Getting Started: Initial Notes

[Williams College]

The tutorial presumes that in thinking about the readings, lecture, and discussion, you have arrived at a topic you wish to write on. We will follow a (fictional) student who decides to write on the parallel between the parts of the just soul and parts of a just city proposed by Socrates. On the left side are the student's writing notes. On the right are annotations.

General tips for approaching writing

Plato has Socrates reveal what justice is in an individual by applying the account of justice in the city to our soul. The basic idea seems to be that, just as every person has a place where her excellence will play a role in generating harmony in the city, within every individual the competing parts of our psychology will each have an appropriate role. If the parts of our soul are ordered and in harmony, then we will be individually just. This idea will only work, though, if Socrates is right in his view about the parts of our psychology. I don't think he is. It seems like it is possible that all the features of a city arise from parts of an individual that are quite different from their macroscopic manifestations.

So, I will argue that Plato needs an argument against the view that the macroscopic, city-level parts that must be in harmony for justice to occur are wholly different from the microscopic, person-level parts of the soul. If I could show this, it would expose an important gap in Plato's view of justice. I guess Plato could still maintain that justice in the individual is harmony between the parts of the soul, whatever they may be. That might still be right, but then the whole method of trying to illuminate individual justice through looking at a city will have been wrong.

In order to argue for (3), maybe I could make the point by saying that the important components of an ecosystem are not the same as the important components of the individual organisms that make up that ecosystem.

Tentative Outline:

I. Introduction (summary of my paper and what is at stake)
II. Plato's argument for the analogy of justice in the individual and justice in the city
III. My argument for a difference between macroscopic and microscopic features
IV. What Plato would say in reply
V. My rebuttal to Plato's reply


PLATO PAPER NOTES Plato has Socrates reveal what justice is in an individual by applying the account of justice in the city to our soul. The basic idea seems to be that, just as every person has a place where her excellence will play a role in generating harmony in the city, within every individual the competing parts of our psychology will each have an appropriate role. If the parts of our soul are ordered and in harmony, then we will be individually just. This idea will only work, though, if Socrates is right in his view about the parts of our psychology. I don't think he is. It seems like it is possible that all the features of a city arise from parts of an individual that are quite different from their macroscopic manifestations. So, I will argue that Plato needs an argument against the view that the macroscopic, city-level parts that must be in harmony for justice to occur are wholly different from the microscopic, person-level parts of the soul. If I could show this, it would expose an important gap in Plato's view of justice. I guess Plato could still maintain that justice in the individual is harmony between the parts of the soul, whatever they may be. That might still be right, but then the whole method of trying to illuminate individual justice through looking at a city will have been wrong. 1. Look up the exact place where Plato argues for an analogy between the city and the person on the basis of how the elements of a city have to come from individual natures. 2. Find some passages that really illustrate Plato's position. 3. Argue for a difference between the macroscopic manifestations (people's proper roles in the city) and microscopic causes (people's individual natures). 4. Say why this is important in the overall argument of the Republic. In order to argue for (3), maybe I could make the point by saying that the important components of an ecosystem are not the same as the important components of the individual organisms that make up that ecosystem. Tentative Outline: I. Introduction (summary of my paper and what is at stake) II. Plato's argument for the analogy of justice in the individual and justice in the city III. My argument for a difference between macroscopic and microscopic features IV. What Plato would say in reply V. My rebuttal to Plato's reply
	.	Start with a short summary of the general idea behind the part of the work that you want to talk about.	.

	.	Be able to say why you want to write on this topic.	.

	.	Formulate a plan. Be specific enough to use it as a guide for your next efforts.	.

	.	Sketch your own idea.	.

	.	Create an outline of the overall paper. The headings should be specific enough so that you could use them as names of sections in your paper.	.