The Science of Shepherding Mankind - Statesman - Book Report/Review Example

The Science of Shepherding Mankind - Statesman 1. After a long and seemingly correct reasoning process, aimed at defining the statesman, he is defined as one who possesses the science of shepherding mankind (266e; also 267d). But the Eleatic Stranger decides that this line of reasoning has gone awry. To correct it and to set it on its proper course, he tells a story” the Great Myth of the Cycles (268d). What does the Myth show the principal error of the initial reasoning process to be and what does it offer to correct it? It is, generally, thought that the human statesman exists on a level apart from and higher than others (namely, that the statesman is the superior Shepherd). However, Plato’s Great Myth of the Cycles shows that whereas the Divine shepherd in the myth is higher than the king, the mortal statesman seems to be on a level of other subjects in his character, breeding, and education. Being that there are innumerable rivals, therefore, how could we distinguish who the true statesman should be? The Eleatic Stranger offers to correct the traditional misperception by distinguishing between invalid and valid statesmanship. 2. Compare the two models of rulership the dialogue offers for our consideration: the shepherd and the weaver of woolens. Which is a more suitable model for the governance of humans? Why? Try to give a point-by-point comparison. The role of shepherding a herd might be considered as the traditional concept of leadership, namely that the leader is distinguished from the ‘herd’ (i.e., his subjects). On the other hand, the weaver is seen as one craftsman of many, each crafts having their own particular sciences and crafts. It is only when an artist (be he weaver, physician, pilot, or statesman) has knowledge of and attachment to his science, can he be considered master of his particular field. The Stranger seems to prefer the model of weaver for the governance of humans: for one thing, weavers produce products that are either maintenance-oriented (or creative) or defense-oriented, for instance clothes could fall into the first category, whereas shields against heat or cold apply to the second. Similarly the statesman produces laws that are either creative or defensive (to protect state). Secondly, there is a distinction between two kinds of arts: there are the arts which are peripheral to, but involved in, the art under discussion (e.g. when related to weaving, there are the duties involved with crafting spindles, combs and related articles), and then there is the art itself (i.e. the actual act of carding/ disuniting and uniting the woof, namely weaving). Similarly with statesmanship, there are the ranks or societal duties, which are peripheral to the essence of leading (seven classes all involved with either defense of maintenance of state), but this should be distinguished from the royal and political science itself which constitutes the very body of statesmanship. 3. How is the true statesman distinguished from the men who get themselves called political leaders (303c)? He rules according to some scientific principle/ art, just as genuine physician is distinguished from quack by virtue of his scientific credibility. 4. How does the rule of law come to be important to human societies? How does this growth in the importance of law alter the possibility and the role of a would-be statesman? The legislator, ontologically unable to legislate laws for each particular case, has to implement generalities, which come to be called ‘law’, crafting exceptions when necessary for individuals. Since, according to the Stranger, laws have a certain scientific validity or rightness, modifying them later on would be absurd akin to a physician transforming his original prescriptions. As a "noble pilot" or "wise physician", the king/ statesman has to preserve rather than modify laws. He is a true king only and only when he rules according to the dictates of traditional law and culture of his country. 5. What position does the Stranger take on the nature of measurement (283b-285c)? For an art to be thus it has to contain a standard of measure (in order to measure artistic achievement against a mean). According to Socrates, measurement of arts is demarcated into two. The first category consists of comparing the arts against each other by evaluating their particular concepts, which, according to the Stranger, include number, length, depth, breadth, swiftness. The second category consists of conducting an internal valuation by contrasting the achievable measurements of the art against a mean which is separated from either extreme – that of excellence in the art and that of failure. Many people – although possibly competent – make the mistake of formulating one universal method of measurement and confusing both categories of measurement into one whole. To judge properly, however, the Stranger insists, distinction must be made between inter-categorical judgment and between intra-categorical judgment. Laws I-III 1. Plato, through the Athenian Stranger, presents a new psychology here in the Laws. It is in the Myth of the Puppets. What are its implications for education? For our political well-being? Constitutional and Natural Laws (as regards states, individuals, and animals) are good and natural designed by the gods – either and/ or for their own pleasure or for promoting a purpose-filled life – to the advantage of human nature. It is best, therefore, that as political creatures we follow, not modify these laws, and that as educators we instruct our youngsters to heed and cultivate their personal natures according to the natural/ constitutional laws. Doing so would be advantageous to both individual and state, since just as a drunkard (who is not in sync with his reason) cannot win a war, so too an individual who is not in touch with the way the gods strung him can guide his existence. 2. What sort of education is put forward by the Athenian Stranger as best for a city? How does it compare with what was proposed in the Republic? With our approach to education? In order to attain excellence of character (all virtue), education – at least in the early years – is best if it follows testing one’s character and employing both pleasure and pain as strategies to achieving ultimate virtue that is “happiness”. Pleasure in the Platonian sense is disciplined dance and music, accompanied by wine, which will mellow individuals to receive and be receptive to the innate beauty of the laws. Interestingly enough, education in the “Republic” centers around pleasure too (music accompanied with sport and stories), but in this sense it is “philosophical” play dedicated to vision of truth (or Good) and good society (and people are encouraged to question) rather than to unquestioning commitment to the laws. When comparing the Platonic education to that of the contemporary Western approach, one seems diametrically different to the other. To generalize, the western philosophy of pedagogue puts the focus on the individual, attempting to level the subject matter to his or her particular understanding and manner of interest. Although Plato accentuates pleasure as strategy for education, in Platonic script education seems to exist for the benefit of the state (i.e. persuading individual to affirm laws whether or not he truly understands them (and in fact he is advised that questioning if necessary should be done only at old age and in a quiet manner), whereas contemporary western society places individual as center of attention and encourages critical thinking. 3. What does the Stranger mean by a mixed Constitution? Why does he advocate this as best for human societies? Do we have a mixed Constitution? A mixed Constitution, according to Plato, is the regimen that causes potential harm in one way whilst simultaneously assisting in another. Gymnasium and common meals, for instance, may be advantageous whilst similarly potentially destructive too; these facets could cultivate character as well as degrade. Nevertheless, Plato (or the Athenian, here) advocates them as being a test for one’s character therefore stimulating growth. Pleasure and pain – the two contradictories – contribute to educational growth and personal development. Perhaps, by according ultimate freedom (in a certain sense) to its citizens, the United States does constitute a mixed Constitution. Freedom is both an advantage and a challenge. Whilst enabling us to reach our fullest potential, it may be best to those who, from nature and nurture, are best equipped to design and structure their route to self-actualization. On the other hand, other individuals may have more of struggle with the concept of Freedom and may flourish better under certain more circumscribed laws or conditions. 4. Compare the goals that the Stranger says a lawmaker should seek to achieve with the goals of our Constitution. Look at the Preamble to our Constitution. Is this still a valid statement for us? A well-governed state ought to be so ordered so that it could best every other state in war. A principle of hierarchy rules that is mirrored (as in the Myth of the puppets in character) in family, villages, and state. In a Darwinian analogy of the survival of the fittest, the superior may defeat and enslave the inferior minority for such is the dictate of the natural laws of survival. Nevertheless, the legislator should ensure – and should educate his citizens – in the superiority of peace as necessary factor for both personal and social welfare. In practice, this does seem to represent the essence of the Preamble to our Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Although there are citizens of this state who seek non-existence of Government (see, for instance, the popularity of the symbol of Anarchy (although not all understand its significance), nevertheless, it seems to me that a body of laws (in this case the Constitution) is still necessary of a country to provide an identity – and hence protection of and growth to its citizens. 1. The Stranger says that a real or lawful constitution should be named after the God who is master of all rational men (713a). Why? What is it about God that we must seek to imitate? What might this mean for us today? A human, even the most perfect, when invested with supreme power may be culpable to misusing that power. Only a Divine Being can be impervious to folly. A city therefore that is ruled by Pure Goodness, Virtue, and Reason i.e. God) cannot fail but represent those same vritures in their totality. We are adjoined to imitate God in employing reason and prudence to the betterment of our character and state of affairs. What this might mean to us today depends one each individual’s conception of God. Nevertheless, since the human sciences do show us to be a creature that is conflicted by bias and rationality, concern for our personal welfare seems to dictate that we follow rationality as far as we are able. 2. What is a preamble to a law? What is its purpose? Discuss the use the Stranger makes of the analogy of slave and free medical doctors. What does this tell us about the nature of law? A preamble to a law may be considered as the summary or the intent of the law. The Preamble to the Constitution, for instance, advises us regarding the objective and intent of the American Constitution. In Plato’s analogy, the servant doctor (who is apprenticed to or assistance of the “free” doctor) is more restricted to fulfilling his regiment – to prescribing then to implementing the cure, whilst the ‘free’ doctor treats himself to the luxury of research, and the amenities of talking with, listening to, and spending more time with his patients in order to persuade them to accept the treatment. The Athenian recommends the dual character of the law to be best: to compel its citizens to commitment whilst persuading them of its inherent wisdom and virtue. Laws XII 1. What is the Nocturnal Council? Who are its members? What are its goals or purposes? By what means does it seek to accomplish these? The nocturnal assemblies of magistrates (composed of as variety of ages) who share in the scheme of education are also involved in ascertaining that the laws of the state are kept. This Nocturnal Council serves as guardians of law and order, who themselves exhibit in their lives the wisdom and virtue that is supposed to be basis of the state, to both generalize whilst particularizing and to be multi-faceted in knowledge. 2. How does the Nocturnal Council of the Laws differ, if at all, from the Philosopher-Kings of the Republic? There seem to be many similarities. The Philosopher-King too has to ground his practice on science, whilst maintain insight into the one though focusing on the many. He, likewise, has to possess courage and self-discipline whilst continuously upgrading his knowledge of the human and divine sciences. The only difference one could say is that the philosopher-king represents an individual, whilst the Nocturnal Council is a group of people aligned under, or assisting the statesman (if one statesman there be). 3. In your opinion do we need to be concerned with the unity of all being? Or is it enough to remain content to explore the diversity of things that are apparent to our senses? Explain your position. Both aspects may be related to one another: by exploring the diversity of things that are apparent to one’s senses, one may come to a greater appreciation of the unity of all being. An assistant to the Dalai Lama, for instance, has perceived the Dalai Lama often being affected by trivial details of nature. It has been these seemingly insignificant corporeal ties that have evoked in him an ecstasy of the homogeneity of the universe. Read More