Plato’s interpretation based on Allegory of the cave
Plato’s interpretation of the play is based on his allegory of the cave; in which he imagines a group of people who had lived in dark all their lives. People in the Oedipus play lived in the dark of the unknown meaning of the riddle; until Oedipus answered the riddle. People ascribed forms to the shadows formed when the light was projected on the blank wall. Philosophers come to understand that shadows on the wall do not constitute the actuality, hence they were like prisoners unchained from the cave. Plato asserts that only the facts of the forms constitute reality.
The relation of Oedipus and Plato’s philosophical beliefs
Oedipus was confused about his parents hence; the form he was taking wasn’t the real one. Philosophers and prophets have their places in society as explained by both Plato and the play; to which people take to be authentic, may be illusions. Oedipus took Polybus and Merope to be his parents, but his biological parents were kinged Laius and Jacasta. When king Lauis learned that he will be killed by his son, he decided to get rid of him with the thought that he would determine his destiny. This illustrates how the people in the allegory of the cave were fixed in the cave, hence considering the ideal more or less the reality. On the other hand, Plato says that if one is dragged out from the cave he would struggle to go back; but on the contrary Oedipus on learning that he had killed his father, vowed never to go back to Corinth. Jacasta on the other hand hanged herself after knowing that she had slept with her son. In conclusion, therefore, Oedipus relates so well with Plato’s philosophical belief about the allegory of the cave.
The relation between a piece of art and Plato’s philosophy
Oedipus killed his biological father and yet vowed to search for the murderer. When he was told that he had killed his father, he ordered the blind prophet to be killed; hence this is relating to Plato’s philosophy that when the reality is revealed to someone, he doesn’t believe in it. If a man is dragged from the cave and made to look at the fire, he could not believe in or recognize the things which were casting the shadows. Also, the prisoner would be angry with the one dragging him out of the cave; as it is seen when Oedipus ordered the prophet to be killed after telling him that he had killed his father. But recent elucidation could show that Oedipus did not spell out to the shepherd; that he was the killer.
Plato’s view on how Aristotle would interpret this work
Aristotle was a poet and thus interested in the Oedipus play; characterizing it as a tragedy. Plato’s art was a tragedy and hence, Aristotle would interpret it that way. His tragedy was much of philosophical than historical as it dramatizes what will happen; by saying that people may be dragged out of the cave ; prophesying what would happen in the future. Hence, Plato would believe that Aristotle will interpret his art philosophically in a poem.
The relation between Plato’s and Aristotle’s philosophical beliefs to the notions of balance and perfection
Plato’s philosophy shows some classical Greek notions of equilibrium and exactness as he says that cave people once fixed inside the cave; will one day see the fire lights and move out of the cave to understand the reality. Aristotle explains how Oedipus got the kingship by answering the riddle which had taken the form of dark to the people.
Work cited
Goodrich, Peter. “Oedipus Lex: Psychoanalysis, History, Law” Philosophy, Social Theory and the Rule of Law). California: University of California Press. (1995): 45-58.