- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Heber suggested that I start a discussion on Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, as this was the inspiration for my screen name. For those of you who aren’t familiar with it, or just want to run through it as a reminder, here as a link to the text: http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/allegory.htmlhttp://www.historyguide.org/intellect/allegory.html” class=”bbcode_url”> And another link with a brief summary and an illustration:
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htmhttp://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm” class=”bbcode_url”> This allegory floored me the first time I read it, and it has taken on deeper meaning to me now because
of my current faith journey. To give a short summary, Plato sets up a hypothetical situation. Several prisoners have lived their entire life in a cave. They are bound in such a way that they can only look forward and see the wall in front of them. Behind them is a fire, and they can see shadows cast on the wall as their captors move around behind them. The shadows they see on the wall are all they know, and this is their reality. They even give awards and recognition amongst themselves for those who are the most adept in their knowledge of the shadows, and can predict their movements, etc.
But, what if someone were to be released and leave the cave? What would he think when he first turns around and sees the fire and the actual objects which cast the shadows? Would he recognize them for what they are, or would he still believe the shadows to be more real? When he exits the cave and comes into the sunlight, it will be painful to see at first as his eyes adjust to the increase in light. His world view will be forced to expand suddenly, which will surely be troubling.
Now imagine after he has come to accept his new life in the big and bright new world, he returns to visit his friends in the cave. How he can explain to them what the outside world is like when they have no knowledge of anything but the cave? They may think he has gone mad or lost his mind as he tries to explain it to them. He may have had a reputation for his great knowledge of the shadows, but because his eyes are now use to greater light, it will be hard for him to see in the cave again, and furthermore he will probably have little interest in playing their games anymore.
I think all of us who have gone through a faith crisis can relate to this man’s plight. The part that connects with me the most now is the idea of having to return to face those still in the cave. My parents have been as supportive as I could ever hope as I have gone through this faith journey, but there is still a gap in communication. In my eyes, I have come to realize the symbols and stories of the gospel for what they are: shadows of an ultimate reality, but not reality itself. I have come to see the world as a complex and colorful place, and not one of black and white. In the eyes of many TBMs though, I have let go of the iron rod, been deceived by Satan, and wandered into forbidden paths. It is hard, because I want to be understood. But I recognize that words alone cannot describe what I am going through. It is something that has to be experienced; you have to leave the cave for yourself.
The cave was a comfortable place for me to live. This new world I have entered is a big, complex, and confusing place. But as much as I wish I could have that peace of mind and sense of meaning in my life again, it would be just as difficult for me to go back to believing the way I used to as it would be for the man from Plato’s cave to go back to believing that the shadows on the wall are reality.
I’d love to hear all of your insights from reading the Allegory of the Cave!
I am not a fan of the allegory of the cave, nor the theory of forms, rationalism/realism that provides the basis of the allegory. Plato’s concept is that the true reality is the ideal (the perfect, the flawless, that which exists before men come to the forms) and this world is the illusion of shadows. I believe this thinking is flawed, because it takes us out of an appreciation for being in itself, for itself, living within the moment.
Take a chair, for example. to plato, the ideal, the universal, is the ideal of a chair. Each and every chair is but a shadow of the ideal chair. in Plato, the idea — the essence — of a chair precedes the existence of the chair, and the physical chair is a flawed implementation of the chair. But is this how life really works?
To a god in heaven according to Plato, everything on earth has already played out in the ideal in the heavens. this is paralleled in early mormon thinking about the ‘spiritual creation’ that preceded the actual creation, as a poor way to explain the different creation accounts in scriptrue. Does god plan out everything? Is each and every chair somehow a poor creation of the perfect chair? What a trap this is! what a lot of bunk.
In the platonic ideal, essence precedes existence. while very compatible with the LDS concept of pre-mortal existence, and a ‘plan’ of salvation, I have come to see that existence precedes essence. We are, therefore we think, and not the other way around.
Take a chair for instance. In my emergent, extistential understanding, the chair nor the ideal does not initially exist. A primitive person feels the need to rest one’s legs, and rather than sitting on the ground, s/he sits on a log. Wow, this is more comfortable than the ground, s/he thinks. And, noticing that if i use a stump, with a bit of wood on th eback so my back can be supported, this is more comfortable. In time, our caveman figures out that the log or stump is too heavy, and carves out the unneeded wood underneath, giving our chair legs instead of a solid stump. In time, we have a chair. it emerged from need and circumstance.
The flaw in my mind of the allegory of the cave is that it says that ‘reality’ is somewhere other than our current existence. We ever want to get to the ideal — the fire, and then the sunlight, instead of embracing our material reality. In the allegory of the cave, the people are slaves to the chain on their necks. Humans are not slaves, except to the idea that they prefer the unreal to the material reality. To make the most of the moment, to live a happy and fulfilled life, one does not seek for the ideal and perfection that can never be achieved. One accepts present reality, and makes the very best of it, adapting and growing in the environment and emerging new realities that are ever more comforting and useful.
The more I lose sight of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the darker my life is, like dwelling in a cave. The more I’m following the Gospel of Jesus Christ and experiencing the influence of Holy Ghost, the more I see “things as they really are, and of things as they really will be.” That is when the world is bright and beautiful. wayfarer wrote:Plato’s concept is that the true reality is the ideal (the perfect, the flawless, that which exists before men come to the forms) and this world is the illusion of shadows.
Yeah, I am definitely not reading the allegory the way Plato probably intended it to be interpreted. But I am still able to find deep personal meaning in the story. I have always liked Nephi’s strategy of “likening the scriptures unto ourselves”. The writings of Isaiah had nothing to do with Lehi’s family and their migration, but Nephi was able to make connections with the motifs like the scattering and gathering of Israel and apply them to their current situation. Hindus and Buddhists would probably be appalled at how I interpret their writings as well. I’m afraid I have a horrible habit of Mormonizing everything I read. But being able to find meaning and application is the most important thing for me.
I’ll concede your point on the ‘Platonic Ideal’ though. The idea that everything in the material world is inherently flawed simply because it is made of physical matter does not resonate well with me.
wayfarer wrote:Take a chair for instance. In my emergent, extistential understanding, the chair nor the ideal does not initially exist. A primitive person feels the need to rest one’s legs, and rather than sitting on the ground, s/he sits on a log. Wow, this is more comfortable than the ground, s/he thinks. And, noticing that if i use a stump, with a bit of wood on the back so my back can be supported, this is more comfortable. In time, our caveman figures out that the log or stump is too heavy, and carves out the unneeded wood underneath, giving our chair legs instead of a solid stump. In time, we have a chair. it emerged from need and circumstance.
This is good stuff. To Mormon-ize it again, I would link this to Eternal Progression. I don’t really buy the traditional Christian idea that the garden of Eden was the pinnacle of perfection, mankind screwed it up, and the whole divine drama that is being played out now is to regain this “paradise lost”. We will always be learning, always growing, always improving. (I apologize if I totally twisted that out of the context you intended).
Shawn wrote:The more I lose sight of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the darker my life is, like dwelling in a cave. The more I’m following the Gospel of Jesus Christ and experiencing the influence of Holy Ghost, the more I see “things as they really are, and of things as they really will be.” That is when the world is bright and beautiful.
This is closer to how I interpreted the Cave Allegory before hitting my faith crisis, and I think it is an equally valid way of looking at it. Thanks for sharing.
I like this allegory. I believe all allegories have their limitations, but there are some interesting points about this one. 1). Is the “real world” in the bright Sunlight seeing things when looking outside the church view feeling like the cave was a false reality of shadows with 14 fundamental puppeteers limiting our view, or is the shadows all the world sees and the gospel and the church bring us to the bright sunlight of seeing things as they really are and a brighter truth? The allegory does not dictate one or the other, we place those meanings on it from our points of view. It seems to me it could be either.
2). There seems to be a drive many of us have to return to the cave. I find that interesting. We are social beings. We don’t just leave the cave and move on, we seem to want to return, and seem to be surprised it is not always a joyful reunion.
3). trying to tell others about our experience is more difficult than we think sometimes. Some things need to be experienced, only then do the stories we tell make sense or are trusted. When we don’t understand another’s experience, we often place meaning on it,like they have gone mad or are led astray, because that makes sense to us from our point of view.
leavingthecave25 wrote:In the eyes of many TBMs though, I have let go of the iron rod, been deceived by Satan, and wandered into forbidden paths. It is hard, because I want to be understood. But I recognize that words alone cannot describe what I am going through. It is something that has to be experienced; you have to leave the cave for yourself.
I see this is the struggle John Dehlin’s and many others have been having, trying to have the conversations is one of the hardest parts. It is why sites like this one exist. Many of us share some similar part of this experience.
As for the chair, wayfarer makes some incredibly insightful points with that, but I am not sure I see the application to the cave allegory,only that it helps us know more about Plato’s point of view and where he may have been coming from. That aside, Plato was not talking about Mormonism, but I can see some interesting lessons on how the cave applies to our experiences with Mormonism. Maybe you can clarify for me more, wayfarer. Why can we not work with the allegory, even if it is limited?
Like I said above, is the cave the experience in the church, or is the cave the experience in the world without the gospel’s light and knowledge? An interesting question for me to ponder.
Heber13 wrote:is the cave the experience in the church, or is the cave the experience in the world without the gospel’s light and knowledge? An interesting question for me to ponder.
To me it is neither the one nor the other. Living in the cave is living life tied to a dogma or orthodoxy, or even to our own intuition, within a religious affiliation or otherwise, without allowing that our intuition or dogma may only be a faint reflection (or shadow, in this case) of reality, with the result that our possibilities for growth are severely restricted.
Personally, I don’t like caves. It’s interesting how allegories (and lots of other things) can rise or fall for individuals based on such fundamental, non-intellectual things.
Yes, I’ve heard of Plato’s cave. An interesting idea, but a curious one. We might see the shadows, but for all we know the shadows themselves are reflected shadows… putting us at two removes. SamBee wrote:for all we know the shadows themselves are reflected shadows… putting us at two removes.
That’s an interesting thought, Sam. I also wonder if perhaps at some point, though they may be shadows, they represent things well enough to still live by and be happy. In other words, maybe the shadows aren’t all lies and deception of truth, but a good reflection of it, so we can have enough assurance to go on and base life and moral decisions on them. The shadows Joseph Smith made were good shadows…but shadows still the same.I seem to recall Plato wrote a lot about ideals… i.e. when we see a tree, somewhere there is an ideal tree… and when we see a rock we are not seeing the ideal rock. Hard to get your head round, but I think I know what he was driving at. Yes, Sambee, and in some ways that fits the Mormon teaching that things are always created twice…spiritually and physically and the spiritual (planned form) is perfect even if the physical mortal form is imperfectly following its potential of the spiritual form. Our bodies have imperfections and get sick and get old and are only the physical form of our eternal spiritual nature, but it is what we have to see and work with in this state. So that part of Plato’s teachings fit in some ways. As Wayfarer was mentioning, however, there are weaknesses or drawbacks to that line of thought. If it takes us away from our present condition, and we fail to see the good we have right now before us, it can be a distraction to us. It can lead us to believe all things are just shadows, and we only value what we cannot have. Whereas some of the Eastern philosophies are more focused on the present. (Wayfarer can explain that more clearly, I’m sure).
I think there is a bit of a Mormon aversion to Plato as well though. I believe some of our prophets and leaders have taught that early Christianity became tainted with the “philosophies of man”, and that Plato is singled out as one of those philosophers. leavingthecave25, The one quibble I have with the allegory is the inherent view that the real world is more wonderful and fulfilling than the cave. In the case of leaving the LDS faith, I’d have to differ. Many do feel that they have entered a more enriching world, and I’m glad for them, but I still wish I’d taken the blue pill. I loved my life before. Everything had meaning and purpose. Hard times could come and go, but there was a steady serene aspect to life that made it easy to relegate hard things to the noise level. I have fallen more than most; being an Atheist now. In Atheism, death is not kind. In my new faith, when our loved-ones pass away, and in fact, someday when each of us passes away, there is no wonderful afterlife that awaits the departed. Rather, all are simply annihilated. It will be as if we never existed. There will be no entity that was once us, or that has any recollection of having been alive… just nothingness. For me, I’d rather still be “in the cave”… not from the standpoint of believing something that isn’t real, but rather from the standpoint of choosing to believe in something uplifting and good.
That’s why, for me, and I acknowledge that others can have a different perspective, but for me, I will never try to convince anyone to leave the cave. If they are happy, why would I want to impose my perception of “truth” on them and take it upon myself to risk what they love so dearly?
On Own Now wrote:…The one quibble I have with the allegory is the inherent view that the real world is more wonderful and fulfilling than the cave. In the case of leaving the LDS faith, I’d have to differ. Many do feel that they have entered a more enriching world, and I’m glad for them, but
I still wish I’d taken the blue pill. I loved my life before. Everything had meaning and purpose. I have fallen more than most; being an Atheist now. In Atheism, death is not kind.In my new faith, when our loved-ones pass away, and in fact, someday when each of us passes away, there is no wonderful afterlife that awaits the departed. Rather, all are simply annihilated. It will be as if we never existed. There will be no entity that was once us, or that has any recollection of having been alive… just nothingness. For me, I’d rather still be “in the cave”… not from the standpoint of believing something that isn’t real, but rather from the standpoint of choosing to believe in something uplifting and good…That’s why, for me, and I acknowledge that others can have a different perspective, but for me, I will never try to convince anyone to leave the cave. If they are happy, why would I want to impose my perception of “truth” on them and take it upon myself to risk what they love so dearly? Actually part of this original cave example is that it would usually be difficult for people to face and accept reality after they have already become accustomed to accepting illusions as being real. Also Plato was an idealist that thought there had to be something better than what we experience directly in the physical world such as “the Good” and other perfect “forms” this world supposedly only reflects in an imperfect way so unlike you he probably didn’t think there was any good reason why people should prefer to stay in the cave permanently and yet he still expected resistance to new perspectives that didn’t match what people already expected to see. That’s the main thing I get out of this cave allegory; basically that ignorance, denial, and oversimplification are all too human but sometimes it is better in the long run to go outside our comfort zone long enough to at least consider alternative possibilities.
This reminds me of the main reason I don’t believe that most Church leaders mean any harm because for most of them the Church is all they have really known their entire lives and they are emotionally invested in it. So the first reaction to any serious threats to their cherished beliefs would understandably be denial in many cases and even if they start to have serious doubts they could still rationalize that if they were happier themselves when they had a simple child-like faith in the Church then maybe others will feel the same way so then they want to protect other members’ belief in it even if that means perpetuating myths with whitewashed history and doctrines. However, for me losing faith in the Church was more of a relief than anything else after the initial adjustment period because I associated the Church with so many pointless and unnecessary guilt-trips and unreasonably harsh expectations and demands.
On Own Now wrote:The one quibble I have with the allegory is the inherent view that the real world is more wonderful and fulfilling than the cave. In the case of leaving the LDS faith, I’d have to differ. Many do feel that they have entered a more enriching world, and I’m glad for them, but I still wish I’d taken the blue pill.
I feel the same way. I don’t find the outside world to be more joyful and more fulfilling. I miss the sense of meaning and certainty I had when I was still able to believe. Now I have to work to find meaning and simply accept the fact that there is no such thing as certainty. I think of the scene from the Matrix where a man is sitting in a restaurant eating a steak, and comments that even though he knows it is all a simulation, that it still tastes good. “Ignorance is bliss”, he says. I’m trying to make the best of it, but I kind of wish I’d taken the blue pill too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.