Near
the beginning of the piece, Socrates emphasizes the importance that each
individual of this state should be responsible for one and only one job. The point that Socrates makes is that each
individual has an area in which they can excel.
This natural inclination towards certain skill-sets should better qualify
people for specific jobs. The logic
follows that if one were to have natural talent in a particular area, that
person would be likely to take up an occupation in which their skills are
shared in order to benefit the society. Socrates,
to me, seems to overemphasize the need for each individual to do the occupation
to which they are best suited, and nothing more. I believe this to be a dire mistake. While I certainly understand the idea that
specialization is one thing that keeps a society cohesive and effective, I
think that each person should have a collection of skills as a precaution for
any kind of plague or sudden loss of one sector of the society. Although this may seem trivial, a society with
such strict specialization can collapse if only a small fraction of the population
were suddenly gone as the services provided by that sector of the population disappeared
with the people. I also take issue with
the idea of a person having natural talent being the career for them instead of
the person choosing what their career will be.
Perhaps it is the liberal arts education I currently receive, but I
think that what a person wants to do, has a much greater value than something in
that they are naturally gifted. If everyone were in the position that were most
naturally inclined to take but miserable doing the job, it seems to me that the
society would be doomed to fail. I think
a lot can be said for the power of a person to choose.
I
think that the stories Socrates wanted to edit before telling to the guardians
overlooks a critical part of storytelling.
I understand not wanting the names of the gods tarnished, however, I also
feel as though the purpose of telling a story is to learn something from the
mistakes of the characters within the narrative. If there are no mistakes and the characters are
presented as perfect, then I think we are already starting off these guardians
with an unrealistic view of the world with unattainable qualities – I suppose
one way of looking at a Utopia. The purpose of editing the stories supposedly
gives the guardians something to strive for, but in listening to these stories
of perfect beings that do no wrong; I feel the guardians would be ill-prepared
to handle the host of mistakes and imperfections that haunt us humans. I also believe that the guardians learning
about the gods as infallible beings is a way of establishing a body of leaders
who do not question people they might view as influential. This can cause issues when there comes an
issue of moral conflict when the guardians, having been taught to not question
authority figures, agree with the moral standpoint of the person they view as
having the most authority. I think
teaching the edited stories would not have the effect that Socrates desires or
expects.
When Socrates was emphasizing the importance of each individual only focusing on a specific job and how it is in people’s nature to be destined for a specific job, it reminded me of the book Divergent. The people are divided into four sectors based on their skills and each sector is only allowed to perform certain jobs that fit their specific characteristics. This is similar to how Socrates believes a city should be run. However, in the book Divergent, there are people called “divergent,” who do not fit into one category, and they are hunted down. In reality, I think that many people are “divergent,” and excel at more than one thing. Therefore, I do not think that it is fair for Socrates to place such rigid boundaries on what people can and cannot do.
ReplyDeleteI agree that it is probably harmful for Socrates to eliminate all traces of flaws from the gods and heroes in their stories and songs. To be flawless is an unrealistic expectations for the guardians, which will probably lead to a sense of disappointment. I also agree that as human beings we learn from our mistakes and from the mistakes of others. Unfortunately, the guardians would not be able to do that because the people they are looking up to do not make mistakes.
I also disagreed with the idea of having people specialize in one skill set at which they are already good, but I didn't even think of the reason you did. Extensive population loss, especially in a utopian society which is most likely small, would be devastating! War, disease, and famine are all very possible for a society such as this, which would really limit its capability to survive if certain skill sets were lost completely and no one else had any idea how to step up and take over. I'm glad you pointed this out because I was only focusing on the idea of needing well-rounded skills in order to be an independent, fulfilled person. If people are locked into jobs that they aren't passionate about, despite being naturally good at them, they are less likely to perform with quality, which would also weaken society.
ReplyDelete