Unformatted Attachment Preview
The Dialogues as Dramatic Rehearsal: Plato's
Republic and the Moral Accounting Metaphor
ALBERT R. SPENCER
Portland State University
IN JOHN DEWEY & MORAL IMAGINATION, Steven Fesmire blames "Plato's
low estimation of imagination in tbe Republic and Ion" for tbe denigration
of imagination's role in moral deliberation (6i). He argues tbat Jobn Dewey's
dramatic rehearsal better integrates imagination into the process of moral
deliberation. His treatment of Plato represents a babit among pragmatists to
reduce Dewey's reading of Plato to tbe polemics present in major works, sucb
as The Quest for Certainty. In fact, Plato was Dewey's favorite philosopher, and
be claimed tbat "[n]otbing could be more belpful to present pbilosopbizing
tban a 'Back to Plaro' movement" (LW 5:154).' Following tbe scbolarsbip of
Jobn Herman Randall and Henry Wolz reveals Plato as a moral artist enga^ged
in a project of social reconstruction wbo wrote tbe dialogues as dramatic rebearsals of particular bistorical and cultural problems, specifically Atbenian
begemony and Sophistic education. From tbis perspective. Republic Book
I dramatizes tbe inadequacy of tbe moral accounting metaphor critiqued by
George Lakoff and Mark Jobnson and experiments witb metapbors sympatbetic to Fesmire's construal of moral imagination.
According to Fesmire, Dewey contends all inquiry requires imagination
and tbat moral deliberation demands attention to tbe aestbetic dimension of
imagination because of tbe affective nature of moral value. Tbis places Dewey
in company witb Adam Smitb and David Hume wbo accepted tbe role of
imagination and sentiment, and at odds witb Immanuel Kant and Plato wbo
suspected emotions and imagination as barriers to rational inquiry:
Imagination, on tbis view, is usually a trusty crafter of images but is
given to miscbief Tbus Kant's suspicion. Imagination as reflective free
play is essential to aesthetic judgment, for Kant, but in morals it is too
self-indulgent. It may sap moral strength, usurping Reason and yielding
THE PLURALIST
Volume 8, Number 2 Summet 2013 : pp. 26-35
©2013 by the Board of Trustees of che University of Illinois
SPENCER : Plato's Republic and the Moral Accounting Metaphor
27
victory to Feeling. If a person "surrenders authority over himself, his
imagination has free play," Kant claims. "He cannot discipline himself,
but his imagination carries him away by the laws of association; he yields
willingly to his senses, and, unable to curb them, he becomes their toy."
Doing one's duty, on Kant's view, requires little imagination; therefore
"its cultivation is at best a luxury, at worst a danger."
Despite eulogizing of imagination by Adam Smith and David Hume,
Enlightenment faculty psychology, following the lead of Plato's low
estimation of imagination in the Republic and Ion, is responsible for
imagination's being ignored even by those who urge that moral theories
must be psychologically plausible. As a limited capacity prone to frivolous fancy and opposed to reason, imagination has little relevance to
practical issues. So it can be dismissed altogether as a prescientific relic
or, transfigured by Romanticism, admired on a pedestal as a "godlike
power that enters into the world on the wings of intuition, free of the
taint of contingency and history." (Fesmire 61-62)
Instead, Fesmire prefers Dewey's concept of dramatic rehearsal because it
properly values imagination and better coheres with our experience of moral
deliberation. Rather than committing to a specific normative theory and always acting in accordance with it, Dewey argues that deliberation works best
when we actively use our imagination to rehearse and evaluate a variety of
responses and possible outcomes (70). Fesmire also references the four most
common modes of dramatic rehearsal that Dewey mentions in his 1900—1901
lectures on ethics, specifically dialogue, visualization of results, visualization of
their performance, and imagination of possible criticism (74). By consciously
recognizing the role of imagination in the process of deliberation and flexing
among the various phases and modes of rehearsal, Fesmire and Dewey believe
that we can reconstruct "frustrated habits" that perpetuate moral problems
and scenarios that seem intractable (78).
Fesmire suggests that the moral artist provides opportunities to practice
dramatic rehearsal through the creation of works of art that engage our imagination. He lists the characteristics of the successful moral artist as follows.
First, she must perceive "relations that otherwise go unnoticed." Second, she
must create works that "transform cultural perceptions" through "an ongoing experiment with novel possibilities." Third, she must coherently express
moral experience in a manner that presents "overall character rather than
blindly giving way to either custom or fleeting impulse," thus "such acts become role models." Fourth, she possesses "delicately refined skills [emphasis
added]" judged not by the "quantity of possibilities available to imagination.
28
THE PLURALIST 8 : 2 2OI3
but their fittedness to the situation for wise deliberation." Finally, the moral
artist communicates with an audience by anticipating their reception of a work
in a way that "enables a dialectical interaction that gives point and focus to
art" (115-18).
At flrst blush, tne dialogues and Plato meet the criteria of both Dewey's
four modes of dramatic rehearsal and Fesmire's characteristics of the moral
artist. The dialogues use conversation as a means of exploring moral problems,
and Plato uses dramatic irony to highlight the consequences of specific moral
opinions as represented by the fate of recognizable interlocutors. His ability
to create works of art that continue to challenge cultural perceptions should
qualify Plato as a moral artist. Fesmire does highlight two points of continuity between Plato and Dewey. He suggests that the Statesman reveals Plato's
awareness that rigid moral laws cannot keep up with the pace of constant
social change. This awareness parallels Dewey's arguments in Human Nature
and Conduct that moral habits, like laws, emerge from human interaction
with our social environment and must adapt to changing social conditions
(17). Fesmire also concedes that Dewey and Plato agree on the intrinsic value
of justice, but distinguishes Dewey as conceiving "right action as cooperative
social interaction and inclusive of growth, not in terms of a harmonious soul
in which reason rules appetites" (99).
By contrast, the majority of Fesmire references to Plato are usually critical.
He acknowledges that Plato was the first to address the "moral power of art"
to "directly and literally contribute to the moral imagination and character,"
but he criticizes Plato's understanding of this relationship as "psychologically
simplistic" and as the source of Socrates's infamous arguments supporting
censorship in Books II and III of the Republic.^ Furthermore, Plato fails to
use art as a metaphor for moral experience. Fesmire cites George Lakoff and
Mark Johnson's criticism of the "dominant moral accounting metaphor, in
which moral interactions are understood as business transactions" and he
agrees with their claim that Dewey provides a "wealth of alternative metaphors," specifically "organic growth, evolutionary adaptation, scientific experimentation, technological innovation, and art (no)."'
Lakoff and Johnson correctly condemn Western philosophy's overdependence on the moral accounting metaphor. Furthermore, Fesmire provides a
much needed alternative to contemporary ethics by re-introducing Dewey's
concept of dramatic rehearsal, but must Plato be a foil to contemporary
pragmatism or can we imagine a different relationship with the first author
of philosophy? Fesmire correctly diagnoses the denigration of imagination
as originating with Platonism, but this denigration originates from a literal
SPENCER : Plato's Republic and the Moral Accounting Metaphor
29
analysis of the arguments presented by Socrates in the dialogues. It stems
from an inability to imagine Plato as an artist, rather than a theorist, and
Dewey struggled to overcome this lack of imagination throughout his entire
career.
One of the first essays to examine Dewey's complex reading of Plato is
John P. Anton's "John Dewey and Ancient Philosophies." Anton focuses on
three aspects of Dewey's relation to Greek philosophy: the "polemic," the
"historico-contextual," and the "cumulative aspect" (477).'' According to Anton, the "sustained historical analyses he presented in his Questfor Certainty
and Reconstruction in Philosophy are so dominated by a central philosophical
and ethical concern of his social pragmatism as to mislead the reader into
concluding that this is all he had to offer by way of understanding and appreciating the classical heritage." Because Dewey's most explicit commentary
on Greek philosophy attempts to overcome barriers to philosophical inquiry,
specifically the misapplication of ancient theories to contemporary problems, one is tempted to reduce Dewey's criticism only to its polemic aspect.
Anton argues that a more accurate treatment of Dewey's approach accepts
his admonishment of dualism and leisure class theory, without ignoring his
"avowed sympathy with Plato" as a fellow social reformer (477-79).
On one hand, Dewey was impressed by the degree of social awareness
expressed in the dialogues and Plato's commitment to and aptitude for social
reform. On the other hand, Dewey was cautious and skeptical of "the static
features he read into Plato's ideals," what one might refer to as the Plato of
Platonism. Anton points out other areas of kinship between Dewey and
Plato, specifically seeing "art as imitation," seeing "intelligence as a method
rather than a collection of finished outcomes," and seeing "philosophy in a
wider meaning of a critique of institutions and a fundamental way of hfe."
Thus, while key differences exist, specifically "on issues of metaphysics, ethics, logic, or aesthetics," the two philosophers are united by their desire for
social reform and similar temperament (487—91).
Ultimately, Anton's assessment of Dewey's approach to Greek philosophy
is unsympathetic. He claims that while Dewey had the potential to offer a
fruitful pragmatic analysis of ancient thought, his obsession with contemporary problems prevented him from developing an accurate picture of classical
philosophy. Essentially, the polemic aspect of Dewey's approach hinders his
attempts to produce a valid historico-cultural account of ancient thought and
obscures the continuity between Plato and Dewey (Anton 498—99). Frederick M. Anderson offers a more charitable assessment when he suggests that
Dewey uses polemics so that ancient philosophy might disclose itself in its
3O
THE PLURALIST 8 : 2 2OI3
original richness free of received, modern interpretations. He argues that Dewey sees the problems of Greek philosophy as emerging from specific historicoctiltural influences and that modern philosophers misinterpreted as necessary
and intractable. Dewey believed the topics discussed by the ancients are not
perennial; they are reflections of specific human concerns embodied within
the fabric of Athenian intellectual culture (Anderson 87-88). In summation,
both Anton and Anderson agree that Dewey sees the authentic Plato as an
expression of the cultural need for reform.
A more useful middle view can be distilled from Anton's and Anderson's
commentaries. The polemics against the Greeks in Dewey's major works
border on the hyperbolic because he wanted to dislodge interpretations of
Plato that overemphasized metaphysical dualisms and leisure class values as
necessary to present inquiry. Using Dewey's own words, a convenient label
for this interpretation would be Plato as the "original university professor,"
however, he preferred the "dramatic, restless, cooperatively inquiring Plato of
the Dialogues, trying one mode of attack after another to see what it might
yield . . . the Plato whose highest flights of metaphysics always terminated
with a social and practical turn" (LW 5:155). Thus, the dramatic Plato uses the
drama of the dialogues to experiment with different lines of inquiry in relation to specific practical problems, whereas Professor Plato invents abstract
theories relevant to perennial, yet imagined philosophical problems.
Sadly, Dewey never fully articulated his interpretation of the dramatic
Plato. He wrote only two essays that provided extended commentaries on
the dialogues. "The Ethics of Democracy" (1888) rebuts Sir Henry Maine's
Platoesque critique of democracy as a "numerical aggregate" and "The Socratic Dialogues of Plato" (1925) presents an interesting, but quirky treatment of the Socratic problem. Both essays demonstrate Dewey's affinity
for Plato, but neither presents a developed hermeneutical approach to the
dialogues for which Dewey longs. He delivers his final word on the matter in
"Experience, Knowledge, and Value: A Rejoinder" (1939) when he states in
response to John Herman Randall's "Dewey's Interpretation of the History
of Philosophy" that "I believe the factors of the existing cultural situation
. . . are such that philosophical theories which in effect, . . . are products
of pre-scientific and pre-technological, dominantly leisure class conditions,
are now as obstructive as they are unnecessary" (LW 14:11) Given the phase
of his career, Dewey probably decided to focus on more pressing concerns
rather than fully articulate his affinity for Plato, and instead delivered a
final warning against the spectator theory of knowledge, but Dewey does
not directly dispute Randall's claim that the history of philosophy can be
SPENCER : Plato's Republic and the Moral Accounting Metaphor
31
used instrumentally "as an arsenal, or as a warning" (Randall, Philosophy
offohn Dewey 79).
In Plato: Dramatist of the Life of Reason, Randall develops tbe tbree cbaracteristics of tbe dramatic Plato (drama, experiment, and practice) tbat Dewey
outlines. Randall contends tbat Plato is not a bistorical pbilosopber, but "a
poet and a dramatist," wbicb be explains as follows: "Plato is a pbilosopber
because be is a poet. True pbilosopby is poetry—poetic insigbt and vision,
tbe imaginative enbancement of life." In tbe dialogues, Plato dramatically
depicts tbe "qualities of man's tbinking, tbe play and conflict of bis ideas, tbe
spectacle of bis mind" as embodied in tbe "discourse of men" or "tbe drama
of tbe Life of Reason." Tbe dialogues do not defend or analyze pbilosopbical
tbeories. Tbey convert individuals to tbe pbilosopbical life (Randall, Plato:
Dramatist-^-4).
Tbe dialogues are not meant to be an accurate bistorical snapsbot of
ancient Greece, but a presentation of "Greece in Plato's own perspective,
Greece as be understood it, bow Greece and Greek culture looked to bim"
(Randall, Plato: Dramatist •^6-46). Randall prefers to speak in terms of "Tbe
Greek Heritage of Plato," tbat is, tbe patterns of tbougbts and values tbat be
inberited from Greek culture, early Greek pbilosopbers, tbe Sophists, Socrates,
and Plato's audience. Randall believes tbat Plato's use of drama captures tbis
combination of curiosity and bumanism to recruit nom as a means of orienting buman nature toward tbe Good Life. Drama allows Plato to express
bow tbese tbemes sbape tbe life of reason. Tbus, "tbe dialogues emerge, not
as programs of action, but as dramatic portrayals of tbe life of tbe mind—of
tbe follies, contradictions, entbusiasms, and greatness of buman tbinking,
as bebeld by a detacbed and ironic intelligence—by nous. Dramatic Reason"
(Randall, Plato: Dramatist 54). Plato bopes to impart tbe value of tbe pbilosopbical life and to inspire bis audience to participate in it so tbat tbey migbt
improve tbemselves in tbe bope of finding fulfillment. Tbe dialogues are not
presentations of pbilosopbical tbeories; tbey are invitations to engage in tbe
betterment of bumanity tbrougb inquiry and conversation.
Randall continues by explaining bow Plato uses drama to respond to tbe
social and cultural cballenges of tbe Periclean Age (Randall, Plato: Dramatist 58-65). During tbe century preceding Plato's career, Atbens experienced
optimism in tbe form of imperial expansion and begemony. Tbis expansion
enabled social mobility, and tbe Sophists met tbe aristocracy's desire to maintain power and the need of tbe new rieb to access greater political privileges
by teacbing arete or success. Wbile some of tbe original Sopbists advocated
"bigb ideals" like "professional standards" or tbe improvement of "social con-
32
THE PLURALIST 8 : 2 2OI3
dirions," they quickly became "commercialized" and began to teach methods
of gaining political advantage. Randall argues that Plato and Socrates saw the
cynicism underneath this veneer of careerism and start teaching and writing as
a response to the Sophists (Randall, Plato: Dramatist 81-84). Randall contrasts
them with Socrates. He suggests that Socrates's actual teachings were broader
than a set of dogmas and that his purpose for engaging in philosophy was
not to know the Good in a systematic way.^ Socrates teaches his students how
to philosophize; he does not teach a philosophy. He postulates the Forms and
the Good for the purpose of revealing to his students the bias and prejudices
that prevent them from thinking better about the practical challenges they
face. Students gain excellence, areté, not through skillful rhetoric or seeking
personal advantage, but through a love of wisdom and the practice of critical
reflection—through imitating the life that Socrates leads, loving wisdom for
its own sake—rather than teaching it for profit.
Plato uses the character of Socrates dramatically to demonstrate how
his readers can benefit from philosophical reflection and to initiate critical
reflection within the reader. Henry Wolz elaborates on Randall's conception
of the dialogues as philosophical drama. Wolz sees two phases at work in the
dialogues: the destructive phase in which the interlocutor becomes aware
of his ignorance, w.iich then initiates the constructive phase of inquiry that
gives birth to new insights. In both phases, Socrates avoids presenting his
own views because doing so would undermine his students' attempts at philosophy. Thus, the goal of the Socratic Method is to empower the student
to engage in philosophy, and by dramatizing philosophical inquiry, Plato's
dialogues empower his readers to engage in philosophy. Wolz cites Crito as an
example of how the dialogues stimulate reflection rather than indoctrination.
It presents the philosophical conflict between "radical freedom and unconditional submission" that "reside in the same mind [Socrates]" (Wolz 238—48).''
Good citizenship requires the ability to negotiate these two demands and by
depicting their conflict within the character of Socrates; rather than in separate characters, the reader witnesses a single character dramatically rehearse
the problem. By extension, the drama of the situation inspires the reader to
think critically about the place of citizenship between radical freedom and
submission. Thus, dialogues allow Plato to dramatize moral deliberation
within a practical context. He teaches readers how to perceive their situations
and imagine multiple solutions in response to a particular problem. Socrates
might recommend a specific solution, but Plato depicts a variety of strategies
and allows the reader to evaluate all of them critically. He does not present
them dogmatically
SPENCER : Plato's Republic and the Moral Accounting Metaphor
33
In fact. Republic Book I dramatically critiques the dominance of the
moral accounting metaphor. Plato sets the dialogue at the height of Athens's
imperial hegemony in the city of Piraeus, the base of the commercial and
military navy. The subsequent conversation occurs at the home of Cephalus, a foreigner from Syracuse who became one of the wealthiest members
of Athenian society through the manufacture of shields. Plato frames this
discussion of justice with a setting symbolic of a society dominated by the
moral accounting metaphor. Furthermore, Athens will soon overextend itself in the 2nd Peloponnesian War and be conquered by Sparta. As an artist,
Plato chooses the temporal and spatial setting of the dialogue to reflect the
failure of this metaphor to provide moral guidance for individuals and the
city-state. The opening conversation between Cephalus and Socrates directly
calls the moral accounting metaphor into question. The aged Cephalus has
spent the day sponsoring sacrifices, which Adeimantus will later describe as
an economic transaction with the gods for the purpose of atonement (Plato
364c). Ever the gadfly, Socrates asks Cephalus three probing questions: What
is it like to be old? How did you become so wealthy? and What is the greatest
benefit of wealth? (328e-33od). Cephalus takes Socrates's philosophical bait
when he answers that wealth removes some of the temptation to "cheat or
deceive someone against our will" and allows us to die without the fear of
owing a "sacrifice to a god or money to a person" (331b).
This reference to sacrifice as a means of easing one's conscience before
death foreshadows and alludes to the final words of Socrates in the Phaedo
and a subtle contrast emerges between Cephalus and Socrates as potential
role-models for different life paths. Cephalus models the metaphor of moral
accounting whereas Socrates models the metaphor of the love of wisdom.
Glaucon reinforces this contrast when he contrasts between the perfecdy unjust
man, Gyges, who uses a ring of invisibility to privately commit injustice while
publicly maintaining a reputation for justice, and the perfecdy just man who
lives ethically, but is publicly reviled (Plato 36oc-36id). Cephalus could be a
candidate for the perfecdy unjust man who commits injustice to achieve his
ends but dies without moral debts through a life of shrewd moral transaction,
and Socrates's execution for impiety by the state certainly qualifies him as a
candidate for the perfecdy just man. When we consider Cephalus and Socrates
at the end of their lives, Socrates dies content and peaceful, confident in a life
well lived, whereas Cephalus has achieved everything he wanted, but approaches
death desperately trying to ease a guilty conscience.^ This segue into the dialogue is thick with references to the moral accounting metaphor and links
them to the discussion of justice and ethics. Socrates critiques the metaphor
34
THE PLURALIST 8 : 2 2OI3
directly when he refutes the claim that justice is "to give to each what is owed
to him," a definition presented by Cephalus but quickly bequeathed to his
heir Polemarchus (33idc). By implying this contrast without direct comment,
Plato undermines the moral accounting metaphor, and the remainder of the
dialogue is an exploration of other possible metaphors for moral deliberation.
The key metaphor of the Republic is the city-soul analogy, that is, that
a link exists between public justice and personal morality (Plato 369a). Ultimately, Socrates supports this connection through an appeal to the metaphysical unity of the forms, but a more Deweyan interpretation would see
Socrates as insisting that the "individual and society are organic to each other"
(EW 1:237). Clearly, Dewey believes that the metaphors of democracy are
superior to the metaphors of aristocracy, but Dewey always admired Plato's
dialogues as works of moral imagination. He claimed that "if they had no
value for philosophical reasons," and the harshest interpretation of Dewey's
polemics might reach that conclusion, "the Republic would be immortal as
the summary of all that was best and most permanent in Greek life, of its
ways of thinking and feeling, and of its ideals" (EW 1:240). Dewey designed
his polemics against Plato to demolish specific entrenched interpretations
that buried the novelty of Plato's reconstruction of his historical context.
Now those polemics should be set aside, lest they become barriers to future
inquiry. By appropriating Plato as a moral artist, rather than a theorist, and
reading the dialogues as dramatic rehearsals of moral problems, rather than
philosophical arguments, we can connect with the Plato that inspired Dewey
and use the dialogues to broaden our own imaginations.
NOTES
I. It should be noted that the publication of Dewey's lost manuscript. Unmodern and
Modem Philosophy, occurred during the editing of this article. In this work, Dewey fleshes
out his mature assessment of Greek philosophy, and it confirms that Dewey's reading of
the Greeks, particularly Plato, is rich and nuanced. According to its editor, Phillip Deen,
the manuscript would have been written between 1941-1943, which is immediately after
Dewey's response to John Herman Randall's "Dewey's Interpretation of the History of
Philosophy" in 1939. Thus, the manuscript stands as Dewey's final words on the subject.
However, incorporating the manuscript into the debate between John Anton and Frederick Anderson or comparing the genealogy of Greek philosophy that Dewey presents
to either Randall's genealogy of Plato's dialogues in Plato: Dramatist ofthe Life ofReason
or Henry Wolz's reading ofthe dialogues as philosophical drama merit separate articles.
With regard to the present inquiry, the manuscript supports this article's thesis that Dewey
scholarship has underappreciated Dewey's affinity for the Platonic dialogues, and their
influence on his work should be reassessed.
SPENCER : Plato's Republic and the Moral Accounting Metaphor
35
2. See also Plato, Republic 378cd, 380c, 401a, and 4Oide.
3. See also LakofFand Johnson 141.
4. See also Betz.
5. See also Wallach.
6. Wolz also notes the Greek convention of using drama as moral education, for example, Sophocles's Antigone, and contends that Plato's dialogues are another example of
this convention.
7. Consider Socrates's final words in the Phaedo: "Crito, we owe a cock to Asclepius;
make this offering to him and do not forget" (Plato ii8a) in comparison to Cephalus's
statement "that when someone thinks his end is near, he becomes frightened and concerned about things he didn't fear before" (33od). Socrates greets death peacefully and
asks his students to offer a single and meager final sacrifice to the god of healing, whereas
Cephalus hints that he has troubled dreams and quickly exits the dialogue to continue
the sacrifices he has already been performing throughout the day. Given these last words
and behaviors, it appears that Socrates goes to his grave with a clearer conscience than
Cephalus. Also, Phaedo and Republic are conventionally considered to be ftom the same
phase of Plato's career and address similar philosophical themes. See Ruprecht.
REFERENCES
Anderson, Frederick M. "Dewey's Experiment with Greek Philosophy." Intemational
Philosophical Quarterly 7.1 (1967): 86-100.
Anton, John P. "John Dewey and Ancient Philosophies." Philosophy andPhenomenological Research 25.4 (1965): 477-99.
Betz, Joseph. "Dewey and Socrates." Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 16.4
(1980): 329-56.
Dewey, John. The Collected Works of John Dewey: The Electronic Edition. Ed. Larry A.
Hickman. Charlottesville, VA: Intelex Corporation, 1996. [cited in text as Early Works
(EW), Middle Works (MW), or Later Works (LW), followed by volume:page number]
Fesmire, Steven./oī Dewey & Moral Imagination: Pragmatism in Ethics. Bloomington:
Indiana UP, 2003.
LakofF, George, and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: U oFGhicago P, 1980.
Plato. Plato: Complete Works. Ed. John Cooper. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997. [cited in
text using Stephanus pagination by number and section]
Randall, John Herman. "Dewey's Interpretation of the History of Philosophy." The
Philosophy of John Dewey. Ed Paul Arthur Schlipp. New York: Tudor, 1951. jj—ioz.
. Plato: Dramatist of the Life of Reason. New York: Columbia UP, 1970.
Ruprecht, Louis A., Jr. Symposia: Plato, the Erotic, and Moral Value. Albany: State U of
New York P, 1999.
Wallach, John R. The Platonic Political Art: A Study of Critical Reason and Democracy.
University Park: Penn State UP, 2001.
Wolz, Henry G. "Philosophy as Drama: An Approach to the Dialogues of Plato." International Philosophical Quarterly 3.2 (1963): 236-70.
Copyright of Pluralist is the property of University of Illinois Press and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
Robert Prus
University of Waterloo, Canada
Representing, Defending, and Questioning
Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs in
Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
Abstract Plato may be best known as a philosopher, but his depictions of people’s involvements in religion are important for social scientists not only because of the transcultural and transhistori-
A
lthough Plato (420-348 BCE) is widely ac-
as well as Islamic theology.3 Still, of much greater
knowledged as a philosopher and frequently
consequence for our immediate purposes are (a)
is referenced as an idealist as well as a theologian,
the linkages that Plato develops between religion
Plato’s texts are only marginally known to sociol-
and social order (as in notions of justice, morality,
ogists and most others in the social sciences. As
virtue, and government), (b) people’s interrelated
part of the task of reconnecting Greek and contemporary scholarship in a broader study of the development of Western social thought,1 the present
paper focuses on Plato’s contributions to the study
cal resources that they offer those in the sociology of religion, but also because of their more
of human knowing and acting by using religion as
general pragmatist contributions to the study of human group life.
a more sustained point of reference.2
Thus, although Plato (a) exempts religion from a more thorough going dialectic analysis of
the sort to which he subjects many other realms of human knowing and acting (e.g., truth,
Whereas the more distinctively theological materi-
justice, courage, rhetoric), (b) explicitly articulates and encourages theological viewpoints in
als that Plato introduces in Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic,
some of his texts, and (c) sometimes writes as though things can be known only as ideal types
or pure forms in an afterlife existence, Plato also (d) engages a number of consequential pragmatist (also pluralist, secular) aspects of people’s experiences with religion.
In developing his materials on religion, Plato rejects the (popular) notions of the Olympian
thagoras (580-500 BCE), our interests are much more
directly related to Plato’s considerations of divinity
to be mindful of Plato’s notions of divinity when considering the more distinctively socio-
as a community experienced phenomenon than his
logical matters he addresses (as in the problematics of promoting and maintaining religious
notions of religion per se.
religion, morality, and deviance).
Still, each of the four texts introduced here assume significantly different emphases and those
interested in the study of human group life should be prepared to adjust accordingly as they
examine these statements. All four texts are consequential for a broader “sociology of religion,” but Timaeus and Phaedo are notably more theological in emphases whereas Republic and
Laws provide more extended insight into religion as a humanly engaged realm of endeavor.
The paper concludes with an abbreviated comparison of Plato’s notions of religion with Chicago-style symbolic interactionist (Mead 1934; Blumer 1969; Prus 1996; 1997; 1999; Prus and
Grills 2003) approaches to the study of religion. Addressing some related matters, an epilogue
briefly draws attention to some of the affinities of Emile Durkheim’s The Elementary Forms of
the Religious Life with Plato’s analysis of religion.
Herbert Mead; Morality; Deviance; Republic; Laws; Timaeus; Phaedo
is a sociologist at the University of
losophy and its sociological offshoot, symbolic inter-
Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. A symbolic in-
actionism, with Classical Greek, Roman, and interim
teractionist, ethnographer, and social theorist, Robert
European scholarship.
Prus has been examining the conceptual and meth-
email address:
odological connections of American pragmatist phi©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
Many of the conceptions of religion that Plato introduces are strikingly parallel with notions of
divinity developed within Judaic and Christian,
This paper represents part of a larger pragmatist study of human knowing and acting from the classical Greek era (700-300
BCE) to the present time. The larger project traverses a wide array of scholarly endeavors including poetics, rhetoric, theology, history, education, politics, and philosophy (see Prus 2003a;
2004; 2006; 2007a; 2007b; 2007c; 2008a; 2008b; 2008c; 2009a;
2009b; 2010; 2011a; 2011b; 2011c; 2011d; 2011e; 2012; Puddephatt
and Prus 2007; Prus and Burk 2010; Prus and Camara 2010).
1
While this paper focuses on Plato’s analysis of religion, Plato’s
contributions to the study of human knowing and acting are
much more extensive than suggested herein. Thus, readers
are referred to interactionist considerations of Plato’s works as
these pertain to causality, agency, and reality (Puddephatt and
Prus 2007), poetics (i.e., fiction; Prus 2009a), love and friendship (Prus and Camara 2010), education and scholarship (Prus
2011a), morality, deviance, and regulation (Prus 2011c).
This is not to deny Plato’s structuralist, idealist, and moralist emphases, but to acknowledge his much overlooked contributions to
pragmatist scholarship. Plato’s considerations of the human condition are less consistently pluralist, secular, and pragmatist than
those of his pupil Aristotle (384-322 BCE), but Plato’s work remains
foundational to pragmatist thought in a great many respects.
2
Keywords Plato; Religion; Pragmatism; Sociology; Symbolic Interactionism; Emile Durkheim; George
6
gious viewpoints of Socrates (469-399 BCE) and Py-
gods described by Homer and Hesiod as mythical as well as sacrilegious. Still, it is instructive
viewpoints on both collective and individual levels and discussions of the interlinkages of
Robert Prus
and Laws have been developed mindfully of the reli-
prus@uwaterloo.ca
prus007@gmail.com
involvements in religion, deviance and control, education and scholarship, and poetics and entertainment, and (c) Plato’s more pervasive philosophic
(and sociological) conceptions of human knowing
and acting (including people’s multiple and shifting perspectives on religion).
Thus, while acknowledging the more specific religious beliefs that Plato introduces in these texts,4
Because Plato’s works predate Christian and Islamic theology,
as well as much of the recorded Judaic text, one can make the
case that all three of these theologies were influenced by Greek
thought in the broader eastern Mediterranean arena.
3
As a more general caveat, it should be recognized that while
Plato often appears to adhere to the theological position he assigns to Socrates and his kindred speakers in Timaeus, Phaedo,
and Republic and to the Athenian speaker in Laws, Plato’s texts
are characterized by a broader set of tensions.
Thus, in addition to some of the (a) idealist, (b) skepticist, (c)
poetical, and (d) pragmatist viewpoints that Plato introduces
in his considerations of religion in these texts, Plato’s (Socratic)
notions of religion are presented in the midst of concerns with
(e) establishing a functional political order, (f) placing philosophers in governing positions in these states, and (g) intensifying human quests for justice, virtue, and wisdom on both
community and more individual levels.
Plato clearly rejects the images of the gods developed by the
Greek poets Homer and Hesiod, but his speakers generally
profess clear notions of divinity. Likewise, Plato’s speakers appear adamant about the pragmatist value of religion as a mechanism for generating social order.
Still, in his dialogues more generally, Plato (via Socrates) often
questions human abilities to know anything. Although this
latter position presumably would include (and would invalidate) Socratic, as well as any other claims regarding a divine
essence(s), Plato clearly does not subject religion to the same
sort of dialectic analysis with which he addresses other features of, or claims about, community life.
It is mindful of these contradictions that Nietzsche (Zuckert
1996) argues that Plato primarily uses religion as a means of
seeking personal prominence in the political arena (i.e., as
a cloak of authority in the “lust for power”). We do not know if
Nietzsche (who more openly craves for power) is correct in his
claims about Plato, but there are many points at which Plato
seems much more concerned about the pragmatic/integrative
features of religion for the community than promoting any
particular set of beliefs.
It also may be the case that Plato had mixed views on religion. Thus, whereas Plato (a) may have followed Socrates in
4
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
7
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
Timaeus 6
the emphasis is on issues such as: (a) the ways that
style of presentation and about the importance of fol-
Plato appears concerned about articulating viable
people deal with the unknown; (b) when and how
lowing the flows of his texts in more patient ways.
conceptions of divinity in all four of these texts and
people invoke, formulate, promote, question, defend,
Thus, whereas Plato’s student Aristotle (384-322 BCE)
has developed various aspects of his philosophy
and reject notions of divinity; (c) how people incor-
writes in a particularly direct and exceptionally com-
around this objective. Nevertheless, to his “socio-
porate religion into their life-worlds ‒ as in routines,
pacted analytic style, Plato develops his analyses in
logical” credit, Plato also recognizes the problemat-
identities, relationships, emotionalities, and the like;
conversational formats. Nevertheless, Plato’s texts are
ic, socially engaged nature of community life within
and (d) how people manage notions of religion, mo-
still remarkably systematic and offer extraordinary
which people’s notions of divinity take shape.
find much in Timaeus that is consistent with Stoic
rality, and deviance on a day to day basis.
conceptual depth.
Timaeus and Phaedo
Christian, and Islamic theology also are apt to find
For those less familiar with Plato’s works, it may be
In developing this paper, I have tried to stay close to
observed that his texts are presented as dialogues in
the specific conversational flows that Plato develops
Although not intended as a set, Timaeus and Phaedo
sequential aspects of these religions.
which his speakers (of whom Socrates [469-399 BCE]
in each of these texts, referencing his materials in
provide instructive introductions to Plato’s notions
often assumes the central role) engage wide ranges
“chapter and verse.” This way, readers might bet-
of religion. Further, prior to the Renaissance (1400-
of topics pertinent to one or another aspect of hu-
ter appreciate the overall ordering of his dialogues,
1600 CE), Timaeus provided the primary source of
man existence. In dealing with their subject matters,
as well as more readily locate particular sections of
contact for Western scholars with Plato’s texts (see
Plato’s speakers typically introduce and consider
these texts for further examination.
Plato: The Collected Works 1997:1224-1225). Even now,
conceptually diverse sets of standpoints on the matters at hand.
As well, although much of the analysis may seem
delayed in the present paper, it is important to es-
many who read Timaeus are apt not to have read Republic and often focus instead on the creation story
and the related notions of divinity addressed within
tablish Plato’s position in some detail before devel-
ers typically leave questions unresolved in the end.
oping an analytic commentary. This way, by treat-
Nevertheless, Plato’s speakers are concerned about
ing Plato’s texts as ethnohistorical documents, read-
Nevertheless, Timaeus contains a mixture of theologi-
defining their terms of reference and generally pur-
ers will be better able to participate in, assess, and
cal and philosophical materials. Relatedly, while the
sue topics in highly reflective terms. As well, be-
possibly extend the analysis. Relatedly, because of
theological matters are clearly more speculatively in
cause his speakers often engage their subject matters
the claims I make in this paper, it is Plato’s analysis
quality and some other “claims of fact” are clearly
in extended, discerning, and comparative analytic
of human group life rather than my commentary
unsubstantiated, some of the philosophic concepts
manners, those who are patient and thoughtful can
that is central here.
introduced in Timaeus are notably sophisticated and
dressed by attending the subtopics that the speakers
To put Plato’s “sociology of religion” in context, it is
consider along the way.
instructive to examine the theological position Plato
Before we engage these texts more directly, it also
a humanly engaged process. After addressing some
may be instructive to caution readers about Plato’s
of the more central features of Plato’s theology as
matters of theology, it is possible that he also (b) was skeptical of theology as a scholar/dialectician, and yet (c) as a social
theorist recognized that religion was a consequential feature
of community life and (d) as a community planner and moralist valued the integrative features of any religion. While more
overtly writing as a theologian, Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)
also appears to have struggled with somewhat parallel matters as both a highly astute dialectician and a most exceptional
student of Aristotle’s texts.
8
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
represents prior to his broader analysis of religion as
Timaeus.
are apt to have contributed to a distinctively pluralist, dialectic or inquisitive emphasis on the nature
of existence and the matters of human knowing and
acting on the part of theologians as well as secular
scholars over the centuries.
expressed in Timaeus and Phaedo, this statement fo-
As will become apparent later, the emphasis in Pha-
cuses on Plato’s depictions of people’s involvements
edo is notably different than that of Timaeus. Still, in
in religious matters in Republic and Laws.5
addition to providing some insight into the charac-
Given the references that Plato makes to Republic within Timaeus, Timaeus appears to have been written after Republic, but
Republic and Laws more fully address religion as a humanly
engaged process.
5
ences to several of Plato’s philosophic notions, it
also represents Plato’s most focused theological
statement. Those familiar with Stoic theology will
religion.7 However, readers familiar with Judaic,
many congruities between Plato’s Timaeus and con-
To the frustration of many readers, Plato’s speak-
glean much insight into the overarching issues ad-
Whereas Timaeus [TS] contains important refer-
ter of Socrates that Plato establishes for his readers,
Phaedo deals with another popular Western religious
theme ‒ the immortality of the soul.
The present statement is based on the translation of Timaeus
developed by Benjamin Jowett (1937).
6
Stoicism (from Zeno of Citium [334-262 BCE]) ‒ no preserved
text remains; emerged as a philosophic position in Athens
(circa 300 BCE), but later achieved considerable popularity in
Rome. Cicero (106-43 BCE) provides a particularly lucid review of Stoic philosophy in On the Nature of the Gods. Although
placing particular emphases on sense-based knowledge and
logic, the Stoics also argue that the universe is governed by
a natural, divinely inspired source (god/gods).
Albeit an extension of Pythagorean and Socratic thought, Stoic philosophy also assumes some consequential divergences.
Perhaps most notably the current history, circumstances, and
experiences of human life are seen as but a temporary phase
in an endless set of repetitions or reoccurring cycles of development and (re)birth of the universe as the gods recreate and
regulate the processes of nature throughout eternity.
Because they envision humans to be immensely indebted to
the gods both for their creations of all things and their unending dedication to all of nature, the Stoics encourage people to
accept things as the gods would intend. Thus, the Stoic emphasis is on pursuing an honorable or virtuous life-style in
which the gods are revered. From a Stoic viewpoint, as well,
community order is fostered through people’s subservience
to the divine ordering of nature.
The Stoics not only argue for the existence of god(s) that regulate all of nature, but also presume that human experiences
are divinely fated or predestined. Relatedly, it is posited that
by reading signs provided by the gods, people may foresee
and adjust to future developments. Still, while human outcomes are predetermined in more general terms, people are
thought to have some freedom of choice and are explicitly
encouraged (through instruction, dedication, and careful,
logical reasoning) to pursue virtuous avenues of action that
would put them in closer alignment with their natural godly
intended destinies.
Whereas the Stoics, like Aristotle, insist on the importance
of sensory perceptions (distinctions) for knowing and appear
attentive to a more logical (vs. emotional) rhetoric, the Stoics’
emphases on divine life-worlds and fatalism take them some
distance from Aristotle’s secular scholarship. For a notably
extended analysis of Stoic and Epicurean conceptions of divinity and related notions of human knowing, acting, and
destiny, see Cicero’s On the Nature of the Gods (also see Prus
2011e).
7
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
9
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
Although Socrates, Critias, and Hermocrates also are
in Republic. Thus, Socrates (TS:20) says that he would
ions have yet more to offer. Thus, after calling on
see the mortal bodies of people and the lower ani-
involved in the dialogue, Timaeus emerges as the
like to provide an account of the origins of his city-
the gods for assistance and understanding, Timaeus
mal species. Thus, whereas God would provide the
principle speaker. The dialogue opens with Socrates
state, one that would give the citizens a sense of
(TS:27) develops a creation story intended not just
souls for all beings, his lesser gods were given the
(TS:17-19) providing a very brief review of Republic.
pride in its struggles and accomplishments.
for the city, but also for the entire universe and all
responsibility of preparing mortal bodies in which
inhabitants of the earth.
these divine souls would reside.
Despite the many references to religion that Socrates
While contending that he is unable to devise a wor-
makes in Plato’s Republic, his references to Republic in
thy statement on his own, Socrates also dismisses the
Acknowledging that a world (i.e., universe) that is
In addition to being the most religious of all earthly
Timaeus focus almost entirely on the nature and well
poets and the sophists as adequate authors for this
amenable to the senses, Timaeus (TS:27-29) says that
beings, people also were to possess capacities for
being of the (secular) state. Somewhat ironically, as
project. Describing the poets as imitators, he sees
an eternal creator, without beginning or end, was the
sensation and emotional experience (as in pain and
well, Socrates (in Timaeus) largely disregards Repub-
the challenge as beyond their abilities. Defining the
cause or initiator of the world. Thus, God created the
pleasure, fear and anger). Recognizing that people
lic’s emphasis on justice, virtue, and philosophy.
sophists as travelers who lack roots, loyalties, and
universe as a likeness to himself by giving the uni-
knowledge of local matters, Socrates also considers
verse a soul or spiritual intelligence that comprehends
them inappropriate for this task. It is in this spirit that
all components and features of its organic (animal-
Socrates seeks assistance from Timaeus, Critias, and
like) whole (TS:30-33). Observing that the universe
Hermocrates, each of whom is held in high repute in
also has a material or corporeal existence, Timaeus
matters of philosophy and statesmanship.
says that all matter consists of fire, earth, water and air.
Critias (TS:20-27) engages Socrates’ objective by re-
While shaping the universe in the form of a globe or
telling a story told to him by his grandfather. His
sphere (TS:33-37), the creator had first created the in-
grandfather had heard it from Solon who, in turn,
visible soul that would reside at the center. After stat-
had learned about the glories of a much earlier Ath-
ing that notions of existence and being are problem-
ens from an Egyptian priest. Noting that Greece had
atic in more comprehensive terms, Timaeus (TS:38)
been subject to numerous deluges or natural disasters
contends that time came into being at the instant of
over the millennia, the priest informed Solon that the
creation and, likewise, would be dissolved if ever the
Egyptians have records showing that Athens was
products of creation cease to exist. For now, however,
once home to the greatest of all nation states. Eventu-
time represents a moving image of existence.
Following a quick reference to the division of labor
(as in farmers, trades people, soldiers and guardians)
necessary for a viable state, Socrates focuses on those
who would serve as guardians or administrators of
the state he envisions. The guardians are to be highly
dedicated, well educated, wise, and noble.
As well, the guardians are to live in modest lifestyles in a setting in which all goods are communally owned. Their female companions are to participate in the activities of the male guardians, including warfare. To avoid more specific ties of kinship
and to encourage the guardians to envision themselves as one family, the wives and children of the
guardians are to be shared in common. Then, discussing the state somewhat more generally, Socrates
also discusses the desirability of selective breeding
ally, however, it was overcome by earthquakes and
floods as, likewise, was the island of Atlantis.
Following a commentary on the solar system, Ti-
would struggle with their sensations and emotions,
God intended to reward those who lived honorable earthly lives with a blessed existence. Those
who did not would (in subsequent lives) pass into
continually lowered states of animal life until they
overcame their earthly failings.
Having developed things thusly, God then turned
matters over to the younger gods that God had created. God left them to deal with human bodies and
souls as best they could (TS:42).
After noting that the sensations that people encounter can affect their bodies in intense manners, Timaeus (TS:43-44) also observes that people are born
without intelligence. Nevertheless, with nurturing
and education, people can develop more extended
intellectual capacities.8
maeus (TS:39-40) identifies four sets of living entities
Later, Timaeus (TS:49-52) considers some of the
in the community. Relatedly, he stresses the impor-
Affirming that he has been accurate in his render-
that God created: the gods of heaven; the creatures
tance of insuring that children of the best citizens
ing of the account of the lost ancient city of Athens,
problematic features of human knowing. Recogniz-
of the air; the species of the water; and the animals
are well educated while still being mindful of the
Critias also observes that the features of Socrates’
ing that the (basic) elements of fire, earth, air, and
value of moving those who show potential to higher
(humans included) that live on land.
Republic correspond with those of the perfect Greek
water are continually changing, he says that it is
levels and assigning those with lower qualities to
state described by the Egyptian priest. Notably,
Noting that their own knowledge of the gods is lim-
too, the same goddess Athene was the founder and
ited, Timaeus (TS:40) says that they can only rely on
guide of both city-states.
what has come to them through tradition.
as his starting point, Socrates observes the state still
Socrates very much appreciates the connections
Still, Timaeus (TS:41) continues. He states that God
needs something more than what he has provided
with the past provided by Critias, but his compan-
had instructed the (lesser) gods he created to over-
live among the inferior classes.
With this highly abbreviated overview of Republic
10
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
inappropriate to say that things “are” or have certain qualities or to make other statements that imply
permanence. Viewed thusly, there are three states
of nature: that which is in the process of changReaders may appreciate some early pragmatist/constructionist emphases in Timaeus’ (TS:43-63) comments on the nature of
human knowing and acting.
8
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
11
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
ing; that in which change takes place; and the other
heavy; and rough-smooth), before considering the
but the creation of the mortal he committed to
While noting that people may be encouraged to
things that the (particular) things in the process of
emotions and the matters of pain and pleasure more
his offspring. And they, imitating him, received
avoid vices through education and study, Timaeus
changing resemble.
specifically. Then, positing that pain is the product
from him the immortal principle of the soul; and
quickly puts these matters aside. Instead, he will
Continuing, Timaeus (TS:51) asks if things properly
(a) have any inherent qualities or whether (b) things
of disturbances to one’s system and that pleasure
is dependent on a restoration of one’s natural state,
Timaeus (TS:64-68) considers the ways in which hu-
around this they proceeded to fashion a mortal
body, and made it to be the vehicle of the soul,
and constructed within the body a soul [psyche
– RP] of another nature which was mortal, sub-
exist only to the extent that people, in some way,
man sensitivities to taste, odor, sound, and sight are
perceive these things through their sense organs?
ject to terrible and irresistible affections, first of
connected with people’s (sensory enabled) experi-
all, pleasure, the greatest incitement to evil; then,
Relatedly, he asks (c) if things have existence only
ences with pain and pleasure.
pain, which deters from good; also rashness and
Then, stating that God alone has the capacity to cre-
appeased, and hope easily led astray; these they
through the names they are given?
Pursuing these matters, Timaeus argues for a dis-
ate and combine all things of his creation, Timaeus
tinction between the things that people might know
(TS:68-69) briefly summarizes his position as he
through sensate experience and things that may be
moves toward the conclusion of his story. Timaeus
understood only through reason. Then, focusing
states that God not only created the universe and
on reason more exclusively, Timaeus argues for the
gave order to what otherwise would be chaos, but
existence of true ideas that transcend human sensa-
also generated a soul for the universe that allowed
tions. Further, Timaeus contends, it is these invari-
for the intelligent, organic capacity of the universe
ant truths (the contemplation of which rests with
to comprehend and adjust to all of the entities with-
intelligence) that provide testimony to a being that
in. Further, while providing people with immortal
pre-exists creation. Timaeus (TS:52) subsequently
souls, God had given his closest offspring, the newer
posits that it was necessary to create space before
gods, the task of preparing and tending to the mor-
the matters that occupy space could be brought into
tal bodies in which people’s souls would be hosted.
existence. Process, likewise, needed to exist before
It was here, too, that people would be subject to the
the heavens could be formed.
human weaknesses (and temptations) associated
After providing an account of the ways in which the
elements of fire, earth, water, and air were configured into the universe, Timaeus (TS:57) observes that
things cannot move without a mover or a source of
motion. Relatedly, there can be no movement without something to be moved. Next, Timaeus (TS:58-
fear, two foolish counsellors, anger hard to be
tions both of these sets of people not to neglect the
rienced by those who neglect their souls by disregarding the quest for knowledge.
Amidst a somewhat extended consideration (TS:7086) of the ways that people’s bodies are (physiologically) prepared for life and disease, Timaeus also
makes a brief argument for prophecy as implied in
the art of divination.9 Timaeus (TS:77) subsequently
notes that trees, plants, and lower animal forms also
were provided for man’s existence.
Following a discussion of human diseases (TS:7885), Timaeus (TS:86-87) engages the topic of vice
Timaeus (TS:89-92) then delineates three aspects of
the soul [psyche] to which people should attend: the
divine, the mortal, and the intellectual. While acknowledging the divinely-enabled nature of one’s
existence and the importance of caring for one’s
mortal being, Timaeus particularly stresses the
intellectual component. It is here, in questing for
knowledge and true wisdom, he says, that people
will achieve the greatest affinities with divinity.
in more direct terms. He says that people who en-
In concluding, Timaeus (TS:90-92) says that the souls
counter great pain or pleasure lose their capacities
of men who have not lived virtuous lives will as-
to reason adequately. Timaeus insists that no one is
sume lower forms of existence in subsequent lives.
[a]s I said at first, when all things were in disor-
voluntarily bad, but that people do bad things be-
In this way, Timaeus accounts for the initial devel-
der God created in each thing in relation to itself,
cause of these and other afflictions that foster anger,
with pain, pleasure, and other emotions amidst human capacities for love:
and in all things in relation to each other, all the
measures and harmonies which they could possibly receive. For in those days nothing had any
depression, cowardice, stupidity, disregard, and the
like. In addition, Timaeus remarks that people who
tings also are prone to vice.
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
engrossed in disputation and strife, Timaeus cau-
man. (Plato [Timaeus:69]; Jowett trans.)
the things which now have names deserve to be
12
on studies and teaching while others are deeply
he observes, the greatest of diseases will be expe-
water, earth, and air), as well as a variety of forms
touch-related sensations (hot-cold; hard-soft; light-
Noting that some souls are intensively focused
love according to necessary laws, and so framed
have poor educations or live in badly governed set-
capacities for sensate experience. He focuses on
and the body in which it is hosted.
care (e.g., exercise) of their mortal bodies. However,
proportion except by accident; nor did any of
Timaeus (TS:61-63) subsequently discusses human
appropriate balance between one’s immortal soul
mingled with irrational sense and with all-daring
61) considers the motion of the four elements (fire,
that these material essences may assume.
concentrate on the importance of maintaining an
named at all – as, for example, fire, water, and the
rest of the elements. All these the creator first set
in order, and out of them he constructed the universe, which was a single animal comprehending
in itself all other animals, mortal and immortal.
Now of the divine, he himself was the creator,
opment of women and human sexuality, the birds,
other animals, reptiles, and fishes. This having been
said, Timaeus acknowledges God as the creator of
all. [Thus concludes the dialogue.]
Phaedo10
9
While accepting the viability of divination as a message from
the gods, Timaeus (TS:71-72) argues that people are most likely
to receive these messages when they are asleep or in demented
states (as in mental anguish or spiritual possession). However,
because people in these latter states are considered unfit to judge
their own experiences, these (messages) are to be interpreted by
others who are more accomplished in the art of divination.
Well known as an account of Socrates’ last days of
his death sentence, Phaedo represents another of PlaIn developing this material I have built extensively on Benjamin Jowett’s (1937) translation of Plato’s Phaedo.
10
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
13
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
to’s more notable theological statements. While em-
ful. In response, Socrates says that people are the
death provides the true philosopher that which he
been lost or neglected overtime. Rather than just
phasizing the immortality of the soul (as a spiritual
possessions of the gods and have no right to destroy
most desires – to be alone with the soul.
remembering things, the claim is that people some-
essence) and its capacity to know things (in both
the things that the gods own. Instead, people are to
human and divinely-enabled terms), this text also
wait until God summons them. Relatedly, Socrates
deals with the matters of people facing death, resist-
states that his time has come.
are not lovers of wisdom, but lovers of the body.
Most likely, as well, they also are lovers of money
Instead of assuming that people are born knowing
of philosophy, virtue, and divinity.
When Cebes and Simmias suggest that Socrates may
and power, if not both. Further, Socrates adds, most
these things at birth, the more viable argument is
be too eager for his own death and perhaps ought
people who claim to be temperate merely control
that people knew these things from a previous life;
Still, in contrast to Timaeus, which has a more distinc-
to fear death more, Socrates (Phaedo:63) says that he
their pleasures in most areas only because they are
though a pre-existent soul that inhabits the present
tive theological emphasis (via the creation story that
might be more fearful if he did not believe he was in
conquered by specific other pleasures of the body.
body. Since these ideas existed before people were
Timaeus recounts), Phaedo places greater emphasis
the care of the gods. Thus, in the afterlife, Socrates
True virtue, Socrates proclaims, is inseparable from
born, Socrates concludes, the souls also existed be-
on philosophy as an idealized (cultic) pursuit. Thus,
fully expects to join the earlier departed who had
true wisdom.
fore birth; conversely, if not the ideas, then not the
whereas one finds strong affirmations of a divinity-
been wise and good in the sensate world.
ing tendencies toward suicide, and the interlinkages
enabled immortal soul in Phaedo, the immortal soul
is sustained by a virtuous philosophic life that is
mindful of the existence of absolute standards rather than through a devout religious life per se.
Those who fear death, Socrates (Phaedo:68) insists,
times recall things of a higher order than they have
ever experienced in their (present) sensate lives.
souls. But, Socrates affirms, since notions of absolute
While listening to Socrates, Cebes (Phaedo:70) sug-
beauty, perfect goodness, and the like, exist, so must
Elaborating on his position, Socrates (Phaedo:64)
gests that people may still be fearful that their
souls exist.
states that the real philosopher should be in good
souls might dissipate with death and, effectively,
spirits when he faces death. While noting that most
cease to exist.
Encountering some skepticism from Simmias who
is not yet convinced that the soul will endure after
people would not understand, Socrates says that
Saying that he will locate his discussion within the
death, Socrates (Phaedo:77-82) asks what is most like-
realm of probabilities, Socrates (Phaedo:70-72) ref-
ly to break up at the time of death – the simple and
Recognizing that the senses are untrustworthy,
erences an ancient doctrine that claims that when
unchanging soul or the complex and changeable hu-
true philosophers (Phaedo:65) are continually at-
people die their souls are reborn from the dead.
man body? Likewise, he asks, what is more vulner-
tempting to separate their souls from their bodies,
Thus, Socrates posits, the living come from the souls
able to dissolution, the invisible soul or the visible
to distance their spiritual essences from the sensu-
of those who had earlier died and the souls have an
body? Socrates also reminds Simmias that when the
al failings of their bodies. Thus, Socrates references
existence apart from the body. Socrates follows this
body and soul are united, it is the soul that directs
In developing his account, Phaedo (Phaedo:58-59)
absolute justice, absolute beauty, and absolute good
with a commentary on the existence of opposites
the body. By this function, as well, Socrates argues
first comments on the noble, gracious manner in
as elements that are inaccessible to the senses and
and concludes that living essences are generated
the soul is closer to the divine and therefore more
which Socrates dealt with the entire affair. Phaedo
that can exist in pure forms only in the clarity of
from those that had earlier died.
likely to be immortal. Then, insisting that there is
also identifies those who had been with Socrates
the mind.
This dialogue opens with Echecrates asking Phaedo
if he had been present when Socrates drank the poison that resulted in his death. Echecrates has heard
about Socrates’ trial (see Socrates’ Defense or Apology)
and expresses his disbelief and dismay that Socrates
had been condemned to death.
true philosophers are always engaging death.
a true, invisible, noble afterlife, Socrates claims that
After Cebes (Phaedo:72) observes that the notion of
Then, citing things such as the quest for food,
the invisible souls of good people will depart to the
souls being born again into other bodies is consistent
encounters with diseases, and loves, lusts, fears,
invisible world at death.
with Socrates’ doctrine of recollection, Simmias asks
Inspired by a dream, Socrates had been composing
fascinations, and foolishness of all sorts, Socrates
Socrates to refresh his own memory on this theory.
musical verses while on his own. However, after the
(Phaedo:66) says that the body is the source of end-
others have arrived, he directs their conversation to
less difficulty. Indeed, the soul cannot achieve pure
In elucidating his position on recollection (also see
earth where they are compelled to undergo pun-
the journey he is about to make (Phaedo:61).
knowledge while embedded within the body. Thus,
Meno [in Plato; Jowett trans.]), Socrates (Phaedo:73-
ishment for their past misdeeds. Further, after ap-
Socrates (Phaedo:67) states, it is only after death; on
77) says that people may recall things that they have
propriate punishment, and because of their earlier
While conversing with Socrates (Phaedo:61-62), Cebes
the separation of the soul from its earthly host, that
never perceived in that manner. He describes recol-
human failings, these souls would later occupy the
and Simmias ask why suicide is considered unlaw-
one’s soul may be purified. Viewed in this manner,
lection as a process of recovering notions that had
bodies of lower, less worthy animal species.
during his last few days and hours. Plato, presumably ill at the time, was absent.
14
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
However, Socrates insists, the souls of evil people
would be dragged down to (an invisible world on)
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
15
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
Developing his position further, Socrates (Phaedo:82)
the body. Socrates assures his listeners that virtuous
lesser. Now, however, Socrates questions whether
Then, following a consideration of the existence of
says that while more virtuous people will be much
souls will not become lost.
one can understand the concept of causality or even
opposites and the impressions they generate, So-
whether things exist at all.
crates (Phaedo:105-106) says that it is the soul that
happier in the afterlife, it is only those souls that
both have studied philosophy and are virtuously
pure that may be allowed to partake in the company
of the gods:
[Socrates:] No one who has not studied philosophy and
who is not entirely pure at the time of his departure is
allowed to enter the company of the gods, but the lover of knowledge only. And this is the reason, Simmias
and Cebes, why the true votaries of philosophy ab-
Suspecting that Simmias and Cebes still have doubts,
Relatedly, Socrates earlier had hoped that Anaxago-
their concerns. Cebes returns to the question of the
would never become the opposite of what it is (i.e.,
ras (500-428 BCE), who said that the mind was the
soul surviving the death of the body. Cebes observes
die). Defining the immortal as the imperishable, So-
source and agent of all things, would provide some
that while one person might outwear many coats,
crates says that the soul is both immortal and im-
answers. However, on reading his texts, Socrates
some coats are apt to survive the owner. He asks
perishable. Thus, while the mortal body will perish,
found that Anaxagoras (a materialist, atomist phi-
the soul will survive.
whether something of this sort may not occur with
the soul. Given the many bodies that the soul occu-
stain from all fleshly lusts, and hold out against them
pies over time, may the soul not weaken or wear out
and refuse to give themselves up to them, not because
– so at some point, the soul might expire with its cur-
they fear poverty or the ruin of their families, like the
rent body. Past survivals of the soul, Cebes contends,
lovers of money and the world in general; nor like the
lovers of power and honour, because they dread the
dishonour or disgrace of evil deeds. [Instead – RP]…
when philosophy offers them purification and release
from evil, they feel that they ought not to resist her
do not guarantee subsequent survivals.
In developing his reply, Socrates (Phaedo:89-90) first
cautions people about being either hardened skep-
influence, and whither she leads they turn and follow.
tics about people or haters of ideas. Still, Socrates
(Plato [Phaedo:82]; Jowett trans.)
(Phaedo:91) says, at this point he is not a philosopher
After insisting that it is only through philosophy
that people may gain a vision of true existence and
escape the bars of their prison,11 Socrates (Phaedo:8384) comments on the particular dangers that sensations of pain and pleasure represent for the soul. Be-
gives the body life and that the (life-giving) soul
Socrates (Phaedo:84-88) encourages them to express
so much as a partisan. Nevertheless, unlike most partisans, Socrates says that his objective is not to convince others of his viewpoint as much as it is to convince himself and, in the interim, to provide something for others to consider in more impartial terms.
losopher who preceded Democritus [460-357 BCE]
and Epicurus [341-270 BCE]) very much disregarded
the mind and instead concentrated on air, water,
and other oddities.
Assuming that the soul moves to another world after the death of the body and has an immortal quality, Socrates (Phaedo:107-108) stresses the importance
of people taking appropriate care of their souls dur-
Seemingly after some other unproductive philo-
ing their presence on earth. Socrates also states that
sophic ventures, Socrates (Phaedo:100) says that he
when souls enter the afterlife they will be judged
assumed a new methodology. He would pick the
and be sanctioned according to the virtues and im-
strongest principle he could find and judge the val-
purities of their earthly lives.
ue of other things mindfully of the correspondence
of these other things with that principle.
In explaining his method, Socrates (Phaedo:100)
says that he holds the position that there is absolute beauty, goodness, and greatness. These being
the absolutely most viable standards, all things exist
only in reference to these comparison points. Hence,
Their consideration of the afterlife is diverted somewhat by a discussion of the earth. [Amongst other
things, Socrates (Phaedo:108-111) not only describes
the earth as spherical in shape, but also at the center
of the universe.]
Returning more directly to the plight of the soul,
cause people’s experiences with pain and pleasure
In the discussion following, Socrates (Phaedo:92-
can be so intense, these sensations have a uniquely
-95) reminds the others that the soul exists prior
compelling presence; one that so completely bonds
to the body and that the soul, especially the wise
the soul to the body that the soul loses virtually all
soul, directs the body. Socrates then reviews Cebes’
sense of its divine origins. Under these conditions,
concerns about the soul not outlasting the body in
comparisons between two or more (sensate) things
there is little hope of these souls grasping aspects of
which it is presently situated.
(as other people might do), Socrates contends, that
after becoming thusly purged of their sins, these
these absolute standards provide one with exacting
souls, likewise, will be rewarded for the good
or perfect reference points.
things they have done.
true knowing. It is for this reason, Socrates explains,
that philosophers must so scrupulously guard
themselves against the more intense sensations of
Those familiar with Plato’s other works may be reminded
of Plato’s “allegory of the cave” (Republic, VII). Readers will
also find material in Phaedo (especially pp. 82-84) that may
have inspired Boethius’ (480-524 CE) The Consolation of Philosophy.
11
16
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
After noting that Cebes has raised a set of issues
pertaining to the processes of generation and decay,
Socrates (Phaedo:96-99) informs the others that as
a young philosopher he also was eager to learn the
causes of things. At this time, too, Socrates felt highly
confident in the comparative notions of greater and
it is only by reference to absolute beauty or greatness that something else may be considered beautiful or great, for instance. Instead of invoking relative
12
Readers may see the foundations of Socrates’ ideal forms or
types in his methodology. Clearly, Aristotle (Categories), who
says that nothing has any quality except in reference to that
which it is compared, does not accept Socrates’ methodology.
Likewise, while Plato seems sympathetic to Socrates’ conception of absolute (especially divinely inspired) truth, Plato also
introduces direct challenges to this viewpoint in Parmenides.
12
Socrates (Phaedo:113-114) distinguishes three ways
in which people’s souls may be treated in the afterlife, depending on their earthly lives. Those who
have lived more moderate lives can expect to undergo punishment for their evil deeds. However,
Those judged to have committed particularly heinous offenses are hurled into Tartarus wherein they
are subject to unrelenting punishment. After an extended period of punishment, those souls that are
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
17
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
deemed salvageable may be given an opportunity
the speakers consider mythical, but they are explic-
Thus, since Plato envisions human involvements in
religion as a highly important mechanism for foster-
to appeal to their victims for leniency. Should their
itly attentive to the importance of developing shared
theology as embedded (being developed, experi-
ing the moral order of the community, as well as pro-
victims not wish to forgive them, these souls would
reference points as sources of meaning and motiva-
enced, instructed, resisted, and changing over time)
viding direction for individual character and moral
be returned to Tartarus. For the souls that are con-
tion for citizens in the state.
within the broader parameters of community life,
well-being, Plato’s speakers are also attentive to the
his notions of religion are developed amidst discus-
relativist, problematic, enacted, and contested nature
sions of education, poetics, wrongdoing and pun-
of religion. They are also mindful of the importance
ishment, and marketplace activity, as well as within
of policies, practices, and even entertainment motifs
more encompassing considerations of justice and
for sustaining religious viewpoints, along with the
the affairs of state.
social and personal implications thereof.
sidered incurable, there is no other destiny than
perpetual punishment in Tartarus.
In Phaedo, Plato gives much attention to the “immortality of the soul,” but still shows how people may
Those who have lived virtuous lives are allowed to
struggle with ambiguity, knowledge and wisdom,
live pure, content lives in the afterlife. Still, Socrates
and doubt, and virtue and religion in the face of
affirms, those virtuous souls who also know philos-
one’s own death and those of one’s associates. These
ophy will fare even better in the afterlife.
sorts of things may seem obvious, but humanly en-
It also is important to note that the emphases of
Interestingly, as well, although Plato is often dis-
gaged matters along these lines have largely been
Plato’s Republic and (later) Laws are somewhat dif-
missed as an idealist, his analysis of religion, virtue,
overlooked in “the sociology of religion.”
ferent. Republic addresses the development of a state
evil, and regulation exhibits a noteworthy pragma-
in which justice and social order are maintained
tist attentiveness to human knowing and acting as
through the activities of a more elite set of guard-
a collectively, community-achieved, adjustive pro-
ians (philosopher-kings) who would manage the
cess. Thus, in addition to acknowledging the mul-
affairs of state in virtuous (as in knowledgeable,
tiple viewpoints that people may adopt with respect
courageous, wise, temperate, and just) manners. By
to the situations in which they find themselves, Pla-
contrast, Plato’s Laws focuses on the matter of devel-
to’s speakers are also mindful of people’s activities,
oping a centralized constitution and an explicit le-
identities, emotionality, reflectivity, and persuasive
gal code that not only would define the essential pa-
interchange (and resistance).
After cautioning his listeners that the afterlife that he
has described is only a reasonable approximation of
what actually exists, Socrates (Phaedo:114) says that
there is good reason to be optimistic about the future
of his soul. Indeed, he contends, those who have severed themselves from the sensations and trappings
of the body and who have lived virtuous life-styles
are ready to face death when their time comes.
13
Republic and Laws ‒ Questing for
Community
In contrast to the more limited scope of Timaeus and
Phaedo, Plato’s Republic and Laws are intended as encompassing guidelines or models for community
life. Plato still introduces a set of theological view-
Then, returning to the more immediate matter of his
points in developing his models of community life.
own death, Socrates (Phaedo:115) reminds his com-
However, because he is attentive to so many features
panions that the earthly body that he leaves behind
of community life as elements “in the making” in
is not the true Socrates. Thus, they should not be
these two texts, Plato provides some early and ex-
Notably, too, whereas Republic deals with scholar-
troubled by the state or disposition of his earthly re-
ceptionally valuable pragmatist considerations of
ship and philosophy in more sustained terms, Laws
mains. The dialogue ends with Phaedo (Phaedo:116-
the ways in which people engage a wide array of
is more attentive to the task of preserving and main-
matters pertaining to divinity.
taining the community at large. Still, in both texts,
118) describing the sense of loss experienced by those
in the setting and, somewhat concurrently, the calm,
peaceful manner with which Socrates faced death.
Timaeus and Phaedo in Context
In developing Timaeus and Phaedo Plato humanizes
his considerations of religion in consequential respects. Thus, while dealing with abstract matters in
certain regards, Plato is attentive to the ways that
people enter into the process as agents. Thus, for instance, Timaeus may revolve around an account that
18
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
Although we will be focusing on religion as an arena of community life separately in these two texts,
Plato is clearly aware of the interconnectedness of
religion and other realms of people’s involvements.
As well, although each religious community develops somewhat unique sets of beliefs and practices, it is instructive to
ask about the affinities (continuities and divergencies) one encounters in the viewpoints expressed by Plato’s speakers in Timaeus and Phaedo and more contemporary variants of Judaic,
Christian, and Islamic religions. By revisiting Plato’s texts, we
may better understand similarities and differences not only between these three major religious traditions, but also between
some of the variants one finds within.
13
rameters of conduct for all citizens, but would also
include provisions for “regulating the regulators.”
one finds a sustained emphasis on justice at a community level and virtue as a highly desirable individual quality. While justice and virtue are defined
as closely interconnected, justice is seen as fundamental to overarching notions of divine and human
Republic14
[Adeimantus:] Once more, Socrates, I will ask you to
consider another way of speaking about justice and
injustice, which is not confined to the poets, but is
found in prose writers. The universal voice of mankind is always declaring that justice and virtue are
honourable, but grievous and toilsome; and that the
pleasures of vice and injustice are easy of attainment,
and are only censured by law and opinion. They say
also that honesty is for the most part less profitable
than dishonesty; and they are quite ready to call wicked men happy, and to honour them both in public and
(community) order, whereas individually achieved
private when they are rich or in any other way in-
virtue represents people’s primary means of insur-
fluential, while they despise and overlook those who
ing a more viable divinely-enabled afterlife.
Moreover, whereas Plato’s speakers are highly attentive to the integrative features of religion and envision
may be weak and poor, even though acknowledging
14
In developing this statement on Plato’s Republic, I am very
much indebted to the translations of Benjamin Jowett (1937),
Paul Shorey (Hamilton and Cairns 1961) and G.M.A. Grube
and C.D.C. Reeve (Cooper 1997).
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
19
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
them to be better than the others. But most extraordi-
beit negative) feature of community life. They note
After commenting on the effects that these matters
cuss God are to do so only in terms that are good
nary of all is their mode of speaking about virtue and
that people often think that injustice (as in decep-
might have on the minds of the young, the speakers
and just. Likewise, as a perfect being, God would
tion and evildoing) can be highly profitable (Rep,
(Rep, II:365) introduce a number of differing view-
not be compelled by external influences (including
II:358-360). They also observe that wrongdoers who
points on the gods. First, because the gods possess
human demands) and, being perfect, would have no
rich men’s doors and persuade them that they have
appear honest may not only achieve considerable
superior intellects and abilities, it seems inappro-
reason for changing within. Relatedly, God would
a power committed to them by the gods of making an
material advantages, but are also often honored for
priate to believe that the gods can be deceived or
not represent himself in ways that are not authentic,
atonement for a man’s own or his ancestor’s sins by
their successes. Further, those who appear dishon-
compelled by human activities. Still, these notions
nor would God be pleased with such representa-
est may be severely punished, even if they are in-
would be inconsequential if the gods do not exist; or,
tions by others.
nocent (Rep, II:361-362).
if the gods exist, but do not care about human mat-
the gods: they say that the gods apportion calamity
and misery to many good men, and good and happiness to the wicked. And mendicant prophets go to
sacrifices or charms, with rejoicings and feasts; and
they promise to harm an enemy, whether just or unjust, at a small cost; with magic arts and incantations
binding heaven, as they say, to execute their will. And
the poets are the authorities to whom they appeal. ...
While recognizing the fairly widespread “slippage
And they produce a host of books written by Musaeus
of justice” that exists in community life, the speak-
and Orpheus, who were children of the Moon and the
ers also note that people typically encourage young
Muses ‒ that is what they say ‒ according to which
they perform their ritual, and persuade not only individuals, but whole cities, that expiations and atone-
people to behave virtuously. Still, rather than encourage virtue as a means of pursuing justice, people
only through tradition and the poets (most centrally
Hesiod and Homer), the speakers also observe that
it is these same poets who claim that the gods can be
influenced by words, sacrifices, and the like.
typically emphasize the matters of maintaining good
Leaving their discussion of these issues in this situ-
ments which fill a vacant hour, and are equally at the
reputations and building character (Rep, II:363). Re-
service of the living and the dead; the latter sort they
ation, the speakers (Rep, II:369-377) next discuss the
latedly, people often tell others that justice will be
processes by which a state (community) is developed
achieved in the afterlife, even if it eludes them in the
and other matters pertaining to war, leadership, and
human present. The claim is that those who are truly
education might be managed. Then, returning to reli-
virtuous will enjoy a luxurious afterlife whereas the
gion more directly, the speakers (Rep, II:377-386) pro-
ments for sin may be made by sacrifices and amuse-
call mysteries, and they redeem us from the pains of
hell, but if we neglect them no one knows what awaits
us. (Plato [The Republic, II:363-365]; Jowett trans.)
Denoting an extended analysis of community life,
evildoers will be severely punished for their worldly
Plato’s Republic [Rep] is one of the most remarkable
misdeeds in a different afterlife setting.
statements developed within the broader tradition
of political science. Still, rather than deal with Republic (a rather substantial text) in more comprehensive terms, this discussion focuses more specifically
on matters pertaining to religion.
Republic begins with Plato’s spokespeople (of whom
Socrates is most notable) embarking on a statement
on justice. While envisioning justice as a central and
highly enabling of community life, they also recognize that justice is a problematic and elusive feature
At the same time, however, the speakers (Rep, II:364)
recognize that people often describe virtue as an
unpleasant or painful experience whereas vice is
more likely to be associated with more pleasurable
human life-styles. As well, the speakers observe,
certain people have assumed roles as prophets or
mediators and claim (often for compensation) to be
able to speak to the gods on behalf of those who
might desire to be forgiven for their transgressions. Likewise, those who attend to the poets He-
of human group life (Rep, I:352).
siod and Homer may be led to believe that they can
Relatedly, although they stress the importance of
performing certain rituals, making sacrifices, and
virtue and intend to find ways of promoting justice,
engaging in various mysteries involving the living
the speakers also view injustice as an important (al-
and the dead.
20
ters. Then, after noting that people know of the gods
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
gain expiations and atonements for their sins by
pose that the poets (such as Hesiod and Homer) be
Continuing, the speakers (Rep, II:386-387) propose
not only to eliminate poetic passages that misrepresent the gods, but also to purge poetic materials of the vivid, depictions of the punishments
depicted in Hades (lest these image traumatize
young minds).
Then, after noting that only misrepresentations that
serve the public good may be allowed (Rep, II:389)
in the state and commenting on the importance of
young people achieving temperance or self-regulation, the speakers again condemn the poets for representing the gods as foolish and indecent in their
censored for their false representations of the gods.
behaviors (Rep, II:390-391).16
In particular, Plato’s speakers are concerned be-
Still, only much later in Republic, after dealing with
cause the poets often represent the gods as acting in
irresponsible, immoral, and quarrelsome manners.
To be viable, God is to be presented in more sincere
terms, as the author of good only.15 Those who disPlato’s speakers are somewhat inconsistent in their references
to God and the gods. In the main, however, Plato appears to insist
on a single overarching spiritual essence, with lesser essences
seen as derivatives or creations of the one. Likewise, while Plato
sometimes refers to God as a prime mover (Timaeus) in ways that
more closely approximate Aristotle’s notions of a prime mover,
Plato’s speakers also seem attentive to good and evil gods at
times, as well as subscribe to a yet broader assortment of gods
(as in Olympian gods and/or other divinely-enabled spiritual
forces). In these latter respects, Plato’s speakers approximate
what later will become known as Stoic theology.
Those who deem Christianity to be more exclusively monotheistic may wish to examine St. Augustine’s City of God wherein
he explicitly compares Greek and Christian views of overarching divinities and lesser spiritual essences.
15
leadership, property, communal life-styles, education, philosophy, and forms of government, and poetics, do Plato’s speakers re-engage religion in more
direct terms.
Retaining their emphasis on virtuous conduct, the
speakers (Rep, X:608) consider what may be the
greatest of rewards for human virtue: the prospect of an eternal existence of the soul. Still, rather
than dispose of the souls of evil people, the speakers conclude that human souls are immortal and
Envisioning the poets as providing models for people’s future behavior, Plato’s speakers also are critical of the poets for
not representing people and city-states in more consistently
virtuous terms (Rep, II:392).
16
Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org
21
Robert Prus
Representing, Defending, and Questioning Religion: Pragmatist Sociological Motifs
in Plato’s Timaeus, Phaedo, Republic, and Laws
cannot be destroyed by the evils of the body. Relat-
while the rewards of virtue are great, Er describes
edly, they (Rep, X:609-611) add that the soul is one
the penalties for evil in horrifying terms.
Laws17
Noting that laws are intended to serve those who invoke them, the Athenian (Laws, I:631) defines a more
Plato’s Laws may be much less well known than ReAfter the souls of the dead had moved forward (in-
virtuous set of qualities to which all states may as-
public is, but Laws represents another major statement
Mindful of the oneness of people’s souls with di-
cluding more virtuous souls, as well as those who
pire. Most notably, these include wisdom, temper-
on political science and the interlinkages of religion,
vinity, the speakers (Rep, X:613) consider next how
ance, justice, and courage. Still, the Athenian also
had been cleansed by punishment), they were given
governing arrangements, and education with the
one might be a better friend of the gods. They de-
acknowledges the importance of some less virtuous
opportunities to choose new worldly lives for them-
fine the just person as one who strives to be per-
moral order of the community. Thus, although Plato’s
qualities, including people’s personal health, beauty,
selves. Because he would be returned alive to his
sonally virtuous and fair in his treatment of others,
speakers envision religion as an important feature
strength, and wealth. It is with this broader set of
former life, Er was not permitted to select another
no matter what life may present in the way of ob-
concerns in mind that the speakers subsequently will
life at this time.
of community life and are attentive to the ways in
which religion can contribute to the moral order of
address matters of education, forms of government,
the community, they are particularly mindful of the
and authority, before the formation of a model state
ways in which religion is sustained and perpetuated,
(Laws, IV onward) in which these objectives may be
with the eternal.
stacles. The speakers also reason that someone who
strives to be a friend of the gods, who tries to be
The souls were informed that there were more
like the gods as much as humanly possible, would
lives from which to select than the souls at hand.
not be neglected by the gods. Then, after claiming
Likewise, samples of a great variety of human
that people will be rewarded in the afterlife in di-
and nonhuman lives were displayed for the souls
rect proportion to their good deeds, Socrates shares
to consider. Working with the stipulation that the
a tale of the afterlife that he has heard.
new life was to be different from the past, the souls
were encouraged to choose wisely, to be mindful
The “vision of Er” (Rep, X:614-621) involves a man
of the risks and liabilities that each life may have
who was killed in a battle and later is carried
with respect to virtue and justice. Then, in turn,
home to be buried. Oddly, his body did not decay
by chance arrangements, the souls were to choose
and on the twelfth day, Er returned to life. Most
new mortal lives. Er reports that people often made
importantly, though, Er was able to provide an
choices that would prove to be foolish and sad, if
account of what he had experienced in the other
not clearly disastrous, for the subsequent states of
world.
their souls.
as well as disregarded and jeopardized as people engage other aspects of community life.
Whereas Republic begins with Plato’s speakers attending to justice in particularly direct terms, Plato’s
Laws opens with a consideration of the origins of
law. The speakers (an Athenian Stranger; Cleinias,
a Cretan; and Megillus, a Lacedaemonian [Spartan])
posit that their laws likely had divinely inspired
origins, but emphasize the importance of a legal
constitution for the well-being of the community
(Laws, I:624). Thus, even the Cretan and the Spartan
who envision conflict as a natural state of affairs for
pursued through a constitutional government.19
Although religion is seen as an important aspect of
community life, Plato clearly does not see religion as
an element (factor or product) unto itself. Thus, while
Plato’s speakers generally quest for and intend to
promote religious motifs within the course of ongoing community life, they also acknowledge the fuller
range of religious and irreligious beliefs and practices
that people may engage both across and within communities. As well, they are attentive to an assortment
of state objectives (e.g., safety, justice, prosperity) and
personal concerns (e.g., wealth, pleasure, physical
well-being) and practices that people commonly in-
Following his battlefield death, Er found himself in
The souls had been free to choose in knowing ways.
the company of the souls of others who also had
city-states, as well as the villages, families, and indi-
However, once their choices were made, the souls
died. He observes that these souls were subjected
viduals within, argue for the importance of an orga-
were subject to “the plain of forgetfulness” and
Likewise, instead of focusing on people’s religious
to a judgment process wherein they were held
nized governing unit characterized by a system of
drank from “the rivers of unmindedness.” In as-
viewpoints and practices as more individualistic or
directly and openly accountable for their earthly
law (Laws, I:625-631).18
suming their new lives, thus, the souls would not
deeds. After judgment, some souls were allowed
know from whence they came or how they arrived
to go directly to heaven, but many had to spend
in their subsequent states.
time in Hades. Here, they were to undergo ten-fold
punishments for instances of human wrongdoing
Socrates concludes saying that it is only in the quest
before they might be considered for admission to
for virtue and justice that people may deal with good
heaven. The souls of those who are judged to have
and evil, be valued by one another and the gods,
been particularly wicked would never leave the
and successfully deal with the long-term pilgrimage
gruesome conditions of the underworld. Notably,
of the soul. [Republic ends on this note.]
22
©2013 QSR Volume IX Issue 1
This statement on Plato’s Laws is developed from the translations of Benjamin Jowett (1937), A. E. Taylor (Hamilton and
Cairns 1961), and Trevor J. Saunders (Cooper 1997).
17
Those familiar with Thomas Hobbes’ (1588-1679) Leviathan
(1994) will recognize the particular affinities of these materials with Hobbes’ conception of the state as one wherein everyone is in a natural condition of conflict with one another. As
evidenced in Hobbes’ translation of Thucydides’ History of the
Peloponnesian War (1975) and his synopsis of Aristotle’s Rhetoric
(1984), Hobbes seems well versed in Greek schol...