Words: 364
Does this look like “Cultural Revolution” that happened in China in late ass in twentieth century? There are differences though, which is how the leaders see the results of the destruction of human civilization. Plato expresses regret at these aesthetic sacrifices, he feels they must be made for the sake of education, which transforms the unhealthy luxurious city into a pure and just city. However, our great leader didn’t see any ruinous effects on our society until he reached the end of his life.
Also, in the book, Plato claims that it is unlawful for people from different classes to exploit the resources from the other. It is impious for them to mix in their souls. To be clear: if the rulers are permitted to acquire private property, they will inevitably abuse their power and begin to rule for their own gain, rather than the good of the entire city. Doesn’t this idea demonstrate that a governor should definitely not be involved in any economic relationships with the merchants in Chinese culture?
Another story really inspires me is the cave analogy in the book. Life is a process of learning and reaching the truth. We each begin our lives deep within the cave, with our head and legs bound, and education is the struggle to move as far out of the cave as possible. Not everyone can make it all the way out, which is why some people are producers, some warriors, and some philosopher-kings. I was thinking that it is obvious that we couldn’t leave the eve with the same distance given the fact that we have unequal education.
Like in Chinese sayings, “people are different “. Also, he points out that the philosopher-kings are only able to enjoy the freedom above ground that they do because they were enabled the education the city afforded them. They were molded to be philosopher kings so that they could return to the cave and rule. This seems to be unfair for the philosopher kings. What if they don it want to rule the city even though they enjoy the education provided by the city?