| Phi 220 Spring 2016 |
|
(Site navigation is not working.) |
The first selection (HK 38-45) continues the selection from the Republic that you read for last time, but the focus shifts to the effects of art on its audience. We will concentrate on two passages.
• Get a sense of the two “parts of the soul” Socrates distinguishes on HK 38-39 and the relation he claims to hold between them (and, of course, think whether or not you agree with him).
• After claiming an analogous relation between reason and the passions or emotions, Socrates completes his case against poetry on HK 41-43. Again evaluate his arguments. If his conclusion seems extreme, what sort of conclusion do you think his arguments would support? Also ask yourself how close painting and poetry are in this regard. Although Socrates treats them as analogous, the ban seems to be directed primarily against literature. That might be attributed to the different roles of painting and poetry in Greek society, but perhaps there is a deeper difference between the two.
The second selection (HK 49-52) addresses similar issues, but it is drawn from a late work, the Laws, that describes an ideal state with an apparently more practical intent than the Republic.
• You can regard the first of the passages HK 49-51 as another indication of the standpoint from which Plato considers the fine arts, but think about the idea of “charm” that is introduced here and think whether you would agree with the requirements for making evaluative judgments that are outlined at the end (HK 51).
• The second passage describes restrictions on drama more moderate than those proposed in the Republic but note (and think about) the description (on HK 52) of tragic poets as “rivals and antagonists” of statesmen.
Many issues are raised by this part of Plato’s discussion of art, but I’ll suggest we focus our class discussion on the following questions:
• Supposing that something like Plato’s distinction between reason on the one hand and the sense and emotions on the other is accepted, is it the senses and emotions that the fine arts engage?
• If so, do such arts tend to reduce the ability of reason to correct or control the senses and emotions? And, if they do, is that a bad thing?
• Does the analogy between the senses and emotions that Socrates proposes hold in this regard? That is, would you answer the above the questions in the same way for the case of the senses and the case of the emotions?