This idea is from The Republic, by Plato, written in about 360 BC. The Republic is probably the most famous book in all of philosophy. Read my mini-review and overall impressions of Plato's The Republic.
And therefore when any of these pantomimic gentlemen, who are so clever that the can imitate anything, comes to us, and makes a proposal to exhibit himself and his poetry, we will fall down and worship him as a sweet and holy and wonderful being; but we must also inform him that in our State such as he are not permitted to exist; the law will not allow them.
~Plato, The Republic (Book III)
I guess Jim Carrey and Robin Williams wouldn't be allowed to exist in Plato's State! They would be worshiped (for their talents are to be commended), but then quickly sent on their way to corrupt another city. Plato's reasoning is that when these men so perfectly imitate a sad or angry or unvirtuous man, they communicate some of that imitated nature to the audience, who are then more likely to act that way themselves.
Even if Plato's reasoning is correct, I think we need a better solution than this. If we are to build a state or society, we are going to need to figure out a place for all natures. Plato is constructing an ideal city in his mind, so he just assumes that he will ship theses “pantomimic gentlemen” to the next city. In the near future, it will be necessary to build a Global State, and there won't be another Globe to send undesirable natures to.
However, there is another way to interpret this idea. If (like me), you regard Plato's Ideal State as an allegory of how we ought to order our own personal lives, then his ideas regarding censorship may make more sense (and be less controversial). Throughout The Republic Plato is a big proponent of censorship. In addition to the above censorship (talented mimics), he wants to censor melancholic music, any mention of Hell, and any fictional stories that involve characters acting unvirtuously. He even specifically mentions the works of Homer.
I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that we should self-censor ourselves from a great many things, if it is to our advantage to do so. Most people never try drugs like crack-cocaine or heroin. They are afraid that the drugs will corrupt them. They are afraid that it will lead to addiction and corruption of their bodies. Why do we not similarly fear certain forms of information which might corrupt our brains and souls?
I can see you there. Of course you don't want to give up your favorite kind of music or your favorite violent TV show. I know you can come up with a hundred justifications. It is so good to you; makes you feel good. I'm right there with you. Interesting, though, that the heroin addict would say the exact same about his favorite drug: feels so good. And he could come up with a bunch of justifications as well. That doesn't mean that it's good for his life as a whole. If we can self-censor ourselves from melancholic music, violence on TV or in the news (as good as it feels in the moment), it's possible that it may lead to a happier and more peaceful life in the long run.
What Next?
See more ideas from The Republic
See more ideas from Plato
Read The Republic for free Online
Learn more, read reviews at Amazon
And therefore when any of these pantomimic gentlemen, who are so clever that the can imitate anything, comes to us, and makes a proposal to exhibit himself and his poetry, we will fall down and worship him as a sweet and holy and wonderful being; but we must also inform him that in our State such as he are not permitted to exist; the law will not allow them.
~Plato, The Republic (Book III)
I guess Jim Carrey and Robin Williams wouldn't be allowed to exist in Plato's State! They would be worshiped (for their talents are to be commended), but then quickly sent on their way to corrupt another city. Plato's reasoning is that when these men so perfectly imitate a sad or angry or unvirtuous man, they communicate some of that imitated nature to the audience, who are then more likely to act that way themselves.
Even if Plato's reasoning is correct, I think we need a better solution than this. If we are to build a state or society, we are going to need to figure out a place for all natures. Plato is constructing an ideal city in his mind, so he just assumes that he will ship theses “pantomimic gentlemen” to the next city. In the near future, it will be necessary to build a Global State, and there won't be another Globe to send undesirable natures to.
However, there is another way to interpret this idea. If (like me), you regard Plato's Ideal State as an allegory of how we ought to order our own personal lives, then his ideas regarding censorship may make more sense (and be less controversial). Throughout The Republic Plato is a big proponent of censorship. In addition to the above censorship (talented mimics), he wants to censor melancholic music, any mention of Hell, and any fictional stories that involve characters acting unvirtuously. He even specifically mentions the works of Homer.
I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that we should self-censor ourselves from a great many things, if it is to our advantage to do so. Most people never try drugs like crack-cocaine or heroin. They are afraid that the drugs will corrupt them. They are afraid that it will lead to addiction and corruption of their bodies. Why do we not similarly fear certain forms of information which might corrupt our brains and souls?
I can see you there. Of course you don't want to give up your favorite kind of music or your favorite violent TV show. I know you can come up with a hundred justifications. It is so good to you; makes you feel good. I'm right there with you. Interesting, though, that the heroin addict would say the exact same about his favorite drug: feels so good. And he could come up with a bunch of justifications as well. That doesn't mean that it's good for his life as a whole. If we can self-censor ourselves from melancholic music, violence on TV or in the news (as good as it feels in the moment), it's possible that it may lead to a happier and more peaceful life in the long run.
What Next?
See more ideas from The Republic
See more ideas from Plato
Read The Republic for free Online
Learn more, read reviews at Amazon
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Do you agree with this idea? Perhaps you like the idea but you disagree with my interpretation? Let your voice be heard.