Plato’s Cautious Stance on Art
Greek philosopher Plato thought that morals and society were endangered by art. He believed art could not be relied upon to accurately depict reality because it was merely a copy of reality. Additionally, he thought that art threatened morality and had the power to persuade people to act immorally. He understood the ability of art to uplift and amuse, but he also perceived it as a danger to morality and society.
Plato thought the world of appearances, which was less significant and real than the world of ideas, was reflected in art. The risk that art poses to morality and society will be covered in this essay, along with my viewpoint. Plato was a master of literature who understood the value of art in human life. Still, his attitude toward the skills is frequently misinterpreted as antagonistic or contemptuous of art and poetry. Plato’s dialogues are creative works in and of themselves that examine how philosophy and art interact.
Plato’s conviction in the idea of forms impacted how he perceived art. This theory holds that the world of matter merely reflects the world of ideas, which is the domain of genuine reality. Instead of reflecting reality in this situation, art represents appearances. Plato considered artists to be only physical imitators who produce representations of objects that are exact replicas of the ideal forms. He thought painters were only reproducing the outward form of things, not their true nature.
Art’s Emotional Power vs. Rational Truth
Plato also believed that the search for truth was unimportant and that art was a lower knowledge. He contends that poetry and theater are harmful because they appeal to emotions rather than reason and might mislead people about the truth in his dialogue “The Republic” (Oates 35). Plato’s understanding of art is neither straightforward nor consistent but reflects his complex and dynamic ideas about human nature, reality, beauty, truth, goodness, justice, love, and other things.
Plato thought that because it might cause the soul to become corrupt, art poses a threat to morals and society. He considered art to be a form of magic that had the power to lure people into accepting deceptive concepts and values (Chukwudi 126). According to him, art can distort reality, create illusions, and influence people to act irrationally rather than rationally (Chukwudi 126). He believed that people could make unethical decisions because of the emotional impact of art, which could overcome reason (Chukwudi 126).
Plato was particularly worried about how tragedy would affect the audience (Chukwudi 126). He suggested that disasters might elicit feelings of fear and sympathy, which might cause individuals to act unreasonably (Chukwudi 126). He believed art could pervert society and divert individuals from the path of righteousness (Chukwudi 126). Plato compared the consequences of art to those of drugs, which may provide momentary pleasure but ultimately harm both the person and society.
Comparisons With Aristotle and Nietzsche
Plato’s ideas about art were not original, as Aristotle was one of many other classical Greek philosophers who thought art might be destructive and corrupt. Aristotle thought art might be used to uphold virtue, but only when executed in a particular manner. In his view, art should strive to replicate the perfect state of things rather than the flawed reality. This idea of ideal forms was a keystone of Platonic philosophy and exemplified how Aristotle and Plato differed in their approaches to art (Oates 29). Friedrich Nietzsche, a German philosopher from the late 19th century, was another thinker who concurred with Plato’s worries about art (Narag 3).
Although Nietzsche thought that the decline of civilization might be caused by art, he did not necessarily think that this was not good (Narag 3). In his view, society needed to be continually questioned and re-examined, and art was one means of doing so. He was aware of the risks associated with art, though, and he thought it needed to be restrained and used for good.
Art vs. Philosophy
Plato held that any imitation-based representation of reality becomes art. This might encompass theater, poetry, music, painting, and sculpture. However, he believed that philosophy and the search for knowledge were superior to these types of art. According to Plato, the ultimate form of art was that of the philosopher who sought to comprehend the world via reason and logical thought. Though he did not specifically address the issue, Plato thought art reflected reality rather than reality itself.
As a result, art can exist somewhere other than a gallery or museum. Plato thought art could be found in nature because it reflected the ideal forms in the divine realm. According to Plato, only individuals who had undergone rigorous philosophical training and had improved their capacity for reason and rational thought could produce true art (Chukwudi 126). He knew that only some could engage in this intellectual exploration, though. Therefore, he believed that only a few could truly enjoy art.
Plato considered art a deterrent to learning and a barrier to philosophical research. He held that only through the pursuit of knowledge and meditation on the perfect forms could one truly find happiness and contentment. He acknowledged that art had some importance, but he thought philosophy was a higher type of knowledge and that art could be dangerous if not appropriately employed.
Personal View
Plato maintained that virtue and reason should be the foundation of a good existence and that art was unnecessary. The philosopher considered philosophy the real road to knowledge and the ideal life. Although I can relate to Plato’s worries about the risks associated with the arts, I cannot entirely agree with his opinions.
Art can move people and motivate them to behave morally. Art may teach us to understand various viewpoints and develop empathy. Furthermore, it is risky to censor artistic expression. People should be trusted to decide what they wish to watch or read.
Plato concluded by saying that he thought art was detrimental to morals and society, contending that it merely imitates reality and might cause people to act immorally. Plato’s nuanced and comprehensive perspective on art reflects his adherence to the theory of forms and his worries about the potential adverse effects of art on morals and society.
I do not share his opinions, even though I can appreciate his fears. Censoring art is a difficult course to follow because art can move people and motivate them to act morally. There is constant discussion concerning the place of art in society, and various intellectuals have expressed varying opinions. One thing is certain, though: we may be moved by art and have our lives improved by it.
Works Cited
Chukwudi, Amadi Cornelius. “Art as Imitation in Plato’s Philosophy: A Critical Appraisal.” AMAMIHE: Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 20, no. 1, 2022, pp. 125–138. Web.
Oates, Whitney J. Plato’s View of Art [by] Whitney J. Oates. Scribner, 1972.
Narag, Diya. “Polis, Poetry and Perversity.” SABAB, vol. 4, 2020, pp. 1-6. Web.