The Lying Truth--Kayla Gill-- 09/29/2018

So I wanted to start this blog off by saying that it is quite sad that I am writing this so early. I really need to find some friends to distract me so I am not always doing homework. With that being said...
So I was assigned Chapter 3 to become an expert on. Which was quite nice considering it was the first one and I could go ahead and view it with a fresh mind. In this book, Socrates and Glaucon (I think... it is really hard without any quotations or roles) are discussing the guidelines for this society they have set in their mind. I can see where some of their rules make sense, all in all, I think this is a recipe for disaster. They are seriously trying to control every aspect of the people's lives. They even describe controlling what the athletes are allowed to eat. They talk about the types of stories that are allowed to be told and even what lies are acceptable.  I feel as if this community would fall quite easily. There are too many rules. I know personally, I would be executed by the end of the week because I would constantly break them. This community, however, does seem like a peaceful community; but, it seems stressful
One rule that really struck my attention was their rule about lying. On page 85, the text says, "Further: We must prize truth...and if it is also right that lies are useful to men only as a kind of medicine or remedy, then only the doctors should be permitted to use them...Only the rulers of the city--and no others--may tell lies. And their lies whether directed to enemies or citizens will be legitimate only if their purpose is to serve the public interest."
So basically this is saying that you are only allowed to lie if it is protecting the greater good of someone else. Ehh I understand where they are coming from, but they are way off. Lying to someone is never benefiting them. Maybe this is why as Christians we struggle with lying so much. We would rather lie to someone than hurt their feelings. We make that judgment on our own even when the great judge is telling us it is better to be honest. I think Socrates is trying to block out deceit while also taking out hurtful actions towards someone. Which again, is not their judgment to call, but of course, they do not know any better because they do not believe in the same just God we believe in.


For a funnier note about this rule of lying. On page 111, a seriously salty comment took place that made me laugh. So Socrates (again I think) is talking about this plan he has for the soldiers that is a lie but it will benefit them for the greater good, but he was very hesitant about telling this plan. So he is telling this story of how he is going to tell the soldiers that all of their training was a dream and that they were born with this particular power to do all of this stuff (Sounds a lot like the book Red Queen by Victoria Aveyard if you have ever read that). Anyways after Socrates finishes, Glaucon looks at him and say, "No wonder you hesitated so long before telling your lie."
It made me laugh a lot because it came off so sarcastic. I don't know maybe I am just sleep deprived



PS: I commented on Zelda and Breanna's posts

Comments

  1. I thought for a long time about the lying thing too! Personally, it made me wonder whether or they would allow things like believing in Santa Claus. It is a lie, but it is benefiting the children and providing entertainment and luxury which they want. I honestly sometimes just laugh at this book, some of the things they want to put in place are so ridiculous, I don't think they could actually ever work. People can't be completely controlled, we aren't animals.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It would be interesting to see this little thought experiment played out in the real world. It all hinges on education and so, theoretically, nobody would want to break the rules. Everyone will have been brought up to love the way things are done and be happy "minding their own business" (I loved that they used this phrase for the translation). However, how would this work in reality? As Christians, we know that everyone has an inherent sin nature. People naturally want to break the rules. So, if this city of words was ever put into practice, would people want to break the rules? Honestly, I tend to think that it would play out similarly to the communist countries. While these two forms of government are quite different in origin and ideals, they do both seek to build a utopian society via education and censorship. And we know how that worked out for the communists. (Spoiler alert: it didn't work out very well at all). Would it be similar for Plato's republic?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have heard of a society that tried to live by similar rules but can't remember the name...regardless, it crumbled. I definitely wasn't surprised to see the over-lording nature of the rules because honestly, as impossible as a "perfect" society is to create, the rules would have to control every single aspect of life to maintain the status of perfection. I know I would've suffocated if I wasn't raised with these rules and they were suddenly implemented, but if we didn't know otherwise, how unnatural would it be for us to abide by these rules? How deeply does this go against human nature? I love the thoughts you shared and the questions you've made me think over!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts