggle
Written around 375 BC, Plato’s The Republic is an ancient philosophical text presented in a series of dialogues between Socrates and his three interlocutors on the ideas of the perfect state and the individual within it.
During the course of the conversation, many questions are raised, concerning goodness, justice, the different forms of government, the structure of the ideal state, and the nature of the guardians (read philosopher kings) that ought to govern the just state. Socrates discusses these questions and delineates, through his trademark dialectics, the unsullied and the ideal forms of these concepts and the need to aspire towards them for a better community.
The internal organization of the State and the virtues thereof are juxtaposed with those of the individual within it, and as far as they are comparable, the Republic can also be seen as a text of moral philosophy just as much as it is of political philosophy. Indeed, Socrates’ main concern is with the individual, and only by extension does he define and expand on the nature of the State.
With exceptional lucidity and clinical use of the Socratic Method, Plato arrives at his theory of forms and his famous ‘The Allegory of the Cave’ and traces out a state bound by harmony and ruled by philosopher kings.
His interlocutors make up the mouthpiece for the common opinions held by Athenians (that seem very familiar) which Socrates argues against, and highlights through his own (feigned) ignorance the ignorance of others.
There is no doubt that there are many flaws with Plato’s arguments (especially his ideas on communal living for the guardians and the role of arts in education) which become all the more apparent with the straw-men positions that his debaters take.
But his points are cogent enough to provoke thought and a philosophical examination of one’s life, which I believe is more the purpose of this book than to incite any form of revolution based upon a theory. A quiet revolution within is much more necessary to live a harmonious life, even if the state outside doesn’t crown one a king.
Plato’s defense of philosophy, his views on the corruptors of prodigious youth, and the regression of the different states of government – from his espoused Aristocracy through Timocracy, Oligarchy, all the way to Democracy and Tyranny – make up the best chapters (6 through 8) of the book when Socrates brings out his big guns. If you don’t have the time to go through the whole book, I would definitely recommend checking those chapters out.
Written around 375 BC, Plato’s The Republic is an ancient philosophical text presented in a series of dialogues between Socrates and his three interlocutors on the ideas of the perfect state and the individual within it.
During the course of the conversation, many questions are raised, concerning goodness, justice, the different forms of government, the structure of the ideal state, and the nature of the guardians (read philosopher kings) that ought to govern the just state. Socrates discusses these questions and delineates, through his trademark dialectics, the unsullied and the ideal forms of these concepts and the need to aspire towards them for a better community.
The internal organization of the State and the virtues thereof are juxtaposed with those of the individual within it, and as far as they are comparable, the Republic can also be seen as a text of moral philosophy just as much as it is of political philosophy. Indeed, Socrates’ main concern is with the individual, and only by extension does he define and expand on the nature of the State.
With exceptional lucidity and clinical use of the Socratic Method, Plato arrives at his theory of forms and his famous ‘The Allegory of the Cave’ and traces out a state bound by harmony and ruled by philosopher kings.
His interlocutors make up the mouthpiece for the common opinions held by Athenians (that seem very familiar) which Socrates argues against, and highlights through his own (feigned) ignorance the ignorance of others.
There is no doubt that there are many flaws with Plato’s arguments (especially his ideas on communal living for the guardians and the role of arts in education) which become all the more apparent with the straw-men positions that his debaters take.
But his points are cogent enough to provoke thought and a philosophical examination of one’s life, which I believe is more the purpose of this book than to incite any form of revolution based upon a theory. A quiet revolution within is much more necessary to live a harmonious life, even if the state outside doesn’t crown one a king.
Plato’s defense of philosophy, his views on the corruptors of prodigious youth, and the regression of the different states of government – from his espoused Aristocracy through Timocracy, Oligarchy, all the way to Democracy and Tyranny – make up the best chapters (6 through 8) of the book when Socrates brings out his big guns. If you don’t have the time to go through the whole book, I would definitely recommend checking those chapters out.