The paper needs to discuss the pedagogical theory’s in Plato’s republic (Cornford Edition) using the chapters on education and training ,as well as the conversations Socrates has with all other characters as methods of teaching. No other references are required, only use of the Cornford edition of the Republic. The essay is for a political science class, so some consideration must be given to how education effects the polis.

Pedagogical Theory in Plato’s Republic

Plato was one of the first philosophers to invent a three-level classification of students in public education. According to him, his aim was separating men with golden hearts as well as intellects by training and educating them to run higher state functions as executives or rulers. It is presumed that lack of proper nurture would cause a bright student lose or lack interest in serving citizens of a state His three-leveled public education comprised the ordinary elementary school, secondary school and state university. Admission to secondary school was selective whereas to the university was more selective.

Plato the father of the ancient Academy was born within 429 BC in Athens died in 348/7. His parents had reputable ancestry his father Ariston being a descendant of an Athens King and Perictione his mother had blood ties with Solon the well renowned Athenian constitution architect. Ariston his father died young and his mother married Pyrilampes, her uncle. Pyrilampes was a great friend of Pericles who was by then a statesman in Athens. Hence, Plato was exposed to politics from an early age but he lost interest and instead turned to philosophy when his teacher and mentor, Socrates was executed.

Plato himself was an academician, having written several dialogues which survive to date and having founded the Academy which is the mother of all universities. The academy was a teaching as well as a research center that focused on both theoretical and practical subjects. Some of the Academy products were Eudoxus the one who geometrically explained the rotations of the earth, sun and moon and Theaetetus who developed his solid geometry in the Academy.  His philosophical works were mainly influenced by Socrates while his successors including Speusippus his nephew continually modified his teachings (Burt, 1975).

Plato was a lover of justice and harmony and according to him education and training were the only keys to achieve the virtues. In his three-level system of education the elementary school curriculum covered literature, music plus civics. In secondary school students studied arithmetic, mathematics, plane in addition to solid geometry, harmonics and astronomy in preparation for future posts in the civil and military services. Higher learning recommended one to undertake five years in dialectic learning. In addition those that were elected to lead the supreme state were required to go for fifteen years in practical experience.

These rulers were then trained and employed for internal law enforcement work and external warfare. This rigorous training prepared the select few, intellects, to spend eternity as philosophers. The ideal state according to Plato relied on kings being philosophers if not philosophers being kings.

His republic required equal opportunities for education, indiscriminative of gender However; this thought was presumed revolutionary during that time. Women got the same opportunities in education as men for both body and mind. They also were privileged to be instilled the art of war. In cases where she possessed acceptable natural gifts, a woman shared the uppermost public duties on equal terms with men. Though it was comprehended that she possessed physical weakness, all occupational opportunities were to a woman. Naturally, a man was perceived suitable for splendor and valor while a woman for temperance and orderliness.

In the republic the initiative of gifted students in the system of education was evident during mathematics discussions. Plato supposed that every student needed to be exposed to mathematics for it contributed to mental prowess of students as well as sharpened their wits and improved their levels of concentration. Higher mathematical skills were presumed essential for the few elect leaders. Hence, systematic thoroughness and accuracy was highly considered in teaching gifted students.

The advanced curriculum was applied to students who demonstrated an understanding of a broad-spectrum of a variety of curriculum areas. Any student who successfully grasped the practical as well as the theoretical connection by age thirty he secured an admission to study philosophy, the peak and most complete of all studies.

The description of Plato to Socrates is one of a philosopher who cut across conservative philosophy and entirely twisted its course. The philosophy of Socrates is realized in his art of speech, listening as well as the interest of trust that he banks on conversation as well as argument. Socrates influenced teaching and public life by use of conversation. His way of life greatly influences public life by insisting on having the Socratic dialectic which does not focus on evil but good.

Socratic teaching uses conversation thus engages students in questions and struggle by conversation. A teacher with Socratic inspiration is committed to rigorous examinations of the morals and faith of the moment, highly recognizing the widely shared but rarely questioned convictions. The prime targets are reliance prestigious paradigms and dependence on consensus. This teaching explores effects of compelling alternatives on current fashions.

Socratic teaching demands us to face and reflect the philosophy we perform in our everyday conversations and our regard to others in speech. According to Socrates, an inhabitant of oral culture, an inhabitant of contextual oral culture, philosophizing meant conversing with other people about topics that mattered the most since they gave reference to the primary issues of the life of man and human nature. Philosophy presented itself in the soul of every man thus Socrates applied philosophy by initiated this prospective to reveal itself.

The distinguishing feature in Socratic conversation is its famous questioning. Socratic questioning ventures out to the way of conversation in the setting of interlocutors. Discussion topics are sternly maintained within the prospects of the comprehension of every participant of the debate. However, there are minimal chances of losing the thread or else having built up hidden disagreement on the argument. Therefore, in cases of an occurrence of opposition Socrates attempts to overcome it through recasting the discussion in acceptable terms to all.

Socratic questioning includes unrelenting questions to the listeners, forcing every individual to speak out, voice personal opinions and stand ground in their own statements. None of the opinions is allowed to lie in wait in bay of a complaining mind while no argument ought to be carried on without consensus and total understanding.

According to Socrates, philosophy comes out from conversation whose confrontational questions form base for mutual inquiry.  In fact Platonic dialogue had its motivation from Socratic teaching of questions and answers. Dialogue was believed to be originally a philosophical thought and a way of bringing two people to an understanding of any subject. Being a faithful follower of Socrates calls for making known personal moral stances since, Socrates stresses on the virtue of honesty. Socratic conversation entails that heard voices be very well connected with their positions.

The first rule, elenchus, states that the respondent is obliged to say what he thinks. Protagoras took on a view that was hypothetical that aimed at breaking this rule. However, Socrates stopped him right away and when Callicles hesitated to give Socrates an answer to a posed question Socrates responded by stating that the inquiry could not proceed if he lacked courage to talk freely. Socrates argues that though the compliance of the respondent eases his job, the respondent should not restrict himself from saying what he really believes.

Elenchus or refutation exceeds just a mere exercise within philosophical analysis.  The mode of asking individuals to ly make a stand on their moral intuitions in their day to day lives certainly reveals an element of their characters. As much as Elenchus is concerned with courage, humility and honesty it also has something to do with reasonable acumen. It emphasizes on the honesty that will drive one to pronounce his thoughts, humility to confess what one is not acquainted with, and courage to move on with the investigation.

Socrates twists philosophy to fit our daily lives through discovering philosophy in choices to the elements of conversation when confronted by questions regarding our choice of way of life and how we tell it to people. Emotion and experience as well as conversation result to personal views on what one is supposed to do. Conversation takes place in social as well as historical contexts. The conversation is deemed to live given that human beings will live in a world that gives them the consent to converse freely every one with another.

Nevertheless, most of his respondents lack all the three elements namely; honesty, humility and courage. When Socrates stops Protagoras from defying the rule of honesty in saying what is in the mind, Protagoras becomes enraged. When Socrates concludes that inquiry could not proceed if Callicles lacked the courage to answer, Callicles began to sulk. Polus on one hand opted to apply cheap rhetorical actions while Critias lost his self-control and Meno wanted to quit. These reactions have since left a lot of questionable doubt creating discrepancy in the ideas with their personalities.

Active participation in Socratic conversation needs searching questions from active listening as well as a will to face up to own ignorance. Socrates models by pronouncing his personal ignorance while confronting that of other individuals. He would make us meet head-on with our knowledge on virtue and our assumptions on what we claim to possess virtue in our professions or work, through our tête-à-tête with others.

The teachings of Socrates extend to making believe the fact that it is impossible to teach virtue but instead virtue is embodied. Socrates himself is a good example of virtue and excellence and he enacts this through his unremitting questing and questioning. Though he may not fully succeed in demonstrating the definition of virtue, but he manages to elaborate virtue as well as excellence through his perfect example of his personal life.

Socrates calls us to evaluate the worth and not the popularity of what we learn. He adds that whatever one learns should not have the capacity to exterminate the psyche just as contaminated food exterminates the body. Socrates spent a good fortune of his life scrutinizing existing presuppositions of Athens. He found out that his philosophy existed as a stance in the countenance of ignorance. Though his life was envisaged critical he was as well constructive.

Socratic power had a great influence in polis for it penetrated the worlds of emotional appearances, physical and perceptual. This world consists of emotions of liking and disliking, a world which people attach their emotions to. Socrates talks about the disparity amid being good and appearing good. There is some possibility that an external manifestation of goodness reflects an inward goodness. Nevertheless, it could possibly not be the fact.   Education from a younger age is believed to curb violence in the society (Elkins, 2000).

Violence in young people has continuously raised major concern by the public in modern societies. Violence prevention merely needs an understanding of growth of young children who are innocent into adolescents who are violent. Research on children from their onset of infancy to adulthood reveals that violence is at its peak between the age of two and four after birth. However, due to the petit sizes of the two-year-olds their physical aggression poses no major threat.

Plato the academician was also Plato the political scientist. Greece by then was ruled by kings and sub-kings. Administration was carried out through the royal household by servants who were assigned different functions. The system comprises classes whereby those with top ranks helped the king perform religious duties as well as representing him in various public functions. The juniors for instance the lesser therapontes were made to control the armory or stables. Army recruitment and supplies were allocated in accordance with tribe.

Thus, by sixth century Homeric kingship as system of government had declined. Plato was highly cynical of the system and in fact described the process of choosing the ephorate by lot excessively childish. Plato and other philosophers like Thucydides and Aristotle highly developed the science of politics in Greek organization and administration. Through education, Plato was set to design the best society that gave an assurance of good life to its citizens. Plato in his works questioned democracy that was claimed to be yet power was not in the hands of a whole but in the hands of a minority.  He adds that education was the only key to a liberalized state by concluding that if kings did not become philosophers or philosophers were not kings then it was bound for trouble to remain.

REFERENCES

Plato. (1973/393 BC). Plato:Laches and charmides. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

Plato. (1951). The Republic. (F. Cornford, Ed., & F. Conford, Trans.) U.S.A: Oxford University Press.

Plato, & Reeve, C. D. (2004). Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.

Order with us for a unique essay on the topic