 |
GetTextbooks.com
Compare Prices & Save up to 90% |
|
|
|
| Login | Sign up | Settings | My Wish List |
 | | The Republic: The Complete and Unabridged Jowett Translation by Plato ISBN-10: 9780679733874 ISBN-10: 0-679-73387-6 ISBN-13: 9780679733874 ISBN-13: 978-0-679-73387-4 Paperback 1991-03-06 Vintage Find Lowest Price |
Editorials | ||
Product Description (Book Jacket Status: Jacketed) Toward the end of the astonishing period of Athenian creativity that furnished Western civilization with the greater part of its intellectual, artistic, and political wealth, Plato wrote The Republic, his discussion of the nature and meaning of justice and of the ideal state and its ruler. All subsequent European thinking about these subjects owes its character, directly or indirectly, to this most famous (and most accessible) of the Platonic dialogues. Although he describes a society that looks to some like the ideal human community and to others like a totalitarian nightmare, in the course of his description Plato raises enduringly relevant questions about politics, art, education, and the general conduct of life. Translated by A. D. Lindsay From the Hardcover edition. | ||
Reviews | ||
Plato's "The Republic" In Benjamin Jowett's easy to read and enjoyable translation of Plato's most famous dialogue you will find the philosopher Socrates delivering one of his most compelling yet revolutionary arguments. And even though we live in the modern era with its vast technological advancements this philosophical colloquy is still being, mulled over in most high schools and college classes around the world. So, how does antiquity such as this stand up to the ravages of time and compels us to re-examine who we are, where are we going, and what our political persuasions ought to be. Plato's student/protégé Aristotle said, "The man who is truly a statesman is thought to be chiefly occupied with virtue; he wants to make the citizens good and obedient to the law." He also stated, "We see that every state is a sort of partnership, and that every partnership is formed in order to attain some good. After all, it is universally true that people do act with a view to obtaining what they think [is] good for them. Clearly, then, all partnerships have some good as their objective, and the highest, most authentic good is the objective of the most authentic of all partnerships, the one that includes all others. This is the state; political partnership." And this syllogism is a Republican governments foundation, though not everyone will agree with this viewpoint. But you must realize that it's the most altruistic response insofar as avoiding totalitarianism. Nonetheless, in a true Republic the government and the citizens must work in unison to achieve success. This is the syllogistic argument Socrates didactically tries to demonstrate to the auditors involved in the dialogue. During the dialectical exchange, Socrates makes many valid points such as "the democratical man grows out of the oligarchial," also he interjects the axiom that democracies eventually become tyrannies because the definition of a democracy is "majority rule," which unequivocally means the minority will be disenfranchised in one form or the other. But alas not everyone is in agreement with Socrates' conclusions. One of the auditors is named Thrasymachus who happens to be the Sean Hannity of his day. Thrasymachus made the animadversion/claim "that justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger." He then demands Socrates to explain why this omnipotent notion doesn't hold apposite when it's clear throughout history that this indeed is the truism. So, with his flair for answering a question with a question, Socrates attempts to reason with this brazen individual and the rest of the auditors. The way I reasoned it, Thrasymachus' position on the matter was more iniquitously pragmatic. A Case in point: Thrasymachus states, ""the just is always the loser in comparison with the unjust. First of all, in private contracts: wherever the unjust is the partner of the just you will find that, when the partnership is dissolved, the unjust man has always more and the just less. Secondly, in their dealings with the State: when there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income; and when there is anything to be received the one gains nothing and the other much." This was one of the examples that Thrasymachus used to argue his point, which is in direct opposition to what Aristotle asserted years later. Moreover, it's plain to see that Niccolò Machiavelli used Thrasymachus' ideology as the foundation for his philosophical works such as the "Prince." Moreover, Socrates' fails to convince Thrasymachus of his (so-called) exiguous folly, but he now has to convince the rest of the auditors that his philosophical perspective is isentropically illogical. In the end of the dialogue Socrates weighs in the dichotomy of good and evil, that virtue is better than immorality; fore justice breeds harmony and that everyone shouldn't be in variance to this concept. I also found it interesting that Socrates was a feminist, which was an extremely radical concept for the 5th century BCE. Socrates believed that women should have the same amiable rights as men. This was a philosopher who was way ahead of his time and after reading this pedagogical diatribe against mankind's reactionary nature......well it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why Socrates was sentenced to die by drinking hemlock. After reading this I pondered that Socrates' syllogistic remonstration for a Republican paradigm was convincing, and perspicuous, but idealistically flawed because for his aspiration to become reality all political persuasions would have to be absolute, and unfortunately that raison d'être isn't realistic. This is a 5 star read that everyone should engage in because it will help you ascertain human nature, government, and universal ideologies. | ||
Plato's Republic Republic by Plato complete and unabridged Jowett Translation about the classic work on the ideal commonwealth which starts out as an inquiry into the meaning of justice and turns into an examination of the Just Man or Just State. This translation is the truist translation yet... it captures Plato for Plato as he writes as Socrates who questions to get answers. I found this writing to be part of individual life as each performs his appropriate function as "the world goes around," with time being eternity. This book and this particular translation seems to be the best as Jowett knows his Plato, very straight forward and easily understood as eternal reason. | ||