The Divided Line
In Plato’s Republic, Socrates is conducting a dialogue with some friends that attempts to define ‘justice’. Along the way they determine that a just person would be one who is on a constant journey to find Truth. But what is Truth? According to Socrates (or technically Plato, I guess), Truth could be found at the end of the Divided Line.
The Divided Line is the path one takes from ignorance to divinity. As babies and children, we know absolutely nothing about the world, but we learn fast. Our experiences create a set of beliefs, things that may or may not be true, but that we have come to rely on. For instance, we might believe its ok to roll around on any surface. When we try rolling around on a bed and fall off, we’ve gained new experience. We revise our beliefs, and advance ourselves along the Line. We have learned a truth, and now we will be aware of the relative height of surfaces we could fall from.
This process continues throughout our whole lives, and according to our inclinations and abilities we advance further and further from our original ignorance, and closer and closer to the ultimate Truth, which is Divine Truth according to Plato. It is God’s knowledge, or omniscience.
The interesting thing about the Divided Line is that it keeps growing longer the more we advance. Each truth that we learn will demote a previous truth to a belief, but will widen our perspective and bring new questions into view. If we seek to answer those questions, we will learn new truths that redefine our beliefs. Plato’s belief was that we can never actually reach Divine Truth, but it should be the purpose of every person to progress as far toward Divine Truth as their individual talents and abilities allow. The benefits are huge, not only for the individual but for the society as a whole. The theory is that with greater knowledge and experience, people become more able to see multiple sides of an argument or problem, and become more fair in their approaches to solve these differences. Utopia would have those with the greatest capacity for advancing along the Line as its rulers.
I believe in the concept of the Divided Line, save the theory that the most enlightened people will always be the best rulers. It seems true, but it fails to take into account that man, by nature, is a predatory animal. Our ability for reason and abstract thought leads us to create societies whose rules are meant to keep our predatory natures in check, because reason naturally strives toward harmony. Nature, however, always provides a counter-balance. As societies progress to the point of relative peace and prosperity, surviving is less difficult, and living a pleasurable existence becomes the new goal. Unchecked by reason, this new driving force can lead society to promote the predatory nature, rather than suppress it.
There are those who gain knowledge for the express purpose of gaining power over others. Plato’s ‘philosopher king’ is only a good king if his divine self (the part of us strives for reason and harmony) is dominant over his primitive self (the predator). When the primitive self is dominant, the perspective gained by those advanced in philosophical thought is used to help them choose when to use their knowledge unjustly, as well as justly. In effect, they can attempt to manipulate those around them who do not share the same knowledge.
Now, here’s an interesting question: what happens when society begins to favor the predatory instinct while rejecting philosophical advancement? You might find a growing group of people that rather than looking toward learned and intelligent people for answers, they will trust solely to their own anecdotal knowledge and limited experience, and look instead for leaders in people who will parrot back to them what they already believe.
Consider whether our current culture fits this picture. We have reached a point where the last few generations have been inundated from birth with mass media exposure. Our culture’s primary source of influence is the television. What are the ideals presented through the majority of advertising and television content? It is hedonism. Our culture is being dominated (or may already be dominated) by a sentiment of entitlement to fame, fortune, and pleasure. The pursuit of these pleasures is a kind of predatory action, and the more that pursuit becomes prevalent, the further our society will degrade to embrace that lower part of our humanity. I’m not saying that the pursuit of pleasures is always bad, but it is bad when it is at the expense of the pursuit of knowledge and enlightenment. We need one to balance the other.
In this kind of environment, debates over complex issues become reduced to overly simple and myopic talking points, with each side trying its hardest to let the people know that they are one of them. Attempts at raising the complexities of the issue become denigrated as ‘elitist’ or ‘inconsistent’, and as challenging what ‘we all know to be true’. Our predatory philosophers will play on our emotions, rather than appeal to our intellect. It will be easy for them to do, because we have elevated that emotional state, which is primal, above the rational state.
I urge you to think about these things as you listen to the debates and rhetoric from the media, current administration, candidates, and your friends and family between now and the 2008 United States Presidential election. Keep them in mind, and notice how much of what you hear falls into the emotional category, and how much into the rational category. How far has our society progressed toward the predatory instinct? Asked another way, how important is it to us as a society that our leaders give to us what we want, rather than work to provide what we need? What distinction do you make between those two things, and how much of your distinction is influenced by emotion?
I push for a return to the importance of rationalism, and for each of us to push ourselves to progress along Plato’s Divided Line as far as we are able. The alternative can quickly lead us instead to a divided country, and an even greater divide between the people and the government.