1) Plato is interested in the education of the guardians of his ideal republic (or his beautiful city, the kallipolis) and he recognizes that they must be both gentle and high-spirited. How does Plato propose to educate them in such a way that they embody both characteristics? What does he propose as his curriculum? Is such a blending of antithetical traits possible in the self-same person through an educational program?He wants a balance in his education. Similar to what we do with education today, there are core subjects that are both right and left brained and also physical exercise. He wants that blend of those “arts” and “gymnastics” to make a more complete education. While some students might not like the combination, it’s important to have the diversity at the entry level at least so that they have a chance to try it.
2) Specifically, why did Socrates not want the major stories of Homer and Hesiod about the gods to be told? Is education primarily the process of looking for role models to imitate?
Role models are always important because it’s what drives students to become better themselves. I don’t think it’s exactly a process of looking for role models, but rather a time to look at role models and choose to develop oneself. Socrates never wanted the stories about the gods to be in the lessons because the gods didn’t learn how to deal with problems the “moral” way. They could just buy a way out of punishment and he was worried that if the students saw that influence they too would think themselves above the laws.
3) What is the sign of a bad and shameful education in a city? 405a-d Hint: it has to do with doctors and lawyers. What are the basic principles here? What kinds of people make the best doctors and the best lawyers or judges?
If there aren’t enough honest lawyers or good doctors in a city then it is a sign of a bad and shameful education in a city. If they can’t train their own doctors and lawyers well enough to service the city and the people have to leave to find that service, then the education is failing. They respect honest lawyers who will help the people without payment being the main focus and doctors should be able to treat patients with the best medicine available to them.
4) Out of these who have been so educated, who is to rule and who is to be ruled? What is the basis for the selection of rulers? How does the “myth of the metals” reinforce this? What is to be the lifestyle of these rulers? Is this a reasonable proposal?
It’s basically like ACT for the rulers. Anyone who passes a lovely test of intelligence then they have the aptitude to rule over people. Those who don’t should be in power. However, the people in power should, according to Socrates, live a simple life that focuses completely on their duty to serve the people. It doesn’t matter where they came from or what station they are, if they pass the test then they can. I like the idea that the rulers would obviously be tested but I’m not sure if it would truly prove their efficiency to rule. I’m not sure why they couldn’t live normal lives if they held positions of power; I don’t think it should be a mark of punishment. It’s an interesting idea that almost never happens though; having those in power with less than those who are not.
If there aren’t enough honest lawyers or good doctors in a city then it is a sign of a bad and shameful education in a city. If they can’t train their own doctors and lawyers well enough to service the city and the people have to leave to find that service, then the education is failing. They respect honest lawyers who will help the people without payment being the main focus and doctors should be able to treat patients with the best medicine available to them.
4) Out of these who have been so educated, who is to rule and who is to be ruled? What is the basis for the selection of rulers? How does the “myth of the metals” reinforce this? What is to be the lifestyle of these rulers? Is this a reasonable proposal?
It’s basically like ACT for the rulers. Anyone who passes a lovely test of intelligence then they have the aptitude to rule over people. Those who don’t should be in power. However, the people in power should, according to Socrates, live a simple life that focuses completely on their duty to serve the people. It doesn’t matter where they came from or what station they are, if they pass the test then they can. I like the idea that the rulers would obviously be tested but I’m not sure if it would truly prove their efficiency to rule. I’m not sure why they couldn’t live normal lives if they held positions of power; I don’t think it should be a mark of punishment. It’s an interesting idea that almost never happens though; having those in power with less than those who are not.
No comments:
Post a Comment