Comparing Chomsky And Plato's Allegory Of The Cave

Amazing Essays
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

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Free Speech Advantages

    • 702 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The idea of censoring unpopular beliefs conjures images of the oppressive governments that our founding fathers fought so hard to avoid recreating. Free speech is essential to higher learning because engaging in truly open discussion is the only way that new ideas and opinions can come forth. Allowing for anyone to share their opinion, no matter how unpopular, is the most effective way of making intellectual progress. Free speech allows for open discussion and criticisms which causes the strongest and most intelligently backed ideas to gain prevalence in society. Many critics of free speech would argue that some ideologies are harmful to a civilized society and they shouldn’t be allowed to spread because it might prove to be detrimental.…

    • 702 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It is human nature to naturally be evil and we must have government to maintain and regulate society, in order to prevent citizens from trumping others rights. Ideologies is a “prescription for society based on personal values.” A truly objective political ideology is almost impossible, but if it can be sensitive to the individual and best promotes their cooperation towards mutual ends. Ronald Reagan was a modern conservative who proposed many changes to how he thought…

    • 1738 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Even though Hobbes says we can vote for who we want to run the country, we need to be able to have a system that can best represent all the people and if the government breaks any laws, they are held accountable. (RUN ON SENTENCE) I think Kant’s use of freedom is key to enlightenment. Without freedom no one can be enlightened and thus, many people would be living a unhappy life. Why extend your life with…

    • 1567 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    However, Locke criticizes Machiavelli’s work. For Locke, the government should encompass the manner of fair play and equity. In order for the government to survive, it must serve the best interest of the people. If it is not addressing the needs of the people, then the citizens have all the right to rebel and overthrow the government. Locke who believes that people are inherently good shares the same sentiment with Machiavelli who, on the other hand, believes that people should be controlled because there are inclinations that they become selfish and greedy.…

    • 715 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Two people arguing about which one is superior. Usually you only hear about their differences but very few about their similarities. Due to the fact that majoritarian democracy is ruled by the major section of the public, the public must be more aware of the happens of the government. They must know how the decisions are made and what goes on behind the scenes more than anything else. Decisions making needs to be understood because of the fact that bad decisions can be made if the people do not have the right knowledge.…

    • 1617 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    One one hand, Hobbes discussed the necessity for a structure of government where an ultimate power would counteract the intrinsic selfishness of humans. Whereas, Montesquieu championed the idea of civic virtue arising from a society dedicated to liberty. Regardless of the specific nature of corruption, political corruption is a tiered concept because it does not end at the individual. Therefore, it is critical that the compounding effect of corruption should be curbed as as soon as possible. Wallis observed that “once independent, Americans worried continuously about their governments and how to design their political institutions to limit corruption” (Wallis 24).…

    • 1420 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    These uneducated people are the men who are stuck in the cave, but yet, they are governing. Plato believes one educated man, a philosopher, should be the one to rule a nation, not one million uneducated people (democracy). "A city in which those who are going to rule are least eager to rule is necessarily best and freest from faction, whereas a city with the opposite kind of rulers is governed in the opposite way" (Republic 520d). Plato is saying that people who are eager to rule are going to amplify their power and take their responsibilities to the extreme and possibly see themselves as a god, like Alexander the Great did. In the opposite way, somebody like a philosopher, who has knowledge and understanding, will simply do the job that needs to be done.…

    • 948 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The objective of this contract is that the people have the power, the government only the administration. I think it would be ideal to have a State that operates under that system but the reality is that this type of government is very difficult to subsist, as it is very easy to fall into vices because “the man is inherently selfish and seeks to have the power.” (Niccolo Machiavelli.) In addition to that the social contract is flawed if you can affect the freedom of the people, and consistent with his…

    • 560 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A successful and respected ruler must have many qualities to give themselves the control they need to govern a country. Both Plato and Machiavelli suggest a different way to rule, which they both believe work to benefit themselves and their country. Machiavelli believes in governing his way because he says a ruler should appear “merciful, truthful, humane, sincere, and religious” and feared by citizens. Plato believes a ruler should be knowledgeable in philosophy, and not necessarily want to rule because those who aren’t after the money or title will be the best rulers. Although some may believe that Plato’s gentler, and more knowledge-based approach may be better, Machiavelli suggests a better way to rule for today's society than Plato does because he believe that a ruler should be feared in order to maintain power and control over a society.…

    • 786 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The concept of authority can be debated in two main ways. For one, it can be used to discuss an individuals or group’s right to rule. The other is when someone is spoken of as an authority figure. In Plato’s ideally just city, philosophers would be in a place of authority, or at the least would have to engross themselves ‘sincerely and adequately’ in philosophy. Philosophers having this knowledge of all form regarding the political life and the life of the welfare of the people, they are able to rule the city state because they have the knowledge of the will of the good which is not of this world and the wisdom of the earthly life (Reeve, 2004: 14).…

    • 1772 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays