Government Imitates Citizens (Book 8) - AnnaKate Burleson
Full disclosure: I am having a really hard time reading this for some reason. I have the attention span of a four year old with a sugar rush, and the less-than-ideal formatting of this book (read: lack of quotation marks) is really messing with my brain. Apologies in advance if nothing I say in this blog post is accurate.
I would first like to note that Socrates really knows what he's doing. The way he sets up his arguments is so brilliant. He's constantly finding points of agreement with those he's in conversation with to solidify his own arguments. It makes it difficult for the reader to disagree with him, even if we know deep down that he isn't correct. How can you possibly debate the ideas of someone that makes everyone agree with him in one way or another?
Something I found really interesting about this particular book was the way he went about describing the different forms of government. From what I understood, he was describing them in order of "goodness." First he describes the governments of places like Crete and Sparta. He calls this type of government timarchy, which pretty much just means "government of honor." He then describes oligarchies, democracies, and tyrannies in that order. It was surprising to me that he put democracy that low on the list, and I was also a little surprised by how bitter the language he used was. But then I remembered the time period. Athens had just gotten beaten by Sparta in the Peloponnesian War. Democracy had just taken a major loss at the hands of Sparta, whose government was still dominated by the honor system. It's interesting to me how quickly Socrates was willing to abandon Athens' democratic ideals after this war instead of furiously trying to defend their honor.
Early on in this book, Glaucon says, "The States are as the men are; they grow out of human characters." I find this observation to be incredibly profound. It recognizes that no matter how effective your government is, if the people aren't good, the State can never be good. This also, in my opinion, solidifies the fact that this perfect republic Socrates is describing could never be a reality. The people will never be good.
What do you all think? Did you find Socrates' analysis of government to be pretty spot-on, or were there parts that you found yourself disagreeing with? Hopefully I'm not the only one having a hard time with this, and hopefully my observations weren't totally off the wall.
P.S. I commented on Will's and Moriah's
I would first like to note that Socrates really knows what he's doing. The way he sets up his arguments is so brilliant. He's constantly finding points of agreement with those he's in conversation with to solidify his own arguments. It makes it difficult for the reader to disagree with him, even if we know deep down that he isn't correct. How can you possibly debate the ideas of someone that makes everyone agree with him in one way or another?
Something I found really interesting about this particular book was the way he went about describing the different forms of government. From what I understood, he was describing them in order of "goodness." First he describes the governments of places like Crete and Sparta. He calls this type of government timarchy, which pretty much just means "government of honor." He then describes oligarchies, democracies, and tyrannies in that order. It was surprising to me that he put democracy that low on the list, and I was also a little surprised by how bitter the language he used was. But then I remembered the time period. Athens had just gotten beaten by Sparta in the Peloponnesian War. Democracy had just taken a major loss at the hands of Sparta, whose government was still dominated by the honor system. It's interesting to me how quickly Socrates was willing to abandon Athens' democratic ideals after this war instead of furiously trying to defend their honor.
Early on in this book, Glaucon says, "The States are as the men are; they grow out of human characters." I find this observation to be incredibly profound. It recognizes that no matter how effective your government is, if the people aren't good, the State can never be good. This also, in my opinion, solidifies the fact that this perfect republic Socrates is describing could never be a reality. The people will never be good.
What do you all think? Did you find Socrates' analysis of government to be pretty spot-on, or were there parts that you found yourself disagreeing with? Hopefully I'm not the only one having a hard time with this, and hopefully my observations weren't totally off the wall.
P.S. I commented on Will's and Moriah's
I completely understand with not knowing what is going on most of the time. I have had to read the same pages over again because it is so boring, I zone out. I agree that Socrates is an amazing debater. He is somehow able to argue every one the opposing side's points, and he answers any questions they ask. I am honestly trying to understand where one keeps all that information in their head.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Socrates point of view with this society. Because of the fall of men ( which I know they don't believe), there is no way for man to be perfect. Therefore this idea of a perfectly just society is never going to happen. There will always be cases that can't go exactly by the book.Even if you raise a child perfectly in the way you want it to go, there is still a chance they will turn away from their teachings. I think early on, Socrates realizes this and tries to make it known to the other philosphers.
I agree with your assessment of Socrates. As a conversationalist, he is brilliant. Socrates comes prepared and knows what he's saying -- even if most of his points are incorrect, he comes with such strong evidence that you're almost inclined to agree with him even if you know it's wrong. Maybe that's why he's remained so popular through the years, he's a very charismatic man and gets people swept up in his argument before they realize it.
ReplyDeleteNo, you're not the only one, I am having a hard time too. This book is just hard to follow with so many rabbit trails to chase. I agree that Socrates's views on democracy were weird but then again his views on everything are weird. I don't think he quite wanted to abandon it though, more so change it to fit the standards of his new society.
ReplyDeleteI had a hard time reading this as well. Socrates has a pretty accurate views of the different governments. But living in the democracy that we like in, we are probably bias. But i agree with a lot of what he says.
ReplyDelete