The fifth book is concerned about the matrimony aspects of human beings focusing on women; talking about war ethics and at last, philosophical importance.
Socrates talks about the nature of men and women and the pursuits accordingly. Same education is supported for both genders which I totally agree with. There are many women who won't be able to wear the heavy armor and ride the horse for long but we cannot deny their right to opportunity just based on their gender. There are lots of men who won't be able to carry the same armor but that doesn't make them eunuch. Its true that the biological natures of women and men are different comparatively strength and character but making women a laughing stock is totally ridiculous which Socrates terms as 'plucking a fruit of unripe wisdom'.
The second portion of matrimony talks about the rearing of child by parents from the point of view of state where all strong children, be it male or female, are kept together in a state operated community center and all other children are kept in other center. This concept sounds totally absurd to me as taking a child away from parents to make them property of state is totally a selfish move to save the king(dom) (the same concept is discussed in Shiva Trilogy by Amish Tripathi). I am not so impressed by this concept. Also, the weaker one are kept aloof and considered inferior; that may be the case for selecting the best soldier but considering them inferior is what I oppose because, for example, a physician may not be the best one to become a soldier but he certainly is not of low status. Socrates was very much into the Guardian thing. Same disintegration is done from the point of view of intercourse. The inferiors are allowed less sexual activity than the so-called superior one as, according to Socrates, it preserves the first rated flock. Another major point is that the ruler has to sanction the marriage and all other marriages are illegal. Well, who decides who the ruler has sex with?
When Socrates talks about administration, as discussed in previous book, guardians are given highest importance in the state and individualism is discouraged at every cost. Well, its true that governments need people who put government above their own needs and expenses, so I will take this argument partially as I believe that individualism is an important aspect of society that keeps the growth on track and that we will discuss in detail when I post about Ayn Rand's objectivism. Also, a just code of conduct by the government is elaborated during the war that includes no spoiling of corpses and proper burial of enemy soldiers along-with no burning of the houses of acquired state as revenge and only taking a part of annual produce. I think this is very important for future perspectives so that people remain loyal to the new king.
Socrates also throws broad light on the inclusion of philosophy with power and political correctness by taking a firm stand that only philosophers should lead and others remain followers. I don't get it. Philosophy means the study of human existence and cosmos relating each other with realities. Well, this is something that needs total attention 24 hours a day and a guardian cannot do it at that level which, in turn, means that philosophers are higher in rank than guardians? Does Socrates means that guardians should not lead? I am unable to get it right now but I might get some guidance from some philosopher one day.
The ending of this book gets interesting when Socrates explains the difference between knowledge, opinion and ignorance in terms of absolute beauty and different views of beauty; the idea of which shan't be replaced with the object and vice versa. Beauty of idea is greater than the beauty of the object. For example, the idea of 4 is representing 4, but I can call it half of 8 or double of 2, but 4 is 4. The idea of travelling is moving from one place to another, but I can move in a camel cart or in a BMW, but travelling is travelling. The idea of marriage is to get a partner for mating and procreation in a social way, he/she may look beautiful/ugly, but the idea of marriage is greater than the objects involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment