Plato and Inspiration

Plato and Inspiration ROBERT EDGAR CARTER PHILOSOPHY, AS UNDERSTOODBY PLATO,is methodical. The system of education outlined in the Republic illustrates Plato's awareness of the difficulties involved and time required to train a student to exercise wisdom of judgment and to perform careful analysis; in short, to prepare a student for the proper use of dialectic. Not until the age of thirty is the student introduced to dialectic, for the young "when they first get the taste in their mouths, argue for amusement, and are always contradicting and refuting others in imitation of those who refute them." 1 Philosophy is not a haphazard investigation into areas of concern, but a systematic method of approach. On the contrary, art in general and poetry and rhapsody in particular are to be classed as non-methodical. Insight and truth are arrived at almost inadvertently. The word which Plato comes to use to describe this non-methodical approach is inspiration (~owm~#&). From what has been said thus far it seems that dialectic and inspiration are antithetical. It is the purpose of this study to show that, although this is sometimes true, in the final analysis dialectic and inspiration are complementary, and that the artist-philosopher is the pinnacle of Platonic wisdom. It is primarily in the Ion and Phaedrus, though not exclusively, that Plato comes to grips with the distinctions between the philosopher and the artist, dialectic and inspiration, and suggests the proper synthesis between the two. In the Ion Socrates is quick to point out that the rhapsody has no systematic method of interpretation, for Ion "knows" how to interpret Homer only, and not the other poets,e Since poetry is a whole,8 a method of poetic interpretation would allow one to interpret all poetry and all poets equally well. Two things are to be noticed here. First, if poetry is a whole, and Ion has no method by means of which to interpret poetry, then he has no method for his interpretation of Homer either. It is for this lack that Plato criticizes Ion and his profession. Second, notice the sense in which Socrates defines poetry as a whole: Does not Homer speak of the same themes which all other poets handle? Is not war his great argument? And doeshe not speak of human society and of intercourse of men, good and bad, skilled and unskilled, and of the gods conversing with one another and with mankind, and about what happens in heaven and in the world below, and the generations of gods and heroes?~ The significant point is that the themes of poetry are also the themes of philosophy. The implication is that the poet treats important philosophic themes unphilosophically. This implies, of course, that Plato has such a method of 1Republic, 539b. Ion, 531a. Ibid., 532c. Ibid., 531c. [1111 112 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY literary criticism, but we do not find it in the Ion. Not until the Phaedrus is the systematic method of literary criticism offered. Although Ion is a recognized authority on Homer, he finds that his mind takes to wandering when other poets are mentioned. 5 Confused by this, Ion asks Socrates if he knows the reason for this.6 In answer, Socrates introduces his theory of poetic inspiration. T Having established that Ion speaks of Homer without any art (~x~) or knowledge, Socrates posits that he must gain his words from an external source. Ion must be possessed by a divinity. A poet is a light and winged and holy thing in whom there is no creativity until "he has been inspired and is out of his senses, and the mind is no longer in him." s The same holds true for the rhapsode. Ion is possessed by the same divinity which possessed Homer--as links in a magnetic chain are held together by the same original force, through the one immediately preceding. Ion is temporarily inspired or possessed by the source of Homer's insight. Indeed, Ion goes so far as to admit that he is not in his right mind during a performance, for he totally identifies with his character, his hair standing on end and his heart throbbing at a tale of...