English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

"Because it does not tell the truth, imaginative literature must shut down readers' rational faculties, in order that it can appeal to their emotions; the effect of such literature, then, is to weaken the minds of its readers." -plato

2006-10-01 09:17:08 · 10 answers · asked by shih rips 6 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

10 answers

I strongly disagree.

In the first place, the purpose of imaginative literature is not merely rational or logical. The way I see it, the purpose of imaginative literature is "Aesthetic Contemplation". We have to exercise some degree of empathy in order that we may better appreciate it.

Secondly, imaginative literature does not weaken our minds but rather it broadens our horizon. Literature, however imaginative or fiction it is, tells some degree of truth about human nature and the real world.

2006-10-01 21:04:10 · answer #1 · answered by rockphilo 3 · 0 0

Plato's arguement is interesting in this - his work "The Symposium" is in fact what he would clasify as "imaginative literature." In fact, the writings of Plato would often times seem to contradict this statement, much of his writings, although philosophical were imaginative as well. Philosophical writings in fact require a solid grasp of the rational while being able to "imagine" the abstractness of an idea. In fact the point of philosophy is to appeal to the rational mind by use of imaginative new preceptions of the same old issues. It is in the development of the imagination that we can find solutions to realistic issues, i.e.: Singer dreamed of a machine with thread being pulled through cloth and invented the Singer sewing machine. Imaginative literature offers the opportunity for the integration of the rational and imaginative minds - that is, thinking outside the box so to speak. In fact, I would disagree with Plato on this one. Imaginative literature requires suspension of the rational but at the same moment requires the reader to be able to have an awareness that the rational thought process is being suspended in order to appreciate the literature as imaginative. Plato's argument seems to be grounded in a generalization found in the first phrase of the quote, the idea that imaginative literature either does not - is not - or can not tell the truth followed by the implication that all imaginative literature leads to a shut down in the minds of all readers. That's a different argument. The truthfulness of creative nonfiction is all together different based on Plato's statement.

2006-10-01 17:01:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I disagree. The requirement is "suspension of disbelief" i.e. the reader is a willing participant. However, some people are weak minded to begin with and cannot tell the difference.

2006-10-01 19:24:06 · answer #3 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0 0

Yes, I agree with Plato on this, if he's talking about too much imaginative literature.

2006-10-01 16:27:46 · answer #4 · answered by Atanasia 2 · 0 0

The defintion of Pulp Fiction or the NY Times Best Seller list on any given day (same difference).

2006-10-01 16:56:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Disagree!

2006-10-01 16:24:36 · answer #6 · answered by songbird 6 · 0 0

depends on how imaginative he is. but i dont really agree since it can strengthen the mind in originality and ideas. Obviously u hav to shut down ur mind to a certain extent so as not to be too gullible!

2006-10-01 17:04:28 · answer #7 · answered by scartissue 4 · 0 0

to become philosophers, that is, according to Plato at least, not specialists of one scholarly branch of knowledge among others, making a living out of their teaching, peer debates and published works, but, in the etymological sense of the word, "lovers of wisdom", lovers (philoi in Greek) only, not "wise" (sophoi in Greek), because they know the wisdom they love cannot be reached in this life (as the principles upon which it depends cannot be demonstrated, which means, as Socrates used to say, that "I know nothing", meaning "I known nothing for certain, in the strongest sense of these words, nothing, that is, of what alone counts to reach happiness in life"), but constitutes an idea(l of justice, of a justice that is not merely abiding by the laws, but which is the inner harmony to be reached by a human being whose will is torn apart between passions and reason and whose unity is not given from the start, as the foundation for social harmony between men and women in the city.

2006-10-01 16:31:37 · answer #8 · answered by a_sibiroglu 1 · 0 0

Sounds like he was talking about the Bible.

2006-10-01 16:18:40 · answer #9 · answered by auntiegrav 6 · 0 0

I disagree.

2006-10-01 16:18:44 · answer #10 · answered by THE UNKNOWN 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers