Plato Knows Best
It is evident from the onset of Book 3 of the Republic that Plato regards the arts with intense seriousness. His critique comes as a challenge to the growing specter of ‘harmful’ poetry and literature plaguing the intellectual discussion of the time. Plato feared that the reduction of rational thought would erode productive discourse. Moreover, he brought into open examination the value of art while laying the foundation for his ideal city state. Of incredible importance is his position that art should serve at the pleasure of truth and goodness — arguments that place merit in art for its aesthetic alone are null and void (401c).[1] One might also take this argument to mean that all pursuits should be evaluated on the basis of how they contribute to truth and goodness. Plato’s proposed actions towards the arts may be difficult to stomach for modern readers yet for him they are accurate guidelines for a more widely beneficial society. His positions on death, self-discipline and participation in the arts shall be analyzed for their continued relevance in the face of ever more absorbing technologies.
The Republic provides Plato’s version of a blueprint for a utopian society that harmoniously orients itself towards the greater good through justice. Rulers, guardians, or whatever form leaders may take in a political society should strive to understand truth and goodness for their own sake.[2] In Plato’s estimation, philosophers are the best suited to approaching absolute truth and goodness, as they seek these ideals through separation of the mind and body and they focus on these pursuits even if it means the destruction of their bodies.[3] To this end, it is considered of utmost importance that stories about death and the underworld should not be so negative. Instead, Plato prefers that the potential guardians of his city should only inherit heroic tales that offer a beacon of hope to those who abide by the principles that he lays out in other areas of the Republic (386c). As Plato develops this idea, he is very much concerned with how artistic portrayals of death are influential not only for the youth but for men who might lament the death of their fellows. For Plato, understanding this point is crucial as we continue along the path to harmonious justice. The temptation of bodily pleasures and the instillment of fear of death by artistic pursuits are particularly difficult to avoid because of their guile, their cleverness, their imperviousness to definition as merely pleasing rather than truth or good (387b). [4]
While not ubiquitously considered art, many of the most convincing religious arguments make a similar attempt to erase the fear of death in order to serve purposes which ultimately feel like sacrifice. In modern conception, religion is often a suitable replacement for the arts in their efforts to design a life that benefits the community at large. Plato recognizes that justice in and of itself does not compel the laymen to do the right thing for the harmonious success of his city, postponing his proof at this point of Book 3 (392b). He therefore subscribes to the idea that by controlling art he can provide armor to the natural fear of death. These scenarios provide for an alternative life, after death, that is of greater importance and much more grand, pleasing and good. Generations of people have grown from their childhood into adulthood under the auspicious notion that their lives are not meaningful except as a means to an end; your actions here are significant only as they contribute to your ultimate judgment. Plato’s preemptive version of this comes in a form that is packaged differently and claims to be different, and yet requires a similar leap of faith. He proposes that guardians may become too soft or weak if they are afraid of death and expects that the guardians of the city will grow up without any fear so long as they are not exposed to the negative artistic portrayal of the underworld (387c).
We can easily find modern examples of art that glorifies corporeal life; popular music, YouTube and social media feeds are some of the most pervasive content regularly consumed by an average individual. To determine their value is to fall helplessly short on the principles of truth and goodness that Plato posits. It is practically impossible to avoid the concept that human life is to dare and achieve in the short time that we have available to us; after all, we only live once.[5] Perhaps one of the most lamentable trends of scientific progress that has broadly benefited humanity is that it has replaced much of the abstract theorizing that provided incredible insight in the time of the Greeks with a view of life that borders on robotic. This is meant to describe death not as a passage to another time, a reward for a life harmoniously passed. While we may criticize the Greeks for a process lacking evidence and repeatable rigor, theories about the essential philosophical questions are still unproven despite the increasingly minute understanding of nature humanity has developed. Because of this, it is easier to avoid hard questions about death and succumb to distraction.
Plato continues his interrogation of the arts with the demonstration that self-discipline may be lacking in those that fall victim to the sirens of food, drink and sex as represented in art(390c). Older generations have never failed to criticize those after them by pointing to their debasement and lack of commitment to the values that were previously held as significant beyond the scope of imagination[6]. Nonetheless, Plato’s concerns are particularly valid in a time when instant gratification is the norm, comparison to others is impossible to ignore, and living the best life is “goals”. Rarely, perhaps even by design, do the algorithms that perceptibly alter the content we consume direct our attention to a fruitful discussion of truth, goodness, justice. If we are not even able to ask the most difficult questions of ourselves, how can we hope to better ourselves and find fulfillment? The argument that self-discipline leads to a life devoid of pleasure is misguided as well, in the sense that humanity is notoriously good at adjusting to their circumstances. A controlled and defined environment for artistic pleasure allows for entertainment and enjoyment, and most importantly, the evaluation of said endeavors for their productive merits:
“Although [Plato] condemns the view that one can be a sufficient judge of an art-form without specialist knowledge of it…it is the elders, with their knowledge of what is good, who will guide the population towards artistic behavior which is right from an ethical point of view.”[7]
Self-discipline as portrayed in modern thought may be one of the most enviable characteristics. One may hope to direct their focus and energy towards pursuits that show mastery and endurance in the face of any distraction, even the most compelling portrayals that permeate art (390d). If Achilles, a hero beyond repute, can be shown to participate in a lack of self-discipline by trashing the gods or his fellow humans, it implies that the youth should not fear to do the same. Plato fears that allowing our greatest examples to be as fallible as we are is to set us up for disappointment. Good behavior and self-discipline should be the reward, not recognition by our peers that we are somehow better. In this sense, the modern equation on this topic is backwards, and there is not much hope for retribution due to the systematic occurrence of highlight reels that we are forced to enjoy. To remove oneself from this equation is increasingly difficult as social pressures draw one deeper and deeper into this self-perpetuating system.
Plato goes on to discuss the difficulties that imitative and representative art, mimesis, present for those that are seeking true fulfillment and the good of all in his proposed city. In his view, the guardians should not be involved with or learn from this type of activity because it lends itself to untoward behavior. His cautiousness with those that perform in these arts is especially palpable. He surmises that those who participate in an art form that does not support the principles of truth and goodness are susceptible to absorbing some of those characteristics:
“Have you never noticed how imitation, if long continued from an early age, becomes part of a person’s nature, turns into habits of body, speech and mind?” (395d).
Tragedy and comedy as performed in Plato’s time were consumed by people of all ages, and youthful viewing of such a spectacle could lead to imitation.[8] This concern is particularly valid because the youth, and those that have a child within themselves as adults, may find it hard to distinguish between fictional portrayal and factual truth in the arts.[9] Even in a world that increasingly recognizes relative perception as a reality, satire, irony and doublespeak play a critical role in art. With the proliferation of fake news and deep fake videos, we have even more of a challenge to deal with. Although one may do their best to sort through this mess with the best intentions, some art is so bad as to be considered good; some art is impossible to decipher; some intention is lost in the medium, and in this process, the value of truth and goodness are prioritized less urgently.[10]
Participation in the arts is taken for granted in many Western societies, and yet, the role models increasingly come from those that sacrifice goodness and truth for clout and views. It is disastrous for our future that the most desired career choice for Generation Z is to be a YouTuber.[11] The sponginess of youthful understanding is progressively taken advantage of by those seeking to monetize art selfishly, and as a result, our future is sure to suffer. For example, it is a common argument that younger kids should not be playing violent video games because they are influenced to be violent themselves. And yet, one of the most popular and lucrative new careers is to stream video games online. To what principles do these role models subscribe? In what way do we hold those responsible, or limit their viewership based on age? Ninja, the most well paid and viewed streamer, has had his fair share of controversy on difficult subjects such as racism, and openly admits that he does not feel responsible for ‘parenting’ his viewers.[12] If we are to learn anything from Plato’s views on the arts, in which we now should include video games and streaming, it is that there is no separation of the content itself from the moral and political views that they express. And if we cannot expect self-censorship by creators as it comes at the sacrifice of their income, we cannot expect that the youth and even uncritical adults will be able to determine which behavior is acceptable; moreover, it could cause the terrible misconception that poor behavior in terms of goodness and truth are what lead to success.
Even in Plato’s day, philosophers were considered outcasts in many senses — it is therefore argued by some that the Republic was not an attempt to define or persuade its audience to a particular principle, rather to convince them of the importance of philosophical inquiry.[13] With our earlier discussions of the perception of death, the nature of self-discipline and the dangerous osmosis of mimesis, we can begin to understand why Plato’s seemingly autocratic actions are rational considering his primary concerns. He insists that the arts are a serious matter to be controlled and evaluated in the society he proposes, and that arguing that art for its own sake retains value is a blanket statement of little merit.[14] With this statement I wholeheartedly agree. The idea that art is dangerous is typically associated with tyrannical political bodies that seek to punish and censor dissidents. Understandably, those living under a regime that offers no creative outlets and silences any attempts to criticize its rulers have the principles of truth and goodness on their side; meanwhile, Plato writes in the privileged context of a growing movement against aristocratic rule and with optimism towards social mobility.[15] Humanity needs the tools to dismantle the meaning behind artistic activities in the same way that art serves as a tool to criticize that which is systematically unjust.
Thus, it is best to consider Book 3 of the Republic as an exploration of art’s value that is applicable to all eras. Art for its own sake should not be censored nor destroyed as Plato suggests, yet it should be considered in light of its insistence on vanity and views. Beauty is not what makes art so dangerous, yet it is a truly monumental task to approach beautiful and persuasive art without being caught up in it. Context and intent offer insight into the meaning behind the message, regardless of medium. It is imperative that from an early age we are accustomed to consuming and analyzing information with the right mindset. One of the most beneficial aspects of Western schooling is the focus on understanding the reasons behind historical facts. And yet, the modern versions of art are invariably brought to our attention due to their significance in the human arena without any guiding principles.
Plato’s broad strokes and abstract argumentation should be part of curriculums from a young age, as they advance from simple to complex, general to detailed.[16] His foundational opinions on art have influenced philosophical thought for all of humanity while fading to the background and in some cases dismissed as authoritarian. By refocusing our efforts on the argumentative method that benefitted Greek intellectual history, we can begin to approach immense questions with as many options as possible. The importance of the arts has always been assailable, but we currently benefit from an extended period of its acceptance in Western society. It is incredibly critical that we enter into conversations about the arts’ depictions of reality with the purpose of bettering ourselves and developing a truthful equation for fulfillment. Otherwise, we may find ourselves retreating from the precipice of the expansion of intellect.
