The Nature of Indulgence in Plato S Republic

Plato's Republic

There is some truth to the idea that certain appetites are difficult to control. As animals, we seek things like food and sex, as these are among our most basest needs. As humans, we may seek some of these things to excess, and indulge in them readily when they are available. There is a case to be made that our desire for recreation (alcohol, drugs, leisure time) can also be taken to extreme levels. These are also animal responses, since we have developed systems of living where many of us do not worry for our survival. The idea is that other animals, if they did not fear for their survival, would also indulge in whatever other activities they find pleasant. There is evidence that some animals play; and many alpha predators from cats to crocodiles spend most of their time relaxing, so easy is it for them to find food.

However, what constitutes strict control is an interesting idea. Plato's idea that our appetites will take over more likely reflects the world in which he lived, among the wealthy and privileged. Such individuals of power, whose survival and safety is largely the work of others, would have been in a unique situation with respect to their appetites. Most people that have existed on this planet, however, have not been in a position to allow their appetites to take over. There are addicts, yes, but most people have enough focus on assuring their own survival and safety that they do not allow appetites to get out of control. Indulgence is, for most, at best a part-time pursuit, with control never really being in doubt.

The discussion in Book I regarding how we transform as we age, wherein many old men lament that they do not live as they once did, highlights Plato's views. Lauded are those who have the discipline to live a life greater than indulgence, for they are viewed as being happier in old age. As age strips away one's desires for indulgence -- sex drive declines to nothing, appetites for food are reduced and the body's ability to handle drink is also diminished -- men who have lost control end up unhappy, while those who have retained control are happier. Essentially, Plato is making this observation, but I am not sure that this a reasonably extrapolated to humanity as a whole.

Rather, Plato appears to be writing from a moralistic perspective. This episode further elaborates: "Hope, he says, lives in the soul of him who lives in justice and holiness," something that is juxtaposed with those who are enamored with their own wealth and became fearful of death as they enter old age. Such values have since become central to Western culture, but appear in other cultures as well. It seems that for many human cultures, there is a certain moralizing that occurs where those who do not indulge feel the need to judge those who do spend their time indulging. The sense of superiority that those who judge others feel, because they have a different philosophy as to the value of life, is little more than a manifestation of pride. Plato's views, whether they pre-existed him or not, would end up forming part of Christian values, but also Islamic values as well. Thus, they have formed part of the mechanism of social control.

Plato's observation therefore can be seen more as an interpretation of what makes a society function better. A disciplined society can accomplish more than an undisciplined society, so the value of discipline would have been easily recognized in ancient Greece. A disciplined society is stronger, in relative terms, to other societies around it, and that strength ensures greater security for that society in terms of both basics of survival -- food production and military strength.

Thus, there is logic to Plato's argument for the virtue of discipline. It is not that indulgence is inherently human, but rather that it is an undesirable trait in any society that seeks to secure its own future -- a society has to at the very least be more disciplined than the societies around it in order to function better. So we know why Plato argues in favor of discipline, but that alone does not prove his point about indulgence being an inherent trait in man.

Book Nine tackles this issue. Plato understands appetites to be a reflection of the animal nature of man: "then the wild beast within us, gorged with meat or drink, starts up and having shaken off sleep, goes forth to satisfy his desires." There are two implications here. First, that these desires are animalistic in nature. Yet, in nature, animals seldom engage in sloth to the degree that the indulgent classes of Plato's time would have, where they were not even concerned with their own food or security. Animals in the wild still must hunt for their own, and must always be on guard for predators. Alpha predators may not worry for their own safety, but still must supply their own food. The appetites of wealthy urbanites in ancient Greece would transcend those of any animal -- no animal would eat to obesity because otherwise it would be unable to hunt.

The other implication here is that there is a clear distinction between men and animals, in that the defining characteristic of man is to overcome the animalistic desires from which we are afflicted. Human beings are specifically better than animals, and the desired state is to be as far from animal as possible. Discipline is the key to overcoming the animal nature. This line of thought reinforces the idea of discipline as virtue, as it is discipline that specifically makes us superior.

However, there is contradiction in this reasoning as well. In the Book I discussion of old men, the man who has overcome the animal desires is the most at peace with his life and his impending death, while the other fears for what he has lost, and what he may yet lose in the future when he dies. Yet, while the fear of death is primal, animals do not contemplate it. When it is their turn, they simply allow it to happen. Animals do not suffer from the same contemplation of death that we do as humans. If the animal nature is not to fear death -- that is human. This undermines the rationale outlined in Book I, however, but maybe does not undermine the rationale that discipline is virtuous. However, there are ties between these in the ultimate argument that indulgence is inherently animalistic. I find that the evidence points more to indulgence as a human trait, one that emerges when our basic needs are satisfied. While there are those who engage in indulgence to the point where it is legitimately self-destructive, that is not the norm for human behavior.

Plato understands the those who love indulgence are but one type of man, that others love wisdom, and others honor. He also sees that people are a reflection of their upbringing. That when one is raised to value things like honor and wisdom, more than indulgence, that these values will stick with a person. Even should that person be put into a position of temptation, the temptation will be relatively minor and weak in its nature, because that person does not value the indulgence much at all. So an element of dealing with indulgence is discipline, and having that discipline instilled from an early age, but also to orient the person towards other pursuits. When one pursues only indulgence, that is the sign of somebody who needs to be focused towards other things in life, from which deeper satisfaction will be won.

The lover of wisdom is held in high virtue. Plato, a thinker, doubtless prefers to see people like himself as the highest order, and therefore places the lover of wisdom as the highest order, certainly superior to those who love gain: "The lover of wisdom has a great advantage over the lover of gain, for he has double the experience."

Discipline goes along with humility. There is a discussion that many pleasures derive from a cessation of pain -- when one is sick, he finds that good health is a pleasure. But there are other pleasures that do not relate to the cessation of pain. A man with the humility to take pleasure in things like good health not only has a more disciplined mind, but is in a better position than the man who finds that only indulgence is a source of pleasure. Indulgence, he argues, is not true pleasure, and in fact there is risk of diminishing returns with indulgence, hence why old men who have lived for indulgence are often unhappy. True pleasure is in the pursuit of wisdom, foremost, and in the simpler things in life. Part of mastering one's animal desires, therefore, comes in a rational understanding that these are not the greatest pleasures in life, and in fact are false pleasures, and in learning how to appreciate the true pleasures in life. The theme of humility is repeated, however, in Book ten, wherein it is explained that one who thinks he has perfect knowledge has clearly been deceived, and that a certain humility is required to realize that no matter how much you know, you will never know anything.

Plato's discussions on this subject echo a lot of thought from around the world --doubtless he exerted influence over Western thought but Buddhist thought also highlights the futility of the pursuit of indulgence when one is seeking happiness. There are definitely things to be learned, with respect to the fleeting nature of indulgences. I do not agree necessarily that indulgences are an inherent facet of human beings -- that we are slaves to these unless we exert discipline upon ourselves. I do feel that there is something to be learned from the more positive side of Plato's arguments, however. He advocates the pursuit of wisdom and honor, and places these as among the highest virtues. For a society to function well, it cannot simply dedicate itself to indulgence. We can see this today -- our question for ever-growing consumption and comfort has given rise to climate change. We are rather specifically choosing to destroy our planet -- or its ability to sustain our lives -- for the pursuit of comfort and ease. We use engines to transport us, buy goods from the other side of the planet so that we can afford to buy more of them, and ultimately these things are of limited, fleeting value. Our comforts -- we typically have little fear for the availability of food and security -- has given rise to a culture of indulgence, to the point where the need for such indulgence is so ingrained it is never really questioned.

Yet, our pursuits are ultimately facile in nature, and many people live unhappy existences. The truly happy can be either rich or poor -- wealth has nothing to do with happiness, only comfort. Happiness among people today is related to other values, the pursuit of wisdom still appears a potent means of obtaining joy in life. The pursuit of meaning relationships, of knowledge, and finding ways to be satisfied in life without resorting to wanton indulgence of appetites is still a foreign concept to many, yet there is logic to it.

The difficulty in Plato's discussion lies not with its concepts, but in its execution. There are insufficient pathways to this wisdom provided. Plato may well be right about many things, in particular the value of wisdom and relative lack of value of indulgence. But without a clear pathway to show people how to value wisdom, he rests on the pursuit of wisdom being a choice. It is something to which people must opt in. Considering that the pursuit of wisdom is positioned as something that distinguishes humans from other animals, it would seem that this is not really a choice at all -- or it shouldn't be. The pursuit of wisdom should be inherent in us all. This leaves one to ponder our evolution -- we are apparently still on an evolutionary pathway, not to far removed from our animal roots. This should probably be seen as alarming, especially since we apparently have made little progress as a species since Plato was writing over 2000 years ago.