Philosopher Kings of Plato - John Waters
My talent for exploration and investigation moved me to
examine Plato and other famous philosophers as well as existing
systems. Plato in fact suggested transforming large groups of people
into societies governed by a large number of "philosopher-kings."
These "rulers" would not compete like horses running a race, but
instead would cooperate like worker bees in a healthy hive, and like
individual leaves in a healthy tree, and like individual tissues and
organs in a healthy human body, all to cooperate to keep the whole
population healthy and fit in mind, in body, and in spirit. But
unfortunately as yet no traditional culture, religion, or nature has
really taken pains to test Plato's invention.
One can go to a modern University in the United States - and perhaps
still in Europe, and meet with learned professors who can talk
extensively about Plato, and even defend Whitehead's claim that "all
of Western philosophy is merely footnotes to Plato" but really in fact
the traditions in philosophy broke apart several hundred years ago
when a few philosophers found serious faults with traditional Western
philosophy so thewe mavericks worked out what they called "natural
philosophy." This rebellion led to the Renaissance and the
Enlightenment which led to modern Western mathematics, science, and
technology which all modern nations now enjoy, thanks to Roger Bacon,
Francis Bacon, Renee Descartes, Isaac Newton and scads of other math
and science and engineering geniuses. All this multifaceted and
multidisciplinary history is available to any independent researcher.
You don't need a college degree to study these subjects. You don't
even need a high school diploma - now with the global Internet.
The revolutionary socio-cultural idea of Plato can be stripped of all
his specialized greek conceptions and language and built up from the
ground level provided we understand exactly how each
"philosopher-king" would be educated. The problem is being clear in
what a good "king" is and what a good "philosopher" is. And the
defining prerequisites have to be testable. The Renaissance and the
Enlightenment leaders argued this to produce "natural
philosophy"(science) out of "classical philosophy."
So really, the term "philosopher" is "natural scientist." That is a
person who knows a lot of truths that are defensible through
reasoning, math, and repeated testing - as in physics, chemistry, and
other "natural philosophies." Modernity has thus define
"philosopher." But what is a good "king" or "ruler"? Remember we
have to test this definition on many different persons and nations.
We have to run experiments!
Well consider all the modern nations and their histories. Has any
nation ever worked on Plato and tested Plato's idea? How many schools
have taught the meaning of "philosophy" and "regality" to children in
theory and in practice? The answer is zero.
==========
Down through history certain kings and premieres and presidents have
been more popular than others. By and large the best king pays best
attention to all of his subjects so that no faction of his society
plots to have the man removed legally or by ruthless force. With
regal females the same rule is general. And with science the same
rule holds, that is the student of geology pays attention to all of
the kinds of rocks and land formations. The good geologist does not
avoid the study of sedimentary rocks, for example. The good
meteorologist can talk intelligently and accurately about tornadoes
and thunderstorms and cirrus clouds, and high pressure areas, and so
on down the line. Today any good student knows about science if he or
she is a high school graduate, because science rules. Without science
there would be no modern civilization.
When it comes to human cultures and human societies, however, the
schools do not teach any science of humanity, human culturing, human
society and human education. The schools of one nation do not teach
the wide variety of foreign cultures. Instead each culture remains
firmly focused on only one "ideology" and doesn't scientifically
examine and test each one of the various ideologies to see which one
best fits Plato's model.
Plato's model anticipates the age of modern sciences, because each
field of modern science follow the rule of being a true natural
philosopher and being a true regal leader and teacher. The King and
the Scientist are equally attentive to each and every subject. In
this case the subject is different cultures, different ideologies,
different religious sects, nations, schools, etc.
In other words, rather than various groups waging wars of words,
money, legal fights, and military battles, under the new system
peaceable proven methods to testing and truth-finding are applied.
Plato anticipated the future human need. If the present-day
anti-scientific superstition-bound archaic sociocultural systems are
maintained - human error and/or machine error will produce a
catastrophic chain of ecocidal genocidal mutagenic mass extinction
events.
The news today is filled such fear talks and mad threats of war, but
as yet I know of no transnational research program that is promoting
the testing of Plato's "messianic" solution to the global human
problem.
The UN "Agenda 21" eutopian scheme just doesn't "cut it." Other more
traditional socio-cultural programs such as "socialism" and
"communism" and "capitalism" all failed to critique and replace the
anti-science pedagogy. Even the most so-called "progressive"
education systems refuse to be scientific when it comes to the full
(true) human potential and study, respect, and foster each and every
one of the human potentials as they exist in any large population of
children.
Background book authors include Dr. Richard Maurice Bucke MD, Dr.
Barbara Brown, MD, and Dr. Rhoda Kellogg, PhD.
examine Plato and other famous philosophers as well as existing
systems. Plato in fact suggested transforming large groups of people
into societies governed by a large number of "philosopher-kings."
These "rulers" would not compete like horses running a race, but
instead would cooperate like worker bees in a healthy hive, and like
individual leaves in a healthy tree, and like individual tissues and
organs in a healthy human body, all to cooperate to keep the whole
population healthy and fit in mind, in body, and in spirit. But
unfortunately as yet no traditional culture, religion, or nature has
really taken pains to test Plato's invention.
One can go to a modern University in the United States - and perhaps
still in Europe, and meet with learned professors who can talk
extensively about Plato, and even defend Whitehead's claim that "all
of Western philosophy is merely footnotes to Plato" but really in fact
the traditions in philosophy broke apart several hundred years ago
when a few philosophers found serious faults with traditional Western
philosophy so thewe mavericks worked out what they called "natural
philosophy." This rebellion led to the Renaissance and the
Enlightenment which led to modern Western mathematics, science, and
technology which all modern nations now enjoy, thanks to Roger Bacon,
Francis Bacon, Renee Descartes, Isaac Newton and scads of other math
and science and engineering geniuses. All this multifaceted and
multidisciplinary history is available to any independent researcher.
You don't need a college degree to study these subjects. You don't
even need a high school diploma - now with the global Internet.
The revolutionary socio-cultural idea of Plato can be stripped of all
his specialized greek conceptions and language and built up from the
ground level provided we understand exactly how each
"philosopher-king" would be educated. The problem is being clear in
what a good "king" is and what a good "philosopher" is. And the
defining prerequisites have to be testable. The Renaissance and the
Enlightenment leaders argued this to produce "natural
philosophy"(science) out of "classical philosophy."
So really, the term "philosopher" is "natural scientist." That is a
person who knows a lot of truths that are defensible through
reasoning, math, and repeated testing - as in physics, chemistry, and
other "natural philosophies." Modernity has thus define
"philosopher." But what is a good "king" or "ruler"? Remember we
have to test this definition on many different persons and nations.
We have to run experiments!
Well consider all the modern nations and their histories. Has any
nation ever worked on Plato and tested Plato's idea? How many schools
have taught the meaning of "philosophy" and "regality" to children in
theory and in practice? The answer is zero.
==========
Down through history certain kings and premieres and presidents have
been more popular than others. By and large the best king pays best
attention to all of his subjects so that no faction of his society
plots to have the man removed legally or by ruthless force. With
regal females the same rule is general. And with science the same
rule holds, that is the student of geology pays attention to all of
the kinds of rocks and land formations. The good geologist does not
avoid the study of sedimentary rocks, for example. The good
meteorologist can talk intelligently and accurately about tornadoes
and thunderstorms and cirrus clouds, and high pressure areas, and so
on down the line. Today any good student knows about science if he or
she is a high school graduate, because science rules. Without science
there would be no modern civilization.
When it comes to human cultures and human societies, however, the
schools do not teach any science of humanity, human culturing, human
society and human education. The schools of one nation do not teach
the wide variety of foreign cultures. Instead each culture remains
firmly focused on only one "ideology" and doesn't scientifically
examine and test each one of the various ideologies to see which one
best fits Plato's model.
Plato's model anticipates the age of modern sciences, because each
field of modern science follow the rule of being a true natural
philosopher and being a true regal leader and teacher. The King and
the Scientist are equally attentive to each and every subject. In
this case the subject is different cultures, different ideologies,
different religious sects, nations, schools, etc.
In other words, rather than various groups waging wars of words,
money, legal fights, and military battles, under the new system
peaceable proven methods to testing and truth-finding are applied.
Plato anticipated the future human need. If the present-day
anti-scientific superstition-bound archaic sociocultural systems are
maintained - human error and/or machine error will produce a
catastrophic chain of ecocidal genocidal mutagenic mass extinction
events.
The news today is filled such fear talks and mad threats of war, but
as yet I know of no transnational research program that is promoting
the testing of Plato's "messianic" solution to the global human
problem.
The UN "Agenda 21" eutopian scheme just doesn't "cut it." Other more
traditional socio-cultural programs such as "socialism" and
"communism" and "capitalism" all failed to critique and replace the
anti-science pedagogy. Even the most so-called "progressive"
education systems refuse to be scientific when it comes to the full
(true) human potential and study, respect, and foster each and every
one of the human potentials as they exist in any large population of
children.
Background book authors include Dr. Richard Maurice Bucke MD, Dr.
Barbara Brown, MD, and Dr. Rhoda Kellogg, PhD.
Comments
Post a Comment