What If Plato Were Alive Today?

Would he be confused or?amazed?

That is the question.

Confused or amazed.

Rebecca Goldstein thought he would be amazed. I was amazed by how she pictured an amazed Plato. I was also amazed at how I misunderstood Plato’s philosophy. More on that at the very end.

The book, Plato at the Googleplex, is one I would recommend to anyone remotely interested in the art of questioning. You might not be interested in philosophy. Usually, it’s because philosophy is not well represented out there.

Some scientists think philosophy is pointless. Sadly, it is the scientists who get called to popular shows and scientific conventions who preach this. Years back, I would have sided with them.

The commonest reason they give for excluding philosophy is from a criterion formed by a philosopher. The irony.

Their defense for the sustenance of science is from a philosopher, Karl Popper. By this standard, philosophy should not be avoided. It should be embraced.

In particular, this book goes into elaborate details revealing how questioning can take one to places where science can’t. Goldstein sets the book in alternating chapters of deep dives into philosophy and Plato’s conversations with various people. The three settings are a conference, Google, and a lab.

At the Googleplex

At the Googleplex, they assume Plato has just released his book. It’s a best seller.

Books can have valuable content but are not best sellers. The keyword?—?seller?—?is often substituted for value. Best sellers are not necessarily as valuable. But they are a starting metric for value.

You might not be swept away by best sellers, but you will not be disappointed. There’s a difference. In this chapter, there’s the assumption that Plato, who is not at all concerned with selling his book, ends up having a best seller.

Of course, it’s Plato. If the author had put it otherwise, one would have wondered if it was Plato she was talking about.

Before giving his Google talk, Plato has a conversation with a coder and his guide. The guide has been helping many authors through such processes, preparing them for the tour and eventually, the talk at Google.

Plato, who we know was always fascinated with knowledge, is taken aback by what Google does. All possible information at the comfort of your palm. It wasn’t this easy back in his day.

The scene creates a spectrum. On one end, someone who hasn’t read any of Plato’s works but has strong opinions about what she believes in. There are moments when she even corrects Plato.

Such moments reminded me of the book by Garrett Hardin, which talks about the importance of conversations with those outside your field. They offer fresh-eyes perspectives.

On the other end, there was the coder, who had consumed every one of Plato’s works. He also felt there were areas Plato could work on, now that there was the ability to learn a lot from Google. He mentions Google’s rank mechanism in arriving at the most reliable information rather than sticking to armchair analysis.

In the middle of this spectrum was Plato, who was open to learning from both sides.

It was a view of the philosopher I never pictured. I liked this Plato

At the conference, there were also two opposing sides, with Plato in the middle. The same case applies to the lab scenario.

In all these cases, Plato was the one asking several questions and seeking or at times offering clarity. I think the author might have done it on purpose, to show the inescapable relevance of philosophy.

The popular phrase, all philosophy is footnotes to Plato, began to make sense.

At the MRI?Machine

At the lab, there was an elderly expert and a young and budding researcher.

The expert represented the obstinate group, who believe there is little to change about what is already known. The young researcher represented the promise of science, which always develops by ousting previously approved theories.

In the middle was Plato, who only wanted his brain scanned.

As you may have predicted, he questioned both sides. The younger side of the argument was more receptive than the elderly side. Go figure. I hope I never develop such a mindset.

But it became clear throughout the book?—?questions are relevant. It does not matter if we have the devices to answer them, nor a field well equipped to test them. But we need to ask.

Questions are essential.

Most importantly, my take on Plato changed.

My take on?Plato

I first heard about Plato and Aristotle when I was in my early primary.

Back then, I remember the quote which ran along the lines of:

All knowledge is rediscovery.

Back then I pictured a yarn. Every increase in knowledge adds an extra string to the yarn. The more the strings, the more stable and spherical the yarn became.

I have been interested in reading since I was young because of this image that never goes away. And it was attached to Plato.

The first incisive introduction to Plato was from my greatest teacher?—?Karl Popper. It was the first section of his book?—?An Open Society and Its Enemies.

Here he talks of the spell of Plato. He does a good job of painting Plato in bad light. I finished the book vowing never to follow Plato’s teachings at all.

Singular perspectives can be that dangerous.

Yes, Plato had something to say about ideals. He also insisted on the idea of a Philosopher King. He considered human beings to be imperfect, unlike the forms he discusses that are seen in geometry.

It’s how humans had fallen from grace.

Popper critiques these and other aspects of Plato’s philosophy.

Goldstein, however, shows a malleable Plato. A Plato who is open to correction, always on a quest to find the truth, and one who is interested in beauty.

To him, beauty is one of the few forms we can see visually. It can also be appreciated as an elegant solution to a problem. It is the basis of the enchantment of scientists with elegant solutions.

Plato talks of eros. That is, a love for knowledge that almost turns erotic.

It is an obsessive interest in finding this beauty, and in the process, being consumed by it. One then becomes beautiful as a result and then regains their long-lost form.

The kind of love one looks at is love which is distant from oneself. Thus by chasing it, you learn to focus on something other than self. You learn to be selfless by seeking the beauty of knowledge.

I think that is beautiful.

At the end of it?all…

It turns out the calm and collected Plato I recently read about was not the mean one I was introduced to.

But you can read the book and have your say on this matter.

It’s a book I’d highly recommend.