Comparing Chomsky And Plato's Allegory Of The Cave

Even though time separated Herman and Chomsky and Plato, they all noticed how the information systems present in their society are used to shape and mold the public consciousness. They both identify specific roles in the society that are a part of this: the masses/public, the shadow-makers/media, the rulers/powerful societal interests, and the philosophers/critics. While both philosophers see the public being manipulated, they disagree on how to fix this problem and who should be in control of the government. Herman and Chomsky suggest that democracy is the best way to rule for a government. On the contrary, Plato believes that the public is the problem and that democracy should be avoided as a way to rule a government and that a small group …show more content…
This philosopher manages to be freed from the cave and makes it out into the real world and experiences natural light from the sun for the first time. This prisoner questioned what the rulers and shadow-makers told him was true and he found out the real truth. After that, he went back to the cave to try and help convince others of the true reality, but many were so deeply influenced by the shadow makers that they would not even consider the philosopher’s claims. It is important to have that background knowledge to understand why Plato believes that an oligarchy is the best form of government. Plato believes that it is the philosopher’s responsibility to go back into the cave and free others from the binding falsehoods of the shadow-makers. He applied this same logic to government. He believes that the government would fail under a democracy because people are influenced too easily. In Allegory of the Cave, Plato says, “Who then are those whom we shall compel to be guardians? Surely they will be the men who are the wisest about the affairs of the state, and by whom the State is best administered. They are the men, and I will choose them, he replied.” Plato asserts that government would be most effective under an oligarchy rule consisted of the philosophers in a society. In a perfect world, an oligarchy of …show more content…
It is important to note that critics are crucial in a society so that the powerful societal interests do not gain too much power. Herman and Chomsky are two great examples of critics. They take in the information the media gives them and then analyzes the validity of that information. They see if the media uses any filter and determines what is true and false by asking tough questions and seeking the answers to those questions. Herman and Chomsky believe the best way to rule the public is by letting the public rule itself. This is done in the form of a democracy. Herman and Chomsky believe that if the public is presented with truth, they will accept it, leading to an effective democracy. Herman and Chomsky want to present the public with raw information and present all stories, not just the ones deemed worthy by media outlets. They have faith that when presented with truth, each person will question it and hold it to high standards and realize that it is truth. The problem with a democracy is that people can easily be influenced and since our media outlets have filters on the information they present, the public will never know the full truth. That being said, even though the government leading society would be a democracy, the media outlets are who are actually in control. And as we learned earlier, the people that