Take a photo of a barcode or cover
atstory2024 's review for:
The Republic
by Plato
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Disclaimer: (Read the Barnes & Noble Classic Edition)
I finally finished this book after about a year and a half of putting it down and restarting it. Around April 2025, I made a commitment to actually finish it. I am proud to say I did.
That being said, I think it was okay.
The premise is that Plato, one of the founders of philosophy, is essentially engaging in a dialogue with one of his students, Aristotle (another classic and important philosopher), about what a perfect government should be. The text was never intended to be in book format, so it goes like 'Question....Anweser....Monologue". I think that was one of the reasons I had kept putting it down; I would have trouble understanding them without using the Internet and AI.
Plato explores questions about defining Justice as subjective, or whether people's occupation or caste should be static (e.g., a carpenter should be a carpenter, a soldier should be a soldier). Plato, in his hypoethical society, advocates for a top-down society and actually rejects democracy because it allows a perfect breeding ground for craven demagogues. As someone who lives in a Western "democratic" society, I have an urge to reject these notions.
Through this dialogue, they discuss the necessities for the state to function, including the need for censorship and the promotion of an educated society. The book also cautions about signs of "decaying state," such as mixing entertainment (circus) and politics.
From the modern world, I reject much of Plato's opinions; however, his insights reflect many aspects of the Western cultural and political landscape. His need to question xyz is evident, and I see how it relates to the modern culture of asking why all the time, and the inherent need for a reason.
Overall, the book was okay but informative. I really don't recommend reading this as your first book of philosophy unless you have a strong interest in Plato. I will definitely refer to it time to time.
I finally finished this book after about a year and a half of putting it down and restarting it. Around April 2025, I made a commitment to actually finish it. I am proud to say I did.
That being said, I think it was okay.
The premise is that Plato, one of the founders of philosophy, is essentially engaging in a dialogue with one of his students, Aristotle (another classic and important philosopher), about what a perfect government should be. The text was never intended to be in book format, so it goes like 'Question....Anweser....Monologue". I think that was one of the reasons I had kept putting it down; I would have trouble understanding them without using the Internet and AI.
Plato explores questions about defining Justice as subjective, or whether people's occupation or caste should be static (e.g., a carpenter should be a carpenter, a soldier should be a soldier). Plato, in his hypoethical society, advocates for a top-down society and actually rejects democracy because it allows a perfect breeding ground for craven demagogues. As someone who lives in a Western "democratic" society, I have an urge to reject these notions.
Through this dialogue, they discuss the necessities for the state to function, including the need for censorship and the promotion of an educated society. The book also cautions about signs of "decaying state," such as mixing entertainment (circus) and politics.
From the modern world, I reject much of Plato's opinions; however, his insights reflect many aspects of the Western cultural and political landscape. His need to question xyz is evident, and I see how it relates to the modern culture of asking why all the time, and the inherent need for a reason.
Overall, the book was okay but informative. I really don't recommend reading this as your first book of philosophy unless you have a strong interest in Plato. I will definitely refer to it time to time.