Plato

Plato's Republic sounds like an Orwellian nightmare.  His fascist sounding ideas, such as: only create art that glorifies the Republic, never show emotion, don't have sex with the person you love, don't enjoy drinking, food, or sex, or laughter, seem to me far from the ideal republic. I always thought the idea of a republic was to have a free exchange of ideas, not to have the elitist know-it-all's control ever aspect of the republic.  Why are these ideas so fundamental to western philosophy?  Why is cutting yourself off from any base experience a wonderful thing?  There is something to be said for discipline, I'll give Plato that.  But he takes the stance of a fanatic, and I find his works antithetical to the ideas of my vision of a republic.

In addition to Plato's dialogues in the voice of Socrates about how people should be educated to behave in his ideal republic, he attempts to rip poetry and every other form of art a new one.  He states that no form of art is worth any time, because it's two degrees removed from truth.  This statement is contradictory to one talked about earlier in the book, where he states that only poetry that praises good virtue is of any importance.  But later in the book, he sees no use in the "lies" that poets tell, or their misrepresentations of the world.  He claims that an artist can't have any idea about what he writes, as a painter that paints a picture of a horse neither knows the saddle nor the reins.

The ideas represented in this work are contradictory to what I believe, yet I'm glad I read it.  His arguments against the artist made me consider what I feel is important about art, and I'm glad for that.  I also found his allegory of the cave interesting, although I had already read it.