Phaedo Workshop: Beauty Itself
By Don Finkel
For Parts I and II, divide up into groups of four, and work as usual with scribes and timekeepers.
Part I (1 - 1/4 hours)
A. (15 mins.)
1. Cast your minds back to a year ago, when it was presidential election season. Recall to mind the media coverage of the two major candidates. The press, TV, and the other mass media spent a great deal of time, energy, and labor creating "images" of the two presidential candidates during the presidential campaign. Give some rough descriptions of the images created by them of George Bush and Michael Dukakis.
2. Presumably George Bush and Michael Dukakis are two real human individuals. Speculate on the relationship that exists between the images of Dukakis and Bush created by the media and the two real men. How well do the images correspond to the reality, do you suppose, and what kind of correspondence is this?
3. Suppose you wanted to know the real Bush and the real Dukakis--realistically, what would you have to do? Where could you realistically go to find the real men?
4. Compare how easy it is in this case to encounter the reality of the men to how easy it is to encounter their images. (Make a numerical ratio; 1/100 means 100 times more difficult.)
B. (20 mins.)
1. On a piece of paper, draw four different triangles, making them differ in both size and shape.
2. Write down the definition of a triangle.
3. Can you draw a picture which represents exactly what is represented in the definition of "triangle"? If so, draw it. If not, explain why it can't be done.
4. Let us call the four pictures you drew "images" of triangularity and the definition you wrote a representation of "true" triangularity. Is there such a thing as the "true" triangle? Is it real? If so, where is the true triangle?
5. Assume the "true" triangle is real. What might be the relationship that exists between it and your four images? What kind of correspondence exists between image and reality in this case?
6. Suppose you wanted to know the true triangle? What might you do to know it, or encounter it?
7. In this case, how easy is it to know the true triangle compared to becoming acquainted with its images? Make a numerical ratio.
C. (20 mins.)
1. Draw three fairly large circles on a piece of paper. In the first, draw three stars in a horizontal line. In the second draw three x's in a triangular arrangement. In the third draw the letters a, b, and z, in a diagonal line.
2. What is the same about these three groups of figures. (The groups are what is inside the large circles. Ignore the circles themselves.)
3. What is the same is that they all have the same number of figures in them, namely, three. How many threes are visible on your paper? Are all of these the same kind of "three," or are some different?
4. What is a number, really?
5. Is a number real?
6. What is the difference between the number three (not the sign or numeral "3," but what the sign stands for) and the pictures you have drawn?
7. Can you represent the number three with a picture or image? If so, how does this situation differ from that of the triangle? If not, why not?
8. Assume the number three is real. What might be the relationship that exists between it and your images on the paper? What kind of correspondence exists between image and reality in this case?
9. Suppose you wanted to know the real number three? What might you do to know it, or encounter it?
10. In this case, how easy is it to know the true number compared to becoming acquainted with its images? Make a numerical ratio.
D. (20 mins.)
1. Look at the image projected on the screen of the statue of David sculpted by Michelangelo. Can you agree that this image is beautiful?
2. Most people will agree that this David is beautiful. I am going to assume you did agree. If you didn't, assume that with time you could agree on some person or some picture of a person you would all agree is beautiful. How is it that we can agree on what is beautiful?
3. Now consider the following three things together: (a) the David, or the image of another body you find beautiful, (b) a glorious sunset, and (c) a melody you find beautiful. What is the same in these three things that make them all beautiful?
4. In a dialogue by Plato called The Republic, Plato says, "The lovers of sights and sounds ... like beautiful sounds and colours and shapes, and all the objects fashioned from them, but their thought is unable to see and welcome the nature of Beauty itself." (476b) Is there indeed a meaningful distinction between beautiful objects and Beauty itself?
5. Pretend for a minute that you find Plato's distinction meaningful. Write a paragraph to convince your roommate that it is important to distinguish between images of beauty, which are many, and real Beauty itself, which is one.
6. Assume that Beauty is real. What might be the relationship that exists between it and the body, the sunset, and the melody? What kind of correspondence exists between image and reality in this case?
7. Suppose you wanted to know or encounter real Beauty? What might you do to know it, or encounter it?
8. In this case, how easy is it to know real Beauty compared to becoming acquainted with its images? Make a numerical ratio.
NOTE: We won't work on it here, but the most important case for Plato is the one that distinguishes between good actions, people, careers, etc. from Goodness itself. Work this one out at home or in your seminar.
BREAK - 15 mins.
Part II (1 hour)
1. On p. 110 of the Phaedo, Socrates refers to "such a thing as absolute uprightness," and, in the next breath, "absolute beauty and goodness, too." These things are referred elsewhere in Plato's works as "Forms." We may consider, for the sake of this exercise, that "the triangle" and "the number three" are Forms as well.
Make a list of qualities that characterize the Forms. Opposite that list construct a list of opposing qualities that characterize objects that "imitate" or "partake of" the Forms (objects such as a particular drawn triangle, a particular group of three objects, a particular beautiful human being or statue).
2. Check the top paragraph on p. 132 for Plato's summary of opposing qualities that distinguish the soul from the body. This list should correspond approximately to your paired lists in 3. Compare the two and amend your lists to correspond to Plato's.
3. Now test Plato's list of adjectives against the three Forms we have been considering. Is the real triangle accurately described by Plato's list of adjectives? What about the real number three? Real Beauty? Write a few sentences summarizing the results of your three tests.
4. Now test Plato's list of opposing adjectives for: (a) drawn triangles, (b) specific groupings of three objects, and (c) specific beautiful things. Write a few sentences summarizing the results of these three tests.
5. "...the man who pursues the truth by applying his pure and unadulterated thought to the pure and unadulterated object..." (Phaedo, p. 110) Why is it that Plato's list of adjectives that describe the soul also describe the object of the soul's knowledge--the Forms? If you don't think the answer to this question is contained in the dialogue, then speculate--make up a plausible reason or set of reasons.
6. Have one person in your group read aloud to the rest, with the others following along in their text, the following passage. Bottom paragraph on page 110 through the sentence on the bottom of p. 111 that ends with the words "contemplate things by themselves with the soul by itself."
7. Consult your own experience: can you think of instances where your five senses or your bodies (including "loves," "desires," "fears" and "fancies") impeded your coming to grasp some truth or some reality? Think about this question individually, make some notes, and then share stories.
8. Consult your own experience: can you think of instances where your "unaided intellect" (your "soul"--and remember that in Plato the soul is that which talks, that which marshals arguments, and that which listens to talk and appraises argument [see pp. 179-180]) was your means to grasping some truth or some reality? Think about this question individually, make some notes, and then share stories.
9. Consult your own experience: can you think of any instances where the opposite occurred to what Plato claims--either with respect to your senses and bodies, or your unaided intellect? Think about this question individually, make some notes, and then share stories.
10. At this point, do you find the view of knowing summarized by the phrase quoted in question 7 above to be plausible, persuasive, interesting, or instructive? Can you come up with a version of it that is plausible, persuasive, interesting, or instructive (i.e., can you "make it good")?
11. Relying on your "good" version from 10., in the four cases (candidate, triangle, number, beauty), what kind of personality or what kind of mind do you think would be required to know the reality? (Assume it would be the same for all four cases.)
12. What kind of education do you think would be likely to promote the development of the kind of personality or mind you outlined in 1. above?
Part III (15 mins.): Whole Group Discussion