Socrates Poetry Analysis

Improved Essays
Socrates states that he is pleased because of the rule about poetry, which is the rejection of imitative poetry. He argues that he feels this way because the imitation that is poetry, damages the understanding of its readers and the only way to reverse that damage is to educate the readers of the true nature of poetical imitations. As a result of Glaucon questioning him, Socrates explains imitation using a bed as an example. He claims there is only one idea, or Form, of the bed and then the maker of the bed uses the idea to create a bed. Along with God, the maker of Forms, and the maker of the bed, there is another, known as an artist. The artist is able to create anything he desires but as appearances only. Furthermore, God, who is the maker …show more content…
Socrates then questions Ion whether he could do the same, in which he answers that he could not interpret inferior poets. This raises a debate between Socrates and Ion that one who knows the better poet would also know the inferior poets. Socrates claims that Ion is unable to interpret the inferior poetry because he has no knowledge of poetry as a whole. Instead, Ion can interpret Homer, not because of knowledge, but because of inspiration and possession. Ion has no knowledge of Homer and poetry because if one can point out flaws and excellences of one poet, they should also be able to point out the same for another, otherwise their argument is invalid. Moreover, poets are said to be interpreters of the gods, making Ion to be considered an interpreter of an interpreter. Socrates believes that these interpretations get farther from the truth of nature, which aligns with his argument supporting the banishment of imitative poetry.

I agree that Ion cannot make a judgment about one poet if he has no knowledge of other poets. If one does not have knowledge of a subject, the argument of superiority is not valid because every aspect of that subject is not known. Without a decent foundation of knowledge about poetry, is not able to make an objective judgment, which aligns with Socrates debate that Ion’s judgment is based on inspiration and possession rather than knowledge.
…show more content…
Plato has beliefs that do not separate aesthetics from ethics because his concerns with poetry are purely ethical. Nehamas believes this causes a significant philosophical embarrassment because it suggests Plato does not understand the real value of art and that there is much more than just the ethical part of the art. Furthermore, Plato makes his greatest objection against poetry because the kind of person that one would be ashamed to resemble because of unethical behavior is admired in poetry. Socrates states that instant gratification is the cause of this absurd line of thinking among

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    This proves to be an inconsistency since Meletus’ calls daimonic activities, “believing in no gods at all.” The third premise is controversial in that it does not use Meletus’ definition of daimonic activities, but the definition that is colloquially synonymous with daimons. What is unclear is if Meletus knew the correct definition of daimonic activities at the start of the argument. Regardless, Socrates’ third premise uses a definition of daimonic activities that is not given by Meletus and should have asked him if he was allowed to insert this…

    • 1311 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Socrates however argues that it is better to show the gods as just to promote justice in the cities, than it is to show them as they truly were understood to be. Griswold explains that the gods must be seen “as good and the cause of only good; as incapable of violence…for god ‘doesn’t himself change or deceive others by illusions’” (Griswold, section 2). Even though Socrates is arguing against poetry on the basis of its promotion on unjust behavior, Socrates is acting unjust to present the gods in the manner he believes to be effective. This manipulation is tyranny, which is ironically what Socrates argues…

    • 2031 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He does create a solid argument for why art is not beneficial in his writing of The Quarrel Between Philosophy and Poetry: From The Republic, Book X in which it isn’t necessary except for pleasure. In my opinion, Plato does not value the connection between society and humans with feelings and expression. Art is something that should be able to show creativity and openness to the world, but to Plato, this does not bring new knowledge so therefore it should be disregarded. Art is shown everywhere without people even realizing it, but if you look at the bigger picture art shows a deeper level of meaning and understanding that cannot be expressed in any other…

    • 1068 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the fragment about the education of the guardians of the second book of the Republic, Plato argues that the stories narrated by the poets lack any moral substance. The problem with these stories is that they do not transmit the truth, but shadows of the truth. This premise is based on Plato’s theory about the mimetic nature of the poetic art. For Plato, the art of poetry is the result of a process of mimesis which consists in imitating the appearances of ultimate reality, but not reality itself. According to this notion, the art of the poet is doubly removed from reality and the poet himself cannot access the true nature of things.…

    • 1041 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    These poets would necessarily extoll the charms of his eyes, his hands and feet, his lips, and his brow. ” (Shakespeare, William 12). However, according to Shakespeare, they would likely not succeed. This thought of Shakespeare does not surprise the reader since in “Sonnet 18,” Shakespeare claimed, no matter how beautiful the poetic language used is, it could not succeed in describing the beauty of his subject because the beauty of his subject is ineffable. Shakespeare does surprise the reader, though, with his claims of why a poem would not thoroughly describing his love’s beauty in “Sonnet 106,” as it contradicts his reasoning in “Sonnet 18.” He provides a different, unexpected reason for the incompetence of poets to describe the physical beauty of his subject.…

    • 1901 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Socrates pounces on this as well. His argument against this one is a little more complicated and I am not sure I have it right. I believe Socrates is saying that how does one know if something is holy just because it was approved of by the gods. Did the gods approve of it because it was holy or is them approving it what makes it holy? This question perplexes Euthyphro and in desperation he just says that Socrates is manipulating his arguments and making them not get anywhere.…

    • 1534 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    This justification is hard to believe for some readers considering that he argued against the existence of definite definitions of just and unjust and a professional in knowledge of all their features so profusely in “Euthyphro”. Additionally, by his demise, the world would be void of his philosophical contributions that he has convinced himself he should be remunerated for. Of itself, this outcome would be unjust. Socrates sustains this rationale, nevertheless. He gives “… that the really important thing is not to live but to live well”; also, “…to live well amounts to the same thing as to live honourably and justly” (Plato, 2003, p. 87).…

    • 1318 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    This would mean that the Athenian way of life is the life of virtue and therefore the life worth living; Socrates by questioning this way of life is going against what Meletus and his supporters perceive to be virtue. Socrates find this absurd and tells Meletus, “I do not believe you…and I do not think anyone else will” because how could one possibly believe that all Athenians except Socrates have the proper understanding of virtue. Socrates in stating this is asserting that if the jurymen believe in Meletus’ claim then they will be giving justice based on who they favor and not in accordance with the law. By doing this, they would be disobeying the laws of the state which Socrates says is impious in the Crito and therefore, would not be leading lives of virtue according to his perception of virtue. Following his…

    • 1839 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If Thrasymachus could define justice in a better way than Socrates then Socrates would owe him money. Socrates then tries to explain to Thrasymachus that he does not have any money so he cannot accept the challenge. Glaucon assures Socrates that he does have money and he will be behind him every step of the way. Socrates does not understand why Thrasymachus would want to challenge him, for he never stated that he had an answer for what justice mean. Thrasymachus accuses Socrates of being the kind of person that learns from others instead of giving his own opinion and trying to teach others.…

    • 1313 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The epic poem Beowulf has an unreliable narrator, for instance the whole poem is convenient for Beowulf, there is no evidence or proof to back up claims made in the poem and the poem contradicts itself. The poem is convenient for the main character Beowulf in which everything seems to work out for him. The narrator glorifies Beowulf in the story to seem like a God who knows everything and can fight any monster. But, in some instances the poem Beowulf can also contradict itself by using Pagan and Christian references in the same poem. Consequently, Beowulf has an unreliable narrator that is mistaken about the poem and is not internationally unreliable.…

    • 902 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays