Resiliency Rounds
Episode 47: Plato’s Republic Book IX-3: Three to the sixth power
We analyze the potential influence music on the guardians of Plato's Republic, and how it serves as a reminder of their responsibilities and the perils of governance. The episode examines Phrygian music and its philosophical implications, symbolizing the cyclical nature of societies. We contrast the chaotic life of a tyrant, draped in the illusion of power, with the serene existence of the philosopher king, who finds true harmony within. This discussion challenges us to reassess the pursuit of power and the intrinsic value of justice.
Wrapping up the symphony, we delve into Plato's philosophy of forms and its crucial role in achieving the ideal republic. As we set the stage for Book 10's further contemplation on the place of artists, we're left to ponder the true meaning of justice and the role of art and poetry in crafting the perfect city-state. This episode is not just a reflection on ancient philosophy but a profound meditation on the essence of wisdom and virtue that continues to resonate through the ages. Tune in for a rich exploration of these timeless ideas that still capture our collective imagination.
We analyze the potential influence music on the guardians of Plato's Republic, and how it serves as a reminder of their responsibilities and the perils of governance. The episode examines Phrygian music and its philosophical implications, symbolizing the cyclical nature of societies. We contrast the chaotic life of a tyrant, draped in the illusion of power, with the serene existence of the philosopher king, who finds true harmony within. This discussion challenges us to reassess the pursuit of power and the intrinsic value of justice.
Wrapping up the symphony, we delve into Plato's philosophy of forms and its crucial role in achieving the ideal republic. As we set the stage for Book 10's further contemplation on the place of artists, we're left to ponder the true meaning of justice and the role of art and poetry in crafting the perfect city-state. This episode is not just a reflection on ancient philosophy but a profound meditation on the essence of wisdom and virtue that continues to resonate through the ages. Tune in for a rich exploration of these timeless ideas that still capture our collective imagination.
All right, man, we're back and we are going to be looks like, wrapping up book nine and then actually delving into a little bit of book 10. And so do you want to kind of give us the lead in? You gave a great treatise at the end of the last episode, talking about essentially the verdict, right what Socrates says about the challenge that Thrasymachus put before him as far as whether it's better to be unjust or just. And in order to answer that question, we not only have to go through this entire exercise of building a virtual republic, but to also deconstruct the soul at the three levels and understand that these soul, the elements of the soul, have specific purposes aligned to them when they are embedded within the aim of a good life. But there's actually pleasures, specific pleasures that can be appreciated at the three different levels, and it's through that framework that you understand why being just is actually truly profitable and why being unjust even if you're appearing to be just but actually being unjust is not profitable.
Speaker 2:Right.
Speaker 2:So the three parts of the mind would be the philosopher king would be the philosopher king, the guardians and the auxiliary, the representatives of the ideal republic inside the mind. For the philosopher king, the representative inside the mind is the rational element. That means a part of the mind that is seeking wisdom. And if you seek something, that means it is something that one believes is going to be a positive attribute Because you seek it, that means it's a pleasure. You're trying to get it so that it makes you feel better. So the highest level, the highest element in the mind, that is, the rational element, is seeking wisdom, seeking knowledge, I would say, actually how to know the difference between good and evil and all the whys that can be answered as to why something is good and all the whys that can be answered as to why something is bad. That is what it is seeking. Now you could. The next step, the next step below, that is the guardians. The guardians is represented by the honor-seeking element inside of our minds, that is, there's an ego attached to it. You want to be perceived as something, as someone. Your actions is not only important for the honors-seeking part to perform the action. It'll only perform those actions for which it is lauded, as opposed to the rational principle that will perform an action for its action's sake, for the sake that it's a good action, not whether it is noticed or lauded. So there's a difference there that you can perceive.
Speaker 2:And the third element inside the mind, which is the correlate, is the auxiliary in the republic, is the appetitive or the profit-seeking. When you say profit, it could be, you know it's called profit-seeking here. But what they're looking for is the pleasures that you and me identify as pleasures. You know, we don't think of honor and wisdom as pleasures, necessarily. We think of pleasures as good food, you know, good house, good car comforts, sex, things like that. Those are the pleasures and the part that is seeking that is the appetitive element or the profit-seeking element, which is almost akin to the kind of the lizard brain you really don't get to. Yes, you can have some twisted pleasures in life, but for the most part most human beings and most organisms have the same pleasure seeking, like you know, especially when it comes to good nutrition, nutrition, sex, these all drives that really. That's right. So if you look at those three now, there is a difference in the level of these pleasures.
Speaker 2:I mean to say by that essentially, is that if there is the rational element, if there truly is built inside of you, a rational element that is seeking wisdom, that pleasure is knowledge. It has the knowledge of the appetites, it has the knowledge of honor and now it is now seeking the knowledge of knowledge, which is the highest level probably unachievable by a rational temporary being. But if you look at honor-seeking element, the honor-seeking element understands pleasure and is willing to forego pleasure for the sake of honor if it believes that's the honorable thing to do. For that it has to understand the pleasures, but it doesn't understand. For that it has to understand the pleasures but it doesn't understand because it's not seeking wisdom, knowledge, it doesn't understand the nature of honor in and of itself. It's not that you're getting honor from everybody. It is honor from within or honor from the honorable. There's a difference between honor from the honorable and honor from everybody else. It just doesn't understand that and that differentiation between good honor and bad honor there is. In fact, bad honor is it would be understood better by the rational principle and, if you so, but it still ranks better than the appetitive side because it understands the appetites. A lot of folks will forego simple pleasures for the sake of honor.
Speaker 2:And uh, the third element, or the operative element, believes that the good and bad are the presence of pleasures or the absence of pleasures, but it has no understanding of honor because it doesn't seek honor. It doesn't understand that if you forgo pleasures you would actually be appreciated for it, and it has no understanding of good and evil, that in fact there are certain that even forgoing not just pleasures but even honor, for the sake of doing what the right thing is or what the good is, is in fact the best form that a human can achieve. And so now you have these three levels Now people operate at. We have these three levels inside of us. Every human being does. It's just that it's lopsided In most of us. The appetitive element, which is the largest part of our mind and is part of the sub mind, the lizard mind, which is from a very early age. We have access to that part that rules inside of most of our minds. The honor-loving part gets developed later and very few of us actually go on to develop the philosophical bent, the rational principle, but all of us have a little bit of that. The rational element is the smallest part and because it's the smallest, it can be overcrowded by all these other thoughts.
Speaker 2:You will easily find aperitif, even in your own life, most of the times that you are aperitif, and even in society, you would find aperitif people. You'll also find times in your life when you are honor-seeking and you'll also find honorable people, but they'll be far fewer in number than aperitif. You seldom find times when you're philosophical. The more times you as a matter of fact, the pursuit of wisdom.
Speaker 2:One of the things that one can do is spend more of their time pursuing wisdom and foregoing appetites and foregoing honor. And that is what Socrates is trying to get his interlocutors to understand that somebody would forego appetites, would forego honor, for the sake of justice. Even he'll be just, even if the world believes he's unjust, he would still be happier for it, which is a very difficult thing for someone to perceive, especially if someone is appetitive, because they just don't even, they've never thought, they have never gone to even the honor stage and forget the wisdom stage. And even for someone who's honorable, for the person who's honorable to say, would you continue to do this if this was not honorable? They would say absolutely not, makes no sense. Why would I do it? Because they don't get to see the next stage. So, um, but only somebody who's been through these other stages understands what the philosophical mind, the rational principle and the happiness one that it can bring, despite you not getting the simple pleasures, despite you not getting the honor for it. So that is where we are right now.
Speaker 2:In this uh stage, it comes to a point where he says he explains these pleasures to his interlocutors and says, okay, now tell me, guys, what do you believe is the right thing to do? To be an operative individual? To be an honor-seeking individual? Or the philosophical king? Who do you think is the happiest? They're like, yeah, based on what you just described, is the happiest. They're like, yeah, based on what you just described. You know it's. The verdict here is that it is the philosopher king who would be the happiest, but in perfect, platonic form. It is not enough just to say that he's going to be happy. There is a calculation which, eddie, you'll have to kind to walk us through. The calculation.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and so this part I mean amongst the many intrigues that I've encountered in this reading every time Plato pulls out a calculator, my brain starts to ruminate. But we arrive at 587C where Socrates says and just as you summar, summarize there are three pleasures, one genuine and two illegitimate. And the tyrant is at the extreme end of the illegitimate ones, since he flees both law and reason and lives with the bodyguard of slavish pleasure. Right. And so then Socrates now observes and I think this is Plato speaking vis-a-vis Socrates, because Plato, famously, was very much into math and admire of Pythagoras and so he says, he points out that the tyrant is at three places removed from the oligarch, and the oligarch is in turn, three places removed from the king. And so then there's a I won't read it, but there's a pretty convoluted calculation- Before you go there, can you explain?
Speaker 1:that.
Speaker 2:Can you explain that?
Speaker 1:Because the five constitutions Right, so it's not three slots. It's three places removed. So that's the other confusing part too. So he's simply saying that the tyrant is thrice removed from the oligarch because there's one spot in between them, which is the democratic constitution. So the tyrant has a third position and the oligarch has the third position from the philosopher king because there's the timocrat in between them.
Speaker 2:That's correct.
Speaker 1:So that's how he arrives at six.
Speaker 2:So the philosopher king, the, philosophic constitution, the democratic constitution, the oligarchic constitution, the democratic constitution, the oligarchic constitution, the democratic constitution, the tyrannical constitution. There's five right, and so the individuals are the same Philosopher, king, the democrat, the oligarch, the democrat and the tyrant Right. So the tyrant is third, removed from the oligarch.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:The oligarch is third removed from the philosophy. So even though there's five slots, if you actually count.
Speaker 1:If you look at the frequency data, it's, you know, six, so that in and of itself was confusing right already. It was confusing and you also have to remember that that did it.
Speaker 2:These guys didn't use zero this is like pre-zero right so so don't forget that this is not a zero, but all that said, you know they, they achieved great things in mathematics obviously with the pythagorean theorem and whatnot I see that you you've whipped out this, yeah, so.
Speaker 1:I had this right up because this it was funny. So Plato essentially talks about well vis-a-vis Socrates, this calculation, and he ends it by saying that, according to this calculation, the philosopher king lives 729 times more pleasantly than the tyrant. And then the conversation actually quickly moves on. But it, you know, kept bothering me. I was like, why 729?, why 729? So I went on a an investigation and I'm not the only person who wondered about this where the 729 came, comes from. But on my research I found that there were a lot of people who said that the 729, you know what does it mean? And a lot of people claim that the number is not important, that Plato was just emphasizing the magnitude of the difference between the philosopher king and the tyrant, and most interpreters don't believe that this number is essential to understanding what his point is. And that struck me as completely not consistent with what little I know about Plato. He doesn't strike me as somebody who would throw random numbers. Out Of all the numbers, 729 is very specific.
Speaker 1:So I found a clue.
Speaker 1:Now, in order to explain the clue, we have to kind of jump ahead, because the clue is in 591D Now we're jumping ahead of where we are in the dialogue, but I'm going to jump you forward so that I can bring you back. And in 501D, socrates just finished talking about one of the qualities of the just individual and he ends the statement by saying it is clear he will always be tuning the harmony of his body for the sake of the concord of his soul. And Glaucon says he certainly will, if indeed he is going to be truly musical man.
Speaker 2:That's beautiful and I was like, okay, musical.
Speaker 1:So I go back and, as it turns out, one of the few things that in this era, mathematically, was routinely measured in exponential steps, exponential intervals, was Pythagorean music scales, okay, and so notice that 729 is three to the sixth power. So notice that 729 is three to the sixth power. So if you've got the philosopher, king, the guardians and the auxiliary, you got three. If you go three removed from there to the power of six, it's 729. Now I sound like a conspiracy theorist, but anyway, that's the point.
Speaker 2:So 729 is three to the sixth power, the only place mathematically where this was happening routinely was in Pythagorean music scales hold on before you go there.
Speaker 1:So the tyrant is six places removed from the philosopher king right, and so that's three raised to six, which is 729 right and that correlates exactly with the musical intervals that were common in the time with the Pythagorean music scales, so three to the sixth. So when you look at that, you quickly arrive at this realization that the powers of three describe the musical scales and the constitutions and that the smaller of the power the more pleasant the interval and the more pleasant the constitution. These things actually correlate with one another.
Speaker 2:That's beautiful.
Speaker 1:And so actually, if you start and I'm going to get into a little bit of a, I'm not a musical theorist, but I know some about music but if you start with the C major chord, you can actually build from there and incrementally move up the Pythagorean music scale. And it sounds crazy, but you could actually play the chords that correlate to these constitutions if you follow the mathematics wherein you have the philosopher king as one, the guardians is three and the Auxiliary is nine, the Timocrat is 27. The Oligarch is 81. The Democrat at 243, and the Tyrant at 729. These are actual musical scales, wow. And so the scales, when you play them, actually not to use a pun actually resonate with the class of constitution that they describe. So when you play the root scale, the home scale, the philosopher king, the origin, the unison scale, you get this harmonic and very full sounding chord.
Speaker 2:It sounds good, yeah it sounds pleasing.
Speaker 1:It sounds virtuous, I mean there's really no other way to describe it. It sounds whole, and I like to use the word full because they also talk about the fact that these three levels of appetites the highest level, the medium level and the lowest that there's different degrees of fullness that you can achieve, and the fullest you'll ever achieve is when you are satisfying the highest drives, the rational drives. Um so democracy sounds epic.
Speaker 1:it sounds a little bit more militaristic it has kind of this, um, sort of distant battle kind of vibe to it, and oligarchy has sort of a shimmering rich sound when you play it. Democracy now is when things start to get a little bit, uh, ominous, because democracy has sort of a contentious, unstable energy in the chord, the way it sounds. And then obviously tyranny is the one that stands out the most because it's completely disquieting, it's dissonant when you play it. So what I did was I basically played the chords that correspond to the Pythagorean music scale, using these root three to the appropriate power, and this is essentially what you get, and I'm going to try and play this on my phone, hopefully it picks up on the mic. Aristocracy, democracy, oligarchy, democracy, tyranny, and back to aristocracy.
Speaker 1:So my mind was blown when I read that and what's funny is that in all those chords the root note does not change. So what you're seeing is an audio representation of the dissonance between truth and tyranny when you play that last chord.
Speaker 2:That is the definition of temperance inside of a constitution, when there is perfect harmony of the three elements, that is, the rational principle is ruling, the guardians are enacting and the auxiliary are producing, so that harmony is present inside of a philosopher, king Right, and inside of that constitution.
Speaker 1:Right, and it's literal harmony. And notice that they talk about harmonics as something that they felt was going to be crucial to the training of the philosopher king. But there's one last little level to all this and we got to go back. Do you remember when they were talking about the training of the guardians?
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:And they spoke specifically about. There's two modes of music that the warriors, that the guardians should listen to, and the two modes were Dorian and Phrygian.
Speaker 2:Phrygian.
Speaker 1:Okay, now I'm going to play you a snippet of a song. I'm going to play you a snippet of Radiohead's masterpiece called the Pyramid Song, and in fact this is a song that I should have included back when we were talking about music. This song is an F sharp Phrygian, and I'm just going to play the beginning of it and then I'm going to explain to you why Phrygian mode music would be very important in this kind of Republic. I'm going to fade it down. So what's happening in this chord progression? They're taking you through all the constitutions and cycling back. Phrygian mode does that? Okay, phrygian mode takes that. Phrygian mode takes you to tyranny and back, takes you through oligarchy, democracy and tyranny and back. That's how it gets to Phrygian sound.
Speaker 1:When you listen to Phrygian music, it's a lesson, bro. It's telling you remember who you are, remember what you're guarding against, remember the truth that. Remember what you're guarding against. Remember the truth. Huh, that's how you see it. If all you hear is sugar pop, harmonious chords, that's all you know. But remember the reason that the philosopher can appreciate everything that the tyrant knows and the timocrat knows, and what he himself knows and no one else can, is because he's familiar with their realm. Phrygian mode music is basically the soundtrack of the philosopher king. That's just amazing man. They see it all. And when you listen to Phrygian music, this is what happens. It's mesmerizing. It's hard not to hear this and not get a meditative effect from this. And this music is unforgiving. It doesn't release you, it keeps you cycling through. Remember, remember. Remember. It won't let you forget, because when you forget, you become susceptible to tyranny.
Speaker 2:Yeah, yeah, that's so true. That's beautiful man, it's wild. It's called the Pyramid Song. It's called the Pyramid Song, yeah, I mean so?
Speaker 1:Anyway it's a great song If you haven't listened to it.
Speaker 2:I have not heard the song. Yeah, that's ridiculous.
Speaker 1:I randomly made the connection, because I'm a huge Radiohead fan and that's ridiculous, yeah, I randomly made the connection because I'm a huge Radiohead fan and when I was looking at all of this stuff and Did they talk about the song? I don't think so, but I just happened to know that this song is one of those Phrygian mode songs, along with some of the other ones that we talked about in that music episode. But then it hit me.
Speaker 2:I was like, well, why would you want your Guardians in the you know, Dorian's skill is a lot easier for my dumb mind to kind of perceive.
Speaker 1:So Dorian actually doesn't get as negative.
Speaker 2:Correct, it's like war music.
Speaker 1:So Dorian is going to be like it bounces to democracy and back to the king, and that makes sense. What's the warrior need to know, needs to know how to fight, needs to come back home and be in alignment with the philosopher king and I don't think we explored phrygian back then. We explored dorian no, no, we didn't talk about. I know we did, but we didn't explore it as much as the dorian.
Speaker 2:Well, this speaks to you, right? Don't speak to everybody right?
Speaker 1:well, phrygian does too. But phrygian sort of sets you into this contemplative state unlike any other.
Speaker 2:I'll tell you though that for me, I'm not musically bent that way right, I never. I've never. I'm saying compared to you, so I can see how you would say now, when you tell me that that's what's going on, I would go back and appreciate it. Yeah uh. But if you were to just make me listen to that song, I wouldn't think of it.
Speaker 1:What the hell is this?
Speaker 2:yeah, as a matter of fact, I wouldn't have been, I would, I wouldn't have said that's a great song, even Because, now that you told me this, my goodness, I want to spend more time listening to the song. Have a second listen to it Wow, I should get my musical playlist recommendations from you, man, you should.
Speaker 1:Okay, Well, that explains the 729. So three to the power of six, and it turns out to be a Pythagorean music scale. And so that's the other thing, too, that I think readers should keep in mind is that Plato's thinking on multiple levels, and I think he's weaving in little elements here and there, and I think one of the reasons why he does throw in calculation has to do with something he talks about later on in his dialogue, when he starts talking about why appearances are problematic and why you should be very skeptical of the part of your body that chooses to decide something is big, for example, and ignore the measurement. So it's clear to me that he has drawn an inextricable link between rationality, even to the point of numeric mathematic. Many more, how many more times? How do I say this? How much more pleasurable the philosopher king's life is than the tyrant they start talking about. You know another way to look at the individual right In terms of critiquing justice versus injustice.
Speaker 2:Now you could say because here's the. This is so beautiful, man. Now that you walk me through the auditory version of the argument, there's a visual version of the argument, because prior to this there was a rational version of the argument.
Speaker 1:Yeah, this part, Socrates, the calculation. I think that was Plato.
Speaker 2:But this is Socrates', this is the visual right, such a strong visual, just like the auditory one. This is just beautiful, man. The auditory one is just beautiful. My mind is blown. Give me a minute in order to kind of collect my thoughts. But he's going to underscore the argument by creating a visual argument. Now he's saying okay, these three parts of these three pleasures that we described, the appetitive pleasures, the simple pleasures, the lizard brain pleasures, the that are multifarious, multitudinous, you know, the the largest part of your mind is these pleasures, the seeking of these pleasures, the largest part of your mind, the part of your mind that is seeking these pleasures, the largest part of everybody's mind.
Speaker 1:There are many. There's many, many roads to. It's the multiform beast right.
Speaker 2:Yes, multifarious, multitudinous. You know immeasurable pleasures in life and that's our life, right? There's so many things we cannot. If you were to ask me to count down how many pleasures there are, I mean, you know I would run out of sheets of paper. That is one, one part. The second is the honor seeking part, which is because it's honor in and of itself is not really multifarious, you know it is, it is conventional, it's based on what you or society believes to be the right thing to do. That is the honorly loving part, which is the second pleasure, and the third being wisdom or knowledge, which is actually not conventional. It is the seeking of the truth. There is no, there is no other versions of it. You know, honor can be good and bad, they can be dichotomous. There are many different ways of getting to honor as well. Obviously less multifarious than the multifarious, multitudin beast, but honored in and of itself.
Speaker 2:It is not really a choice. The choice only is should you be honorable or not? And for the honor-seeking person that choice doesn't even exist, right? Just like for the multiferous, multitudinous pleasure, there's no choice of following it or not. Really, when you are inside of it, the tyrant really doesn't have a choice to not be taken in by pleasure. The honor-seeking person has no choice on whether to be honorable or not. They just have to, they only. They don't have that choice, and what is honorable is not decided by them, it is decided by convention at large.
Speaker 2:The only person who has choice really is the philosopher king. Has choice really is the. The philosopher king. Uh to to? Not in the sense that they can choose to to follow the path that leads to wisdom, but to forget to, not to follow the path that leads to pleasure, not to follow the path that leads to to honor if those paths are not in the same trajectory as wisdom. So the only choice I submit so now you have this person. So now, how would that look on? A visual representation is what they're trying to show.
Speaker 2:So he says okay, let's, because the question at hand is still whether the person who is a tyrant but is believed, or looks like someone who's just, would this person be happy or not, compared to somebody who is just but doesn't appear to be so? So he creates the visual. Your beast, right? So he creates the visual. Um, the visual here is, he says take this a, create inside of your mind a beast, a beast that is multifarious. It has many heads, many arms, many claws, many tails, many bodies. It's, it's a chimera, and you, you create this chimeric beast.
Speaker 1:And the multiform, the multi-headed hydrotype. That's part of it. Right, that's just one part of it. That's not the entire beast. No, it's not. That's just one part of it.
Speaker 2:You create, but the chimera is defined as which is a, which is a Piecemeal, which is actually a beast in Greek mythology, a kind of multitudinous, multifarious heads, you know, head of a snake, head of horse, head of all of these, these different. Some of these beasts are tame, some of these beasts are dangerous, some of these beasts are venomous, some of these beasts are how do I say? Anyway, come to me. My point is that they're all these multitudinous beasts, multitudinous, uh, um, looking, and you know, heads, arms, claws and bodies all squeezed into one that represents the appetites, okay, and then you have a lion, which represents the honor-seeking part of the same entity and you have a, a human being who is the rational being.
Speaker 2:The chimera and the lion don't have rational minds. The human does. Okay, now you take all of these three and you, you, you, you coat them on the outside with a, with the skin of a regular human being. So when you look at these three beings, all you're seeing is this, the structure of a regular human being. But inside of this human being, inside this human being that you are seeing, this, this, this facade of human being, just the skin and the structure, are actually three things. There is the, the rational human, the honor-seeking lion and the chimera of the appetites. Now, of the three things, the chimera is the largest, biggest, most hideous, uncontrolled, when each of these heads are kind of eating the other heads. You know there's this big fight that's going on and the lion is the second largest and a strong presence, but the human is actually the weakest Right Now. Inside of this human that you are seeing, all of these three things exist.
Speaker 2:Now, if you have a tyrannical soul, a tyrannical mind, this person that you're looking at, this skin structure you're looking at, inside of that mind, that tyrannical person, the chimera and the lion are engaged in a fight and the human is basically just cowering. There is no, the human has. No, you cannot tame the lion, definitely cannot tame the chimera. And then and the chimera and the lion are just constantly going at each other right, the chimera actually will win, for the most part because it's the largest, most multifarious. That is the soul of a tyrant. It may look to you just to be a regular human being. You would not be able to tell any difference. He's walking around, talking and behaving just like anybody else, but inside of, inside of him, the sky mirror rules yeah, I mean there's a.
Speaker 1:It's a tormented slave, completely right right to this multifarious, multitudinous beast.
Speaker 2:There is no ruler inside of it. Even this beast turns on itself, this Kaimera turns on itself and this person is walking, talking, acting in regular, day-to-day life and you would not know what's going on inside of his mind. Inside of his mind, it's just torment. There is no ruler. They're constantly being shifted here and there by appetites. Their honor-seeking part is being taken over by the appetites. But that's the fight. The rational mind has no role in this place, right? And then you have a similar-looking person, the same skin on the outside, but inside of them, the rational principle has tamed the lion and the lion holds the chimera in control. That person on the outside looks just like this other person, but is the? Is a just constitution, a philosopher, king, right? So if you were to ask, right? So if you take these two individuals and these individuals are operating in the day-to-day world, it turns out the one that who's, who has the chim, that is, is ruling inside of him. It holds high office, is born into into a wealthy family, has because of that, you know, because of his pursuit of pleasures, is able to hold constitutions, hold office, be able to participate in contracts, both social and personal that are leading to money and influence, as opposed to the constitution in which the human is tamed the lion who's then keeping the chimera in check? That person is born into poverty, is seeking wisdom and forgoing honor and forgoing appetites, and has nothing ready to show for himself.
Speaker 2:You look at these two individuals now from the outside. You can't see what's going on in the inside. They look just human to you and ask who appears happy? Most people who could just look at it have no further idea would say that the person who's the tyrant is happy. Most people who just look at it have no further idea would say that the person who's the tyrant is happy. He appears happy. He looks happy. The other person looks impoverished. But if you were to look inside, if you look at it from within, you realize that the constitution which the chimera rules is tormented, is unhappy and the, the constitution which the chimera rules, is tormented, is unhappy and the, the, the body in which the human, the rational element, rules, is 729 times happier and that that is congruent with this idea that the tyrant, uh, is not recognized as a tyrant by those around him.
Speaker 1:The tyrant attracts people who see what they are and what they're doing as things that are desirable, and it's really the capacity to think at the level of a philosopher king to realize that they are indeed a tyrant. And so it would only be somebody who is either a philosopher king or strives to be a philosopher king who would be able to recognize the person who, on the surface level, is wrapped in power and luxury, is really somebody, is an individual who is a slave to their own desires. That's correct, and that the other individual, who by outward appearances lives a very modest, temperate life, is actually the one that's well on that path. You know virtue and wisdom.
Speaker 2:right, because it is better for everyone to be ruled by a divine and wise ruler, right, right. So if you do that, if you, if you are that person, as a matter of fact, it turns out that even if you are the, the, the chimera, the one that's ruled by the chimera, right, you're better off to be discovered and found to be somebody who is a tyrant, so that you could get on the right path. The one who suffers the most is the tyrant who goes undiscovered, right, he says. I mean, doesn't the one who remain undetected become even worse? I mean, doesn't the one who remain undetected become even worse, while in the one who is discovered and punished, the bestial element is calmed and tamed and the gentle one freed? Doesn't his soul, when it returns to its best nature and acquires temperance and justice along with wisdom, achieve a condition that is more honorable than that of a body, when it acquires strength and beauty along with health, as a soul is more honorable than a body?
Speaker 1:this also addresses the, the claim that thrasymachus made, which is that, well, the best way to be is to be secretly unjust but to appear just, and this is where this is essentially uh, socrates would, through rational argument, completely unraveling that point unraveling that and he says that guy, that that guy or gal would be temper, would seek philosophy, would be temperate with health, strength and beauty, be temperate with money, be temperate with honor.
Speaker 2:Yeah, now that person right, temperance right. That's the harmony. The temperance comes, brings about the harmony, right that person would be musical.
Speaker 2:That person would be musical and that person will rule his own city right, right, and what that means is that you're not looking at this individual as somebody who is standing for elections. You know this is not a public figure. This is a private figure. This is again going back to building the constitution within. It's got nothing with what. Does anybody else appreciate you for having that constitution? They wouldn't know. As a matter of fact, when they look at you they'd be like, oh look, he makes the terrible decisions.
Speaker 1:Yeah, in fact, there'd be something more sublime about your own wisdom and virtue, the less recognized it is Correct, because you, you would carry around with you the ultimate validation, which is that you achieve this or that you pursued this for its own sake, and that would be the only way to guarantee it. That's right, of all the respect in the world, in fact the less aware the world is of your pursuit of virtue, the stronger your virtue, maybe.
Speaker 2:What I'm trying to say essentially is that the strength of the fifth corner is independent of the world.
Speaker 1:Right, it's independent, independent of the world. But if you ever wanted to decontaminate any possibility that you're secretly honest, I see, I see what you mean, but I know any possibility that you're secretly honest.
Speaker 2:I see what you mean. My point goes back to what you're saying. Yeah, right, it goes back to the the, the point that, in order to to seek wisdom, say if, if one is seeking wisdom but along along the way, has been able to get the accrued amounts of life, born into a of the, the right family, has the right um constitution, has been educated the right way in music and physical abilities and all of that, and and and is in the pursuit, understands the nature of the unity and and the truth and truth, beauty, um, you know, and and and good understands, understands that that person is truly a philosopher, king, right, but you cannot take that away from them just because they were born in the right environment and had the musical and all that and the upbringing and were lauded for it. You know, like, the closest thing that I can think of is Marcus Aurelius, right.
Speaker 1:That's the example that comes to my mind.
Speaker 2:But you cannot take that away from that If.
Speaker 1:I was in that situation though me. If I was truly being honest with my own introspection, I would have to say I can't completely eliminate that possibility, that the fact that there is honor associated with it.
Speaker 2:Oh, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:I'm not saying that this completely nullifies it. I'm just saying that is a consideration.
Speaker 2:Honor becomes an unnecessary distraction. At that point I get your point. But if you think about it, unfortunately, even for us to come up with an example, if you have to think of a very tormented individual like Marcus Aurelius, he was a tormented individual because of this reason, you know, because honor came naturally to him, because he was the emperor. But inside of his mind, when you read the meditations, it is this, it is the pursuit of wisdom. He wore that crown of emperor with much trouble Because he kept guarding against this pursuit of honor.
Speaker 1:Right, he never lost his temperance. Right, there was a modesty to his approach right.
Speaker 2:You cannot be modest when you're the emperor of Rome. You cannot be temperate when you're the emperor of Rome Because you see the office puts on you this grotesque.
Speaker 1:I think you can be temperate. I think your temperance will exist on a different scale, but I mean, I think you can be.
Speaker 2:Because you could have easily been a tyrant right.
Speaker 1:I see what you mean, but again temperance and tyranny is what you're saying. A tyrant can't be tempered, correct? I agree with you but you know.
Speaker 2:But you can be temperate, but not be a philosopher king. You know temperance is not is is hard to achieve, but wisdom you have to have all the virtues. You have a courage, temperance, you know, wisdom, you know you're going to have all of them. So my point is that because he held a public office, he was more troubled. You see what I mean.
Speaker 1:He had a complex landscape of obstacles, challenges.
Speaker 2:Temptations mean yeah yeah, right, obviously that's all okay so, in fact, his, his temperance had to have been like, above and beyond the average, uh individual's but if you ask some, you know I I believe that if you were to ask him right based on these, if you read the meditations, he would have chosen the simpler life yeah, I think so too, you see so the coming back to it.
Speaker 2:This goes to show that the reason to know all of this, or to understand the nature of justice and understand the nature of the philosopher king, is so that you rule your own city. At least you are not giving into the chimera. You tame the lion, who tames the chimera and you rule your own city. Forget about public office, forget about ruling a city state.
Speaker 2:Rule your own city right and there is there's a, there's a beautiful line here and I don't think we have time to now go into the next part. Man, this took us quite a bit of time to get here.
Speaker 1:I think we should probably end here. This might be a cleaner break. Anyway, I think this would be. We're going to book 10 after this. Are you talking about 592B?
Speaker 2:Well, so there's a beautiful line here which talks about the next one. He says he will rule his own city. Socrates says right, he will rule his own city. Socrates says right. Glaucon says you mean in the city we have just been founding and describing the one that exists in words, since I don't think it exists anywhere on earth.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:Socrates says, but there may perhaps be a model of it in the heavens For anyone who wishes to look at it and to found part in the politics of it alone and of no other.
Speaker 1:So what?
Speaker 2:they're trying to create. Here is where we go into Plato is very well known for this the philosophy of forms and this entire argument. To this point, someone would say, oh great, all this sounds good, but guess what? You can't show me an example of this anywhere on the earth. You are right, you cannot show this example anywhere on the earth. But that is not how this works, Right? This is the perfect form of a republic.
Speaker 1:Because we're in the cave. He's showing you the form of justice, the form of the soul.
Speaker 2:Correct.
Speaker 1:Outside the cave which happens to be nourished by justice by just living the form, though the form is exists.
Speaker 2:There is only one republic, the, the true republic. There's only one version of it and it's the form. And you can create a copy of it, right, and? And what? Whatever you create is not going to be the republic, right, it is going to be a version of it and as we, you see, as we go to the next chapter in chapter 10, it it will be, it will be. It won't be an exact replica, it'll be an imperfect replica of that. But just because it doesn't exist in the world today doesn't make it any less relevant. It exists as a form. You see, he I think plato gets um this, this philosophy of forms gets challenged quite a bit. But I don't think that if you read the philosophy of forms, if you read just chapter 10 in isolation, you know, I think you would be led astray again.
Speaker 1:We have taken the long way of kind of figuring out how does he get to the philosophy of forms in order to explain the perfect republic right and it exists right it exists, and I firmly believe you can you live your life in a way that what you're doing is you're making yourself a citizen of the republic? You?
Speaker 2:can do that correct, that's.
Speaker 1:That's the point he's trying to make.
Speaker 2:The republic of the republic. You can do that Correct. That's the point he's trying to make the republic of the republic, the republic, the republic, not a republic, the republic, yeah, of course, this republic.
Speaker 1:So this might be a good place to end, because now we're going to go into book 10. Book 10. And we're going to indict the poets and the painters and evict them from the city. So, yeah, so we have some deep stuff to talk about next. So, but by and large, once you've reached the end of book nine, thrasymachus has been handled at this point, and now I think Socrates is going to talk about some way bigger issues. So we're going to be talking about not only poetry and art and the role in the city.
Speaker 2:He's been handled. I like it. Unfortunately, though, as we've seen, Thrasymachus wins.
Speaker 1:Thrasymachus wins practically speaking, but in the realm of forms he did not. We'll just end it here and then we'll pick up with Book 10 on the next episode.
Speaker 2:Yes, sir.