The Intelligent Troglodyte’s Guide to Plato’s Republic, 2016a

truth are highly entertaining. Consider the Star Wars movies. How well did
George Lucas, or do the writers now working for Disney, understand the human
soul, the nature of good and evil, the relative merits of different political systems,
or the physical limitations of space travel? What about using “the Force” – did
Lucas know what his characters were talking about? Maybe not. But it is an
entertaining story all the same, particularly with the costumes and makeup, the
cinematography, the special effects, the full symphony orchestra and chorus, and
so on. It is sometimes said that, in literature, form is at least as important as
content. Socrates thinks this is all too true. Strip a literary work of its “musical
colorings,” and what remains is dull and unenlightening. Even the poet treats it as
“a kind of game, not something to be taken seriously.” For “if he truly had
knowledge of what he imitates . . . he would take deeds much more seriously than
their imitations, would try to leave behind many beautiful deeds as his own
memorials, and would be much more eager to be the subject of a eulogy than the
author of one.”
Do poets (novelists, songwriters, screenwriters, etc.) know anything that the
rest of us don’t, anything beyond the details of the literary craft?
Is it true that, if poets truly had knowledge of virtue, then they would be
virtuous rather than imitate virtue? Is the same true of teachers – that if
someone truly knew mathematics, say, then they would be mathematical
rather than teach mathematics? Perhaps. But is to successfully teach
mathematics not a way of being mathematical? Is to successfully imitate
virtue not a way of being virtuous?
Is to successfully imitate dialectic not a way of being dialectical?
Back