What is the signifigamce the dialogue form for Plato, especially in the Republic? It seems to me that it is an attempt to appeal to a larger audience, or to appeal to the common man; a sort of exoteric approach to writing very dense philosophy. However, in the same sense, it seems that Plato obfuscates his arguments in the dialogue; almost as if he intends the true meaning to only be discovered by the most careful reader. What is everyone’s take on this? Another note on the obfuscation is Plato’s use of Socrates. Does he use Socrates to avoid persecution, similarily to Descartes claiming to be a Christian? I don’t believe this could be the simple reason. The character of Socrates is too poetic and too symbolic. I believe Socrates is Plato’s Philospher King, his Uberman, etc. Socrates is the perfect light in the dark dramas of Plato, illuminating a landscape of ficle human nature and corruption. The point is that I have been dealing with these thoughts as I have been reading the Republic and would like some second opinions. Can anyone help me out?
He uses Socrates to remind Athenians of their collective guilt in consigning the old guy to death. I think scholars tend to agree that it is likely that the earlier works of Plato were fairly representative of Socrates and his ideas. Later on they suspect that he serves much more as a literary device.
I personally find the Dialouge a very effective medium of getting across ideas. Plato’s ideas are obviously complex and were quite groundbreaking at the time (and even now), so to just read it would be difficult.
Take Kant, for example, his ideas are brilliant, but he often gets a litte convuluted and it’s difficult to see his point. With Plato though, not only do you get a clearer picture (for the most part) of his philosophy through the Dialogues, you get a second person, most often the common man, reacting to Plato’s or Socrates’ words. That, to me, is an invaluable tool, because i’ve often had a concern or question with something in Plato’s Dialouges, only to find the dialoug…ee (forgive the random conjugation) adress the same point or something similar.
Plato thought that philosophy was the exchange of arguments - he even thought that, if you were philosophising mentally and internally, you were throwing different arguments back and forth within yourself. This, I’m pretty sure, is why he used the dialogue form in his works.
I often before kept notes in dialoge form if I was discussing something with someone over the internet on a forum like this or over email. It helped me se things from both perspectives and better predict where the faults in my argumentas would lie. It also helped me in a very big sence to get my points thew and write better and more understandable English.
It is only when you stretch your arguments to the limit one way that you can expect others to do the same.
In the same sence, writing something where you would like to teach someone something, writing it in dialogue form would help you better understand how your words come threw.