I agree with most everything you have said, but my interpretation of the souls mixture (quantity or quality) is that a "Gold natured" soul can be
traced back to an original gene pool and as I described earlier, the mixture preserves a bloodline. When the Republic started, some had more Gold
than others (quality on your view and I agree). Others had less quality of Gold and some had none at all. It is the mixture of parental "soul
quality", like Mendellian Genetics, that gives the possibility of "better" qualitied souls: true, the craftsmen can create guardians, but the
parents had to have had a mix of gold in their souls to produce such a child, then the child goes through testing. That Gold mixture was passed on
through generations beginning with the first generation Gold elements that were mixed in the beginning of the Republic throughout the populus, some
getting more than others. But yes, I like your label ine
bloodline, and I agree. That is the fun thing with Plato, is that his discourse,
which contains a large breadth of allegories and myths, can be interpreted quite "scientifically", and thus more literal, or one can take a less
scientific take. Look what that myth has brought up with us:
(1) Nature vs. Nurture
(2) Psychology (soul quality)
(3) Genetics (on a more scientific view)
(4) Political science
(5) Class structure, a Meso-scopic take
As for the mixing of soul preserve, here are some combinations: the results of offspring can easily be predicted by use of Punnett squares:
(n)= no gold
Some possible mixtures of soul preserve from the citizens: [SS, SS], [SS(n), SS], [SS, BB(n)], [SS, GG], [SS(n), GG], [BB(n), BB(n)], [GG, GG], [GG,
By using punnett squares, we can get the probability of offspring containing Gold in their souls.
I really have to read it again to get Plato's own words on the whole mating campaign, since it has been years and I am going off rather distant
memory: that is where you come in Masonic Light!
As for aristocracy, I must say again that in a modern context
, I agree with you and I do not think Plato meets the definition of an aristocrat.
True, we are only talking about a myth, but that myth covers a lot of ground meant to induce this kind of discourse: discerning specifics.
First, lying is actually reduced to the Noble FALSEHOOD. FALSE
. It has been decided that it is just to falsify certain things because it is
in the benefit of all who make up the Republic. Thus, it should not be taken as someone who is corruptable. To really understand this, the
Philsopher Kings, having ascended from the ranks, look at the citizens as children of the Divine, as very important elements and necessary ones of the
state. In this way, they are, well, the parents of these children. It is like when your parents tell that your dead dog went to another family
because it had a flea problem. The next day you guys get a new dog to fill the void. Well, with the Philosopher Kings, they have carefully thought
out what is best, in the longterm
for the Republic and justify lying here and there as a result.
To answer the question about the beginnings of the Republic, I can't think of an easy answer for you on that. Remember, it is, in the end, a myth.
Perhaps Plato and Company will be the "Shadow Government" of it, and oversee its inception
[edit on 31-1-2005 by freudling]