IndexAnalysis of the analogy Plato's Republic, city-soulSection 1 Section 2Section 3Works CitedAnalysis of the analogy Plato's Republic, city-soulIn an elaborate effort to Understanding individual justice, Socrates engages in a lengthy debate that explores the intricate details, structures, and general principles of a just city. This analysis will explore the City-Soul analogy through three separate human lenses. Section 1 will delve into the second-hand account of Socrates' conversation, as recorded by his student Plato. Section 2 will analyze a political theorist's perspective on the soul of the city. In the tertiary section I will examine my personal connotations regarding Socrates' city-soul. In addition to exposing the reality theoretically deduced by Socrates in which he himself defines himself as God. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essaySection 1 The City-Soul analogy comes from Socrates' rationality that the larger an object is, the easier it should be to read and understand. Since Socrates is engaged in determining the true meaning and actions that exemplify justice and the just man, Socrates begins this cognitive quest by building a theoretical city to better understand man, who is physically smaller. Supporting the creation of this city are three other conversationalists: Thrasymachus, a sophist, Glaucon and Adeimantus, Plato's brothers. The city is imagined from scratch. This vital city begins with just four citizens, each of whom are skilled artisans of a trade critical to the city's sustenance. Socrates notes that “A city, I suppose, comes into being because each of us is not self-sufficient but needs many things.” (Plato p.153) Thus, cities are the psychic manifestations that support man's growing needs and desires and, above all, every man has the duty to support society in a predetermined role. Socrates affirms this by stating that "we are not all born exactly the same but different by nature, for all kinds of different jobs..." (Plato p.154) According to Socratic logic, one's function within the city is therefore determined from the natural gifts of each talented man. It is now indisputable that Socrates believes in a divine power that assigns talents and therefore roles to human beings. The importance of this notion will be explored in depth in the third section. The analogy continues with the theme of the assignment of tasks within society, up to the artists. Compared to artisans and skilled workers, artists produce more than tangible consumer goods. Artists of the Socratic era include poets, painters, and creators of fables. (Plato p.162) These positions in the city give great power to those in the professions mentioned above. Art and culture are one, that is, each can shape the other. Art and culture have the power to advance specific ideologies and ways of thinking. "Then first, it seems, we must institute a censorship on the makers of fables, and approve every good fable they make, and disapprove of the bad..." (Plato p.162) This power of the arts worries Socrates that his ideal i citizens could be corrupt. It is with great irony that Socrates speaks of how to censor the tales of the gods so that the youth and, more importantly, the future guardians of the city not only learn of the harmful acts, but have no conceptual knowledge of what would constitute an action negative. To preserve the rightness of the city, future guardians must not be educated on the human tendencies of the Athenian gods. At the end of the allegory, Socrates has brilliantly guessedthe soul of his theoretical Polis. All individuals, at all social levels within the city, play a unique and vital role in maintaining order, justice and prosperity. Socrates also concludes that it is necessary to tell a lie to hide past disputes. In great literary style, Plato includes other conversationalists to exemplify real human nature. Their questions help Socrates to strengthen his argument, and therefore his polis, by intervening precisely where his argument must prove superior to any proposed alternative. An example of this rhetorical device can be seen when Socrates demonstrated to Thrasymachus that “justice was better than injustice.” (Plato p.152) The city-soul analogy is intended to start the discussion for the rest of the Republic. Section 2Recent literature has focused particularly on the city-soul analogy, in order to explain Plato's Republic as a whole. Viewed through the lens of a political theorist, Kateri Carmola's Noble Lying: Justice and Intergenerational Tension in Plato's Republic attempts to explain Socrates' reasoning as to why a noble lie is necessary for future citizens to be just. To understand this topic, one must first recognize that ancestry played a more important role in Socratic times in determining career paths and life trajectories, compared to our contemporary times. The need for a noble lie articulated by Carmola: “The noble lie will generate an ideal just state by falsifying the origin, or generation, of citizens, but it is a justice undermined by a potential reference to the continuing problem of past generations.” (Carmola p.40)Carmola makes it clear that Socrates is engaging in this discussion to resolve the problems faced in his time and space. This notion is significant, since readers of philosophical literature (including myself) may confuse historical philosophers with writing for universal and always applicable reasons. The time difference between writing and reading philosophical literature will change how it is perceived. Carmola addresses this theme by identifying the young people to whom Socrates addresses himself directly. (Carmola p.43) This argument is strengthened by the fact that the Athenian democratic structure of the 4th century BC was heavily centered on an age class system. (Constitution) Further evidence of the necessity of Socrates' noble lie is explained by Carmola's observation of intergenerational conflicts between the Greek gods. This coincides with why Socrates felt the need to censor some fables as mentioned in Section 1. The Greek gods were engaged in abusive family relationships and consequently transmitted intergenerational tensions. Carmola reminds the reader of the well-known myth in which Cronus eats his children for fear that they might kill him. More realistically applicable, there are stories of Hephaestus being abused by his parents. (Carmola p.44) Ancient Greek societies were strongly influenced by mythology, and by this, mythology was equally influenced by society. The two have a symbiotic relationship. As a political theorist, Carmola explains why it is actually necessary for the city imagined by Socrates to be built on a lie. Carmola believes that Plato's Republic revolves around this central intergenerational conflict. Justice requires politics and government. Socrates is attempting to lay the foundation for implementing a political ideology, for governing a society without unfair intergenerational dilemmas. Thrasymachus and Glaucon must be convinced that a just city is far superior to one that contains even the slightest act of injustice. (Carmola p.57) The noble lie is more thanrelevant in the city-soul analogy, since it is “a device used by Socrates throughout the Republic”. (Carmola p.58) It is a rhetorical tool that shapes a solid argument. Section 3 In my studies, I find it very enlightening to ask not what a particular historical figure says, but rather why it is said and in what context. To deepen my understanding I learned that the best way to understand the topic presented is to analyze the author from a sociological and scientific perspective. The key to understanding reason with a time, place, and cultural difference from your own is to look from a top-down perspective. First, the sense of scientific knowledge of societies will allow us to understand how their reality is perceived and what causal effect it has on their logic. No matter the intelligence of an individual, one will always be bound by the collective knowledge of the species. In the case of Socrates, his logic was flawed by the aggregate conceptions of his times. As a philosopher, one would think that Socrates would be ranked among the most enlightened men of his time. Because he had the misfortune of living in a time devoid of pure science, mythology and divine beings were used to explain natural events. The presence of these false beliefs allowed Socrates to postulate a pure and higher meaning of right. Justice is nothing more than a social construct. The values ​​attributed to this way of acting are absolutely relative and can vary infinitely. Therefore there can never be an exact definition, but it is only possible to obtain a consensus. When agreed upon by a significant number, this shared perception gives rise to all of society's constructs. This being the case in Socrates' time, and with several thousand years of scientific progress, I can now observe his actions with the utmost adherence to empirically based explanation and rationality. While Carmola's literature focused on the practicality of Socrates' allegory, and classroom discussions about the soul of the city focused on identifying the mechanisms that promote justice, I focus on the cognitive journey that Socrates and his conversation partners undertake in the allegory of the soul of the city. In the Soul of the City allegory, Socrates was unconsciously playing the role of God. Socrates is creating a theoretical reality in which he is the ultimate decider over the lives of everyone in the city. He chooses how the guardians should be educated and which stories of the mythological gods need censoring. (Plato p.162) Today it is well known that the Greek gods are a form of animism. This theme of assigning spiritual qualities to natural events is found throughout the ancient world. Knowledge of why natural events occur is now considered elementary. With advanced scientific understanding, the natural world becomes less mysterious and therefore the primitive method of placing responsibility on the gods is no longer necessary. Fundamental principles are established and triumph over animism. Why would Socrates feel the need to censor these divine fables? The simple answer is always the best, and in this case it is that these gods have flaws typically associated with humans. Only by deductive reasoning could one assume the obvious notion that the creators of the Creator are man himself. As Ludwig Feuerbach concludes in The Essence of Christianity: «God is the manifest interiority, the expressed ego of man, religion the solemn unveiling of man's hidden treasures, the revelation of his intimate thoughts, the open confession of his love. secrets." (Feuerbach p.34) In the allegory, Socrates, who is indeed very enlightened for a being of his time, is actually projecting his inner nature outward. Readers of The)