What is Plato’view on music and gymnastics?
The guardians themselves must possess a number of qualities: keen senses, strength, bravery, high-spiritedness, and love of wisdom (376e). Plato regards both music and gymnastics as directed to the improvement of the soul: gymnastics alone would foster a brutal and harsh disposition, while an exclusively musical training would render the soul too soft. Hence the guardians’ nature must achieve a harmony between both dispositions, high-spiritedness on the one hand, and gentleness, together with a love of knowledge, on the other. Plato’s terminology here is revealing: such a guardian would be “the most perfect and harmonious musician”
The harmony in the soul of the guardian is not innate; it is achieved only by long training and ideological inculcation.
He claimed about the poets..
- (1) the falsity of its claims and representations regarding both gods and men; (2) its corruptive effect on character; and (3) its “disorderly” complexity and encouragement of individualism in the sphere of sensibility and feeling.
- .Nor should poets be allowed to present the gods as assuming manifold forms since, in actuality, “each of them, being the fairest and best possible, abides forever simply in his own form” (II, 381c–d). Finally, poets must not present the gods as deceitful since, affirms Socrates, “there is no lying poet in God” (II, 382d). Again, this phrase suggests that poetry by its very nature is a falsifying rhetorical activity. The underlying point is that such portrayals of gods and men will inculcate false and corruptive ideals into the guardians.
He claimed about the politic, poets and state..
……According to Plato, the originating circumstance of a city is that individuals are not
self-sufficient. “One man is naturally fitted for one task” (II, 370b). Plato is adamant on this point, insisting that “it is impossible for one man to do the work of many arts well” ” and that
in the ideal city every man would work at “one occupation . . . all his days” This rigid division of labor is the foundation of the entire analogy between the just individual and the just city
……The definition of justice in the state is reached in book IV: justice is a condition where “each one man must perform one social service in the state for which his nature was best adapted.” It is also defined as the “principle of doing one’s own business” and “not to be a busybody” Socrates recognizes here that this “principle” for which he had been seeking had in fact already been laid down as “a universal requirement” in the very origin of a city
……In political terms, poetry’s greatest crime is its insubordination in respect of
specialization of labor. Plato urges that the same man ought not to imitate “many things”: any poetic imitation involving “manifold forms” will, says Socrates, “be ill suited to our polity, because there is no twofold or manifold man among us, since every man does one thing”
…….If a man . . . who was capable by his cunning of assuming every kind of shape and imitating all things should arrive in our city, bringing with himself the poems which he wished to exhibit, we should fall down and worship him as a holy and wondrous and delightful creature, but should say to him that there is no man of that kind among us in our city, nor is it lawful for such a man to arise among us, and we should send him away to another city, after pouring myrrh down over his head and crowning him with fillets owool.
…….Plato now presents the poet as a “most marvelous Sophist” and a “truly clever and wondrous man” who “makes all the things that all handicraftsmen severally produce” (X, 596c–d). The political implication of this claim that Plato attributes to poetry is that poetry can have no definable (and therefore limited) function in a state ordered according to a strict hierarchy of inexchangeable function..
……It literally does not know its place and it can never be clear in relation to which activity or discipline it can be subordinated or superordinated.. In this sense, poetry is the incarnation of indefinability and the limits of reason. It is in its nature a rebel, a usurper, which desires to rule; and as such it is the most potent threat to the throne of philosophy, which is also the throne of polity in the state of the philosopher-king.
Plato claims about democracy..
……There is, moreover, a further political valency in poetry’s indeterminacy of function.
Plato sees poetry as pandering primarily to two types of constitution, the democratic and the tyrannical. Tyranny, moreover, is viewed by Plato as somehow not opposed to democracy but a logical extension of it. The precise significance of this association of poetry with democracy may be evinced from a broader political context. Plato suggests that there five basic forms of government. His own ideal constitution can be conceived as either royalty or aristocracy. Tyranny- is a despotic authoritatian ruler. Democaracy creates tyranny in parts of elections
…….. He rejects democracy and accepts aristocracy. There are people who are capable of doing things. This is no democracy. It is pre-determined. Democracy brings us Tyranny. Poetry is evil. It is to be banished. The person who governs the country is obvious in the society. Rationality and reason are important but Aristocrats just should govern the country.
……. There were no classess in Plato’s republic. “ everyone had one role which is inherited” this is not democratic. There is no class. This is not justice. To draw a destiny to mankind is not justice
…….. He doesnt defend democracy.. Poetry gives us imaginary ways. There are a few groups. The first is gurdians, the second is workers. “ if everyone stabilizes in his works it is true. They success in their work”