Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal - Plato's Cave - The FULL Story

Episode Date: June 28, 2024

Please consider signing up for TOEmail at https://www.curtjaimungal.org   Support TOE:  - Patreon: https://patreon.com/curtjaimungal (early access to ad-free audio episodes!)  - Crypto: https://tinyurl.com/cryptoTOE - PayPal: https://tinyurl.com/paypalTOE  - TOE Merch: https://tinyurl.com/TOEmerch    Follow TOE:  - *NEW* Get my 'Top 10 TOEs' PDF + Weekly Personal Updates: https://www.curtjaimungal.org  - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theoriesofeverythingpod  - TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@theoriesofeverything_  - Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurt  - Discord Invite: https://discord.com/invite/kBcnfNVwqs  - iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/better-left-unsaid-with-curt-jaimungal/id1521758802  - Pandora: https://pdora.co/33b9lfP  - Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4e  - Subreddit r/TheoriesOfEverything: https://reddit.com/r/theoriesofeverything   

Many people reference Plato's cave, but not many people have read it, including myself, so let's rectify that. Plato first articulated the cave allegory in 380 BCE in a book called The Republic. Ever since, scads of literature has been published on it, especially in the philosophy of metaphysical and epistemological inquiry. This is from Socrates. And now allow me to draw a comparison in order to understand the effects of learning upon our nature. Imagine that there are people living in a cave deep underground. The cavern has a mouth that opens to the light above, and a passage exists from this all the way down to the people.

They have lived here from infancy with their legs and their necks bound in chains. They can't move. All they can do is stare directly forward as the chains stop them from turning their heads around. Imagine that far above and behind them blazes a great fire. Between this fire and the captives, a low partition is erected along a path, something like puppeteers used to conceal themselves during shows. Plato's brother Glaucon says, I can picture it. Socrates says, look and you'll be able to see other people carrying around

objects back and forth along the partition, things of every kind, images of people and animals carved into the stone and wood and other materials. Some of these people speak while others remain silent. Glaucon says, a bizarre situation for some unusual captives. Back to Socrates. So we are. Now, tell me if you suppose it's possible that these captives ever saw anything of themselves, or even of one another, other than the shadows flitting across the cavern wall before them.

Glaucon? Certainly not. If they restrained all their lives with their heads moving forward only, how could they? Socrates. And that would be just as true for the objects moving to and fro behind them, correct? Certainly. Socrates, now if they could speak, would you say these captives would imagine

that the names they give to the things they were able to see applied to the real things? Glaucon, it would have to be so. Socrates, and if sound reverberated through the cavern from one of those others passing behind the partition, do you suppose that the captives would think anything but the passing shadow was what really made the sound? Glaucon. No, by Zeus. Socrates. Then, undoubtedly, such captives would consider the truth to be nothing but the shadows of the carved

objects. Glaucon, most certainly Socrates. Look again and think about what would happen if they were released from the chains and these misconceptions. Imagine one of them is set free from the shackles and immediately stands up, bends his neck around to take steps to gaze up toward the fire. All of this was painful and the glare from the light

made him unable to see the objects that cast the shadows he once beheld. What do you think his reaction would be if someone informed him that everything he had formerly known was an illusion and delusion, but that now he was a few steps closer to reality? Oriented now toward things that were more authentic and able to be seen more truly. And even further, if one would direct his attention to the artificial figures passing to and fro and ask him what their names are, would this man not be at a loss to be able to do so?

Would he rather believe that the shadows he formerly knew were more real than the objects now being shown to him? Glaucon, much more real. Socrates, now if he was forced to look directly at the firelight, wouldn't his eyes be pained? Wouldn't he turn away and run back to those things which he normally perceived and understand them as more defined and clearer than the things now being brought to his attention. Glaucon.

That's right. Socrates. Now, let's say he's forcibly dragged up the steep climb out of the cavern and firmly held until he finally stands into the light of the sun. Don't you think that he would be even more agitated and begin to complain? Under that light, would his eyes not be nearly blinded? Unable to discern any of those things that we ourselves call real? Glaucon, no, he would not see them at first.

Socrates, it would take him some time, I suppose, for him to get used to seeing these higher things. In the beginning, he might only trace the shadows, then reflections of people and others in the water. Then he would be able to see things themselves. Then he would behold the heavenly bodies, and the heaven by the night, seeing the light of the stars and the moon with greater ease than even the sun and its light by day. Glaucon, indeed so. Socrates. And then, I think, he would be able to at last gaze upon the sun itself,

neither as reflected in the water, nor as a phantom image in some other place, but in its own place as it really is. Glaucon, undeniably. Socrates. And now, he will begin to reason. He will find that the sun is the source for the seasons, for the years, it's the governor of every visible thing, and is ultimately the origin of everything previously known. Glaucon. Of course, first he would see and then he would draw conclusions. Socrates. That being the case, should he remember his fellow prisoners and their original dwelling, and what was accepted as wisdom in that setting, don't you imagine he would consider himself to be fortunate for this transformation?

Indeed, even begin to feel pity for the captives? Glaucon, I agree. Socrates, now suppose there were honors and awards among the captives, which they granted as prizes to one another for being the best awards among the captives, which they granted as prizes to one another for being the best at recognizing the various shadows, passing by and deciphering their patterns, their order, the relationships among them, who is the best at predicting what shadows will be seen next, etc. Do you believe that our liberated man would be concerned with such honors, or that he

would be jealous of those who received them, or that he would strive to be those who were lauded by the captives and enjoyed pride among them, or would rather take Homer's view and rather wish in earthly life to be the humble serf of a landless man and suffer whatever he had to instead of holding the views of the captives and returning to that state of being. Glaucon. Truly, he would rather suffer a great deal than return to such a life. Socrates. Well, here's something else to consider. If such a man was to suddenly go from the sunlight to once more descend to his original

circumstance, wouldn't his vision be obscured by the darkness now? Glaucon. Obviously it would. Socrates. Ah, okay. So let's say he is with the captives and gets put in the position of interpreting the wall shadows. His eyes are still adjusting to the darkness and it may take a while before they are.

Wouldn't he then become a laughing stock? Wouldn't they say, you have returned from your adventure up there with ruined eyes? Would they not say that the ascent was a waste of time? And if they had the opportunity, do you suppose that they might raise their hands against him and kill this person who's trying to liberate them to a higher plane? Glaucon, I'm afraid so. Socrates, then my friend Glaucon, this image applies to everything we've been discussing. It compares the visible world to the underground cavern, and the power of the sun to the fire that

burned in the cavern. You won't misunderstand me if you connect the captive's ascent to be the ascent of the soul to the intelligible world. This is how I believe and I shared it at your wish, though heaven knows whether it all is true. Regardless, it appears to me that the realm of what can be known, the idea of the good, is discovered last of all. And it is only perceived with great difficulty. But when it is seen, it leads us directly to the finding that it is the universal cause of all that is right and beautiful. It is the source of visible light and the master of the same, and in the intelligible world, it is the master of truth and reason.

And whoever, in private or in public, would behave in a sensible way will keep this idea in focus. Glaucon, I agree to the extent I can manage to understand. Socrates, stay with me then for another thought. We shouldn't be surprised that individuals who have reached this level might be unwilling to spend their time on mundane affairs, for wouldn't it be that their souls always feel a calling to higher things? If our illustration holds true, that would seem quite likely.

Glaucon, yes, indeed likely. Socrates, now, would it be at all surprising for one who is engaged in contemplation of holy things when he ventures into the ways of the degenerate humanity to appear ridiculous for his actions? What if, for example, while his eyes were still adjusting to the mundane gloom, he were forced to appear in court, to hold forth about the mere shadows of justice or the other shapes that flitted across the wall, and to engage in debate about such concepts with the minds of others who have never beheld

the ideal justice. Glaucon, it would not surprise me in the least, Socrates, but one who has his wits about him would remember that there are two things that pained his eyes, being brought from the darkness to the light and transitioning back from the light to the darkness. Now, considering that the soul experiences the same discomfort, this man wouldn't make light of another when he met another confused soul. He would take the time to understand if that soul was coming from a luminous realm and his eyes were blinded by the darkness, or whether journeying from the darkness of ignorance

to the illuminated state has overwhelmed his eyes. One he would consider fortunate. He would pity the other. And if he laughed at either, he would be less justified if he laughed at the expense of the one who was descending from the light above. Glaucon. That's a fitting way to put it. Socrates. Of course, if I'm correct, then some of our educators are mistaken in their view that it's possible to implant knowledge into a person that wasn't there originally, like vision into the eyes of a blind man.

Glaucon. That's what they say. Socrates. What our message now signifies is that the ability and means of learning is already present in the soul, as the eye couldn't turn from the darkness to the light unless the whole body hits moved. So it is that the mind can only turn around from the world of becoming to that of being by a movement of the whole soul. The soul must learn by degrees to endure the contemplation of being and the luminous realms. This is good.

Agreed? Glaucon. Agreed. Glaucon. Agreed. Socrates. Therefore, of this matter itself, there must be a craft of some kind, which would be a most efficient and effective means of transforming the soul. It wouldn't be an art that gives the soul vision, but a craft that labors under the assumption that the soul has its own innate vision but doesn't apply it properly.

There must be some kinds of means for bringing this about. Glaucon. Yes, such a craft must exist. And that's the end of it. If you've enjoyed this reading, then I've done another one. It's linked here. It's called Is God a Taoist? It's riddled with commentary due to the copyright issues with that wonderful essay by mathematician Raymond Smullian on the nature of free will, God, and the paradox of divine intervention with personal responsibility. If you think it's obvious that we have no free will because we're so-called determined by the laws of physics and the forces are outside of our control. Then give this a listen as mathematician Raymond Smullian disagrees.

It's a whimsical explication into what and who you are. If there are any other readings you'd like me to do, for instance, The Dark Knight of the Soul is one that I'm working on. Then let me know in the comments section. Firstly, thank you for watching, thank you for listening. There's now a website, curtjymongle.org, and that has a mailing list. The reason being that large platforms like YouTube, like Patreon, they can disable you for whatever reason, whenever they like. That's just part of the terms of service.

Now a direct mailing list ensures that I have an untrammeled communication with you. Plus, soon I'll be releasing a one-page PDF of my top 10 toes. It's not as Quentin Tarantino as it sounds like. Secondly, if you haven't subscribed or clicked that like button, now is the time to do so. Why? Because each subscribe, each like helps YouTube push this content to more people like yourself, plus it helps out Kurt directly, aka me. I also found out last year that external links count plenty toward the algorithm, which means that whenever you share on Twitter, say on Facebook or even on Reddit, etc., it shows

YouTube, hey, people are talking about this content outside of YouTube, which in turn greatly aids the distribution on YouTube. Thirdly, there's a remarkably active Discord and subreddit for Theories of Everything where people explicate toes, they disagree respectfully about theories, and build as a community our own toe. Links to both are in the description. Fourthly, you should know this podcast is on iTunes, it's on Spotify, it's on all of the audio platforms.

All you have to do is type in theories of everything and you'll find it. Personally, I gained from rewatching lectures and podcasts. I also read in the comments that hey, toll listeners also gain from replaying. So how about instead you re-listen on those platforms like iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcasts, whichever podcast catcher you use. And finally, if you'd like to support more conversations like this, more content like this, then do consider visiting patreon.com slash Kurtjmongle and donating with whatever you like.

There's also PayPal, there's also crypto, there's also just joining on YouTube. Again, keep in mind, it's support from the sponsors and you that allow me to work on toe full time. You also get early access to ad free episodes, whether it's audio or video, it's audio in the case of Patreon, video in the case of YouTube. For instance, this episode that you're listening to right now was released a few days earlier. Every dollar helps far more than you think. Either way, your viewership is generosity enough.

Thank you so much.