Abolishing The Family In Socrates The Republic

In The Republic, Socrates discusses the idea of the traditional family and the benefits that it would have on the community to abolish it. Socrates argues that families are the source of injustice in communities and that communities can never reach full potential if families still exist. He believes that the state should generate personal and any kind of familial relations. However, the idea of abolishing the family could cripple the community and hinder vital personal and emotional connections that come with having one. Upholding traditional family values helps to create a more wholesome and productive environment where all people can prosper. Though families can stir up issues, such as loyalty and responsibility, they expose each other to …show more content…
It should not designate what or who makes a family but merely respect what people want to consider a family. It complicates the lives of the people by not allowing them to be themselves. When the state starts to determine that only certain people can be denoted as a family it hinders the loyalty to the state by the people and it makes people want to rebel and change the authority, only to suffice their needs to be with their loved ones. Though this may seem like a point to abolish the family, it just goes to show another way the family builds character and creates people that a community would like to have in its corner. Besides the concern with dominating what a family is considered, the state should have limited access into the affairs of the family. Warranted they should take some action in making sure that family members are not being inappropriate with one another, the state should not determine how a family is to conduct their personal live. The family is the personal and emotional aspects of a person’s life and the state is the public and apathetic accepts. There should really be no overlap unless the emotional and personal aspects are misaligned with the basic fundamentals of the community. The state should act as a third party in the life of the people and not as a father always watching over their