Feed the Machine -Will Brady
There's too much I could be saying about The Republic right now, but somehow I have been relegated to focusing on Book V... And somehow it was I who wound up blogging on the feminist chapter and not our president. (If SOMEBODY hadn't thrown me out of her chair at the beginning of class, this wouldn't have happened.) This is entirely fine, however, as I can simply emulate her writing style and pretend to be her. Let us begin, under the guise of Zelda.
"Big oof. Bad pun. I commented on Will's post because he's super smart. The end."
With that settled, now I begin in earnest.
Socrates, what is wrong with you? In your attempts to play god, you fail so spectacularly. Your vision involves dominating every aspect of your citizens' lives and thoughts, disintegrating the family unit, and murdering all babies born outside of specified periods of time, and you claim to be establishing perfect justice. In all the previous books, your plans to control your citizens' occupations, take their property rights, and censor their very thoughts left me unsettled. But in Book V you end marriage, straight-out selectively breed human beings, take their children, and attempt to create the master race to rule your society. We Honors students have discussed a lot of things in class that seem strange to us but were completely normal and indisputable in your time, but the reactions of your peers prove that your propositions are societally repugnant throughout history. This isn't justice. This is you being a dictator and deciding that your methods are the absolute good because none of your friends will put up much of an argument with you. And of course you try to get us on board by saying, "All the philosophers (read: smart people) would support me on this, no doubt!" Your Orwellian fantasies are intriguing to read, but overreaching nonetheless, Big Brother Socrates.
If men were to implement this society regardless of all these concerns, at what cost would it come? They would be asking themselves to surrender their thoughts, their freedoms, their wants, even their emotions. This Republic, if successful, would turn people into non-sentient cogs in a giant machine. It would be a "just" society that lacks one thing: society. Instead of a civilized group of people living harmoniously together, this is nothing more than a massive engine fueled by the soulless repetitions of its robotic inhabitants.
But hey, at least then we could define the word "justice," right?
P.S. I commented on Breanna’s post and Zelda’s because she’s super smart and I value her despite my mockery.
"Big oof. Bad pun. I commented on Will's post because he's super smart. The end."
With that settled, now I begin in earnest.
Socrates, what is wrong with you? In your attempts to play god, you fail so spectacularly. Your vision involves dominating every aspect of your citizens' lives and thoughts, disintegrating the family unit, and murdering all babies born outside of specified periods of time, and you claim to be establishing perfect justice. In all the previous books, your plans to control your citizens' occupations, take their property rights, and censor their very thoughts left me unsettled. But in Book V you end marriage, straight-out selectively breed human beings, take their children, and attempt to create the master race to rule your society. We Honors students have discussed a lot of things in class that seem strange to us but were completely normal and indisputable in your time, but the reactions of your peers prove that your propositions are societally repugnant throughout history. This isn't justice. This is you being a dictator and deciding that your methods are the absolute good because none of your friends will put up much of an argument with you. And of course you try to get us on board by saying, "All the philosophers (read: smart people) would support me on this, no doubt!" Your Orwellian fantasies are intriguing to read, but overreaching nonetheless, Big Brother Socrates.
If men were to implement this society regardless of all these concerns, at what cost would it come? They would be asking themselves to surrender their thoughts, their freedoms, their wants, even their emotions. This Republic, if successful, would turn people into non-sentient cogs in a giant machine. It would be a "just" society that lacks one thing: society. Instead of a civilized group of people living harmoniously together, this is nothing more than a massive engine fueled by the soulless repetitions of its robotic inhabitants.
But hey, at least then we could define the word "justice," right?
P.S. I commented on Breanna’s post and Zelda’s because she’s super smart and I value her despite my mockery.
But would a robotic society even be "just"? Because justice is supposed to have a purpose, be right, and provide some sort of service for the greater good of the world. What would even be the point of this robotic society if it provides nothing other than existing? Maybe I am taking it out of context, but do you see what I mean?
ReplyDeleteYour comments on the emotionlessness of this book is something I immedailty recognized and identified with. The lack of emotion in this Republic and this book reminds me in spades of 'The Giver' by Lois Lowry and even the dystopian novel 'Matched' by Ally Condie -- which features a society that banished all feeling and emotion from the world in the former and fixation on better 'breeding' in the latter The city they describe in Book Five and the words they use to describe sounds almost hauntingly like the worlds of these novels -- this utopian and perfect society sounds very much like a dystopia to me.
ReplyDeleteLet me play devil's advocate here. In book III, one of the fruits of justice is harmony. Everyone gets along because it's what just people ought to do. No one is soulless. In fact, one of the main themes in book III is how people should use their souls to benefit themselves and society. Also, this isn't a dictatorship because there isn't a dictator. It is the job of multiple people to protect the city and make the laws. The guardians and the workers have to work together or else the city can't exist. Don't mind me, I'm only poking holes in your argument.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies, I was actually referring to book IV. My bad.
Delete