To Establish Truth Plato Both Rejects And Relies On Mimesis. Discuss

Socrates, a philosopher in ancient Greece argued that Sophists were 'superficial thinkers who adopted and reflected the prejudices of society.' He also openly protested that 'democratic leaders were influenced more by popular pressures and prejudices than by true political wisdom.' Such overt criticism of the state resulted in Socrates being placed under arrest; he was accused of corrupting the young boys of Athens and sentenced to death by committing enforced suicide. Plato, a student of Socrates, strongly agreed with the views of his master. The Republic is Plato's literary reaction to the death of his teacher.

To establish truth Plato does indeed rely and reject mimesis. However, let us not be naïve in our opinions, that Plato was unaware of this tension between philosophical expression and its dependency on the literary. Plato, through the creation of what could be labelled as fictional a world, with fictional characters, employs literature to critique the contemporary society in which he lived. Rather than look to philosophers -lovers of wisdom - on matters of virtue and vice, poets, such as Homer, were praised for their masterful pieces of poetry, which were considered more essential in the education of young boys on such matters. Plato strongly disagrees, arguing that such men appeal to nothing but the fleshy, lowly parts of our soul and who are really responsible for the corruption of the youth, not his beloved master Socrates. Plato's Republic is the fictional conception of a state which forbids the corruptive influences of poets to effect the ideology of its people. He banishes those whom we could label villain from this idealised utopian state. Through the creation of this fictional world, Plato is able to raise Socrates from the grave, so to speak, allowing his voice centre stage in the narrative; Plato can clearly articulate his ideas within the expanse of literature, given him absolute control. A dramatic dialogue exists between the characters of Glaucon and Socrates and assists in the expression of Plato's views -Socratic teachings-on themes such as: virtue, morality, truth and justice; thus Plato immortalises both his deceased master and his teachings within the framework of a literary creation. Within the course of this discussion, extracts from "Book X" of Plato's Republic will be used to provide textual evidence that demonstrates Plato's rejection of mimesis-in regards to the negative influence of poets and poetry- and his reliance on, mimesis in order to establish truth for the purpose of vindicating the name of his master, Socrates.

We shall begin the discussion with a quote from Socrates:

"We hear some people say that poets know all crafts, all human affairs concerned with virtue and vice, and all about the gods as well. They say that if a good poet produces fine poetry, he must have knowledge of the things he writes about, or else he wouldn't be able to produce it at all. Hence, we have to look to see whether those who tell us this have encountered these imitators and been so deceived by them that they don't realize that their works are at the third remove from that which is and are easily produced without knowledge of the truth since they are only images, not things that are, or whether there is something in what these people say, and good poets really do have knowledge of the things most people think they write so well about."

On the surface, it appears Socrates is speaking against literature-poetry; unlike, phusis-nature- which is the true form of something and of which never changes, literature is a craft - tekhne- a putting of words and images together. This process involves imitation -mimesis- which gives only a third removed explanation of the truth. Through the dramatic dialogue of Socrates and Glaucon, Plato rhetorically argues this thought by illustrating a painter and a carpenter. Plato is correct: literature is a craft. It requires the act of crafting images and words together. Interestingly, it is the craft of which he too employs to engage in this "ancient quarrel" between poetry and philosophy.

There is a tone within the above extract, which suggests that rejection of mimesis equates to more than just: poets/ literature are defective because they are imitative. Plato does not reject imitation completely, or as a concept, but he does reject the use of mimesis when it seeks to exploit human frailty and appeal to the irrational part of the soul -its weaker element, though I am sure poets would defend their post entirely . Plato does not reject literature as a concept, but he rejects it entirely unless its purpose is to educate youths about the truths of good and evil, consequences of the wicked and rewards for the good. Discourses of matters of truth should be the responsibility of those who truly know it, live it, and dedicate every moment of their lives to acquiring and understanding it. Conversely, poets merely give a third removed explanation of truth, because of their lack of experience.

There was a consensus amongst the ancient Greeks that good poets who produce fine poetry must, "know all crafts and human affairs concerned with virtue and vice." It is this consensus that Plato finds most irksome. He asserts that those who believe this have been solely "deceived." To establish truth Plato retorts that one must not rely on "mere probability" but must be willing to follow a "rational calculation" which "tragedy and its leader Homer" do not provide. These men were idolised amongst the contemporary Grecian society and were praised for being all wise for the ability to educate the youth about matters of virtue and vice, which Plato demonstrates, it is a degree to which they do not qualify. Plato remarks that they are "deceived" by the skill of the poet's ability to "write well" on subjects of truth and virtue. Therefore only because poets possess the skill of producing good literature, does not mean they possess knowledge of truth about the subject of which they write: "All the tragic poets whether they write in iambics or hexameters" are as imitative as they could possibly be, because they "exploit weakness of our nature." As "there are two opposite inclinations in a person in relation to the same thing, we say that he must also have two parts," then it is indeed these two parts that are in conflict with one another. The body is subject to corruption and death, in contrast to the soul, which is an immortal entity. Therefore if one continues to be deceived it could result to the corruption of the soul. He now turns our attention to the eyes to further prove the deceptive influences of poets and predicates that there are often circumstances where "people with bad eyesight often see things before those whose eyesight is keener." We cannot trust the physical eye as a means to establish truth, as to depend upon our senses would limit us to this "world of appearances." Our eyes can be "deceived by colours and every other similar sort of confusion" so that an object can look "crooked when seen in water and straight when seen out of it, while something else looks both concave and convex. Poets such as Homer engage in this "trickery" . Plato argues that the rational part of our soul -the better part- which is accustomed to measuring, weighing and counting, would not agree with the part of the soul "that forms a belief contrary to the measurements." Therefore if we want to establish truth via the means of sense data, than we will not be successful. Truth is universal. Therefore our senses lend no assistance; truth exists outside the realm of the material world, which is not in fact the reality, but just an image of the true form, for example, the carpenter creates an image of the true form of the "bed". That being the case, to allow one to establish truth via sense data is limiting and dangerous.

Hegel would argue that there needs to be a constant engagement with the negative in order to come to the point of absolute knowledge, truth ; however, Plato on the other hand affirms "the bad is entirely coterminous with what destroys and corrupts, and the good is what preserves and benefits." Recognising the dichotomy of the nature of the soul from the body - the rational and the irrational, the weak and the strong - identifies a flaw in human beings . "Imitation really consorts with a part of us that is far from reason, and the result of their being friends and companions is neither sound nor true," clearly the two parts are in opposition; one is either led as a slave or rules as king. Plato contests that "Imitation is an inferior thing" and "we are all aware of the charm it exercises." In consequence to this defective nature within us, if poets were permitted into the city they would manipulate one's ability to think rationally, to revivify "pleasure and pain to be kings in your city, instead of law or the thing that everyone has always believed to be best, namely reason."

Plato argues that "the soul is full of a myriad of such oppositions at the same time." Thus When experiencing difficulties we should instead "arrange our affairs in whatever way reason determines to be best." Here Plato criticises the dramatic concept of catharsis and asserts rather to dwell in grief as, "grief prevents the very thing we most need in such circumstances from coming into play as quickly as possible" - that "thing" being, deliberation- "we instead must accustom our souls to turn quickly as possible to healing.and putting the disaster right, replacing lamenting with cure." To illustrate this he gives the example of a "decent man who happens to lose his son or some other prized possession" , he questions whether this man "will fight his pain and put up more resistance to it when his equals can see him or when he's alone by himself in solitude?" Plato identifies the contrast of behaviour between the private man and the public man; the part of the man that is interested in keeping up with the appearances and the expectations of his peers, that could possibly, entirely, contradict with his behaviour when he is on his own. Glaucon agrees that the man will "fight it more when he is being seen. But when he is alone I suppose he'll venture to say and do lots of things he is ashamed to be heard seeing or doing." Thus, Plato concludes that it is "the best part of us that is willing to follow this rational calculation," allowing reason and law to rule within us rather than allow our experience of it to allow us to "give in." Then, those who praise poets and think it agreeable that their ability to provoke emotion equates to them being educators of truth have co-operated in this act of trickery and deceit, mistaken the inspirations of their work for something of higher value, than what it is in truth. Allowing our senses to be the judge of truth, does not result in establishing truth. As our soul resides in a vessel subject to decay and which exists in a "world of appearances" there is a danger that the soul, if it remains in subjection to the senses could be entirely corrupted.

Plato encourages us to "see the soul as it is in truth, we must not study it as it is while maimed by its association with the body and other evils." Plato identifies a division of the soul from the body; both of which possess unique characteristics that are used for different purposes and thrive better in different environments and are examined and understood through different means. The body, Plato argues, is "maimed, by evils" and thus in order to establish the true condition of the soul, "as it is in its pure state" we must separate the soul from the body because the soul is separate from the body and does not appeal to the same desires, needs, wants and interests as the body does. The soul, because it lives within the body which exists in the material world, has been "beset by many evils." He uses the Greek mythical character of the sea god, Glaucus to illustrate this point: "primary nature can't easily be made out by those who catch glimpses of him. Some of the original parts have been broken off... and his whole body has been maimed by waves and by shells...stones that have attached themselves to him, so that he looks more like a wild animal than his natural self." Therefore in order to "discover the true nature" of the soul, the true form, we must look to "its philosophy". This is the means as to which the soul can be examined because it is "akin to the divine and the immortal and what always is".

Finally, by including the myth of Er into the narrative plot Plato encourages one to think about the afterlife. Plato encourages us to take time to dwell upon such thoughts, rather than get caught in this world of appearances, caught up and banded and led captive by human senses and our experiences of these, which are only momentary, frivolous and fickle. So, whilst the democratic leaders who had sentenced Socrates to death and thought that they had rid the state of his corrupting influences, Plato pronounces a warning- as if the soul of Socrates now resides in the body of Plato-that we will all be judged and sentenced according to the just and unjust affairs of our past lives. By relying on mimesis to establish truth Plato has accomplished true justice for the purpose of virtue and vice; Socrates is immortalised; his teachings will live on forever and has continued to influence the development of western philosophy up to this very day.