Something that really struck me after reading about the allegory of the cave and further interpretations of it is that the concept of being in darkness and seeing light seems to be a universal one which often ends up used in various religions. For many judeo-christian religions, the darkness into light symbolism is used to illustrate an ignorance prior to knowledge of the divine. People aspire to the light of religious knowledge to feel closer to their god figure and in doing so feel as if they have come out of the darkness they may have experienced prior to that knowledge. Concepts of good and evil are also tied into darkness vs. light symbolism. For some people the concept of good is tied to the light and evil is tied to darkness.
This could perhaps be because the concept is such a primal one. We are conceived and grow in the darkness of the womb and our birth is into the light. Using such a concept is something that many people can easily relate to and grasp.
What was fascinating to me was to read a darkness vs. light scenario that was not immediately tied to religious enlightenment but rather to enlightenment of the mind. I say immediately because I briefly read about Plato's Form of the Good tied to his Metaphor of the Sun which could possibly be linked to a god figure. However, it's interesting that so many interpretations of the allegory leave this open ended in terms of what the ultimate enlightenment actually is.
The entire reason that I find philosophy liberating is because it encourages critical thought and questioning of everything that surrounds us. It encourages people leaving the comfort of what they know and have become accustomed to (the cave) for the light of enlightenment and questioning (outside the cave). The entire line of questions regarding what could or would happen with the person who would then return to the cave is also fascinating to me because there are so many variables that can be linked to the condition of society even today. While there are those who venture out of the cave, so to speak, some do go back because they prefer the comfort of what they were used to after seeing the reality of the world whereas others embrace the light and while it becomes apparent that their lives in the cave may have been not at all what they thought they are willing to move on and grasp at enlightenment. And there are those who remain in the cave who are in denial that there is anything else outside as well as those who would try to go back to convince the others in the cave that there is more to existence than just the cave.
The general gist seems to be that one has to experience the world outside (philosophical enlightenment) for themselves to fully grasp that form of enlightenment and I am inclined to agree with this. I think that you can only go so far with explaining to people that there is a way to critically think. They must do it for themselves to completely understand what it is to critically think. Only then can they be liberated from their former darkness.
A life without critical thought, without philosophy is a life unexamined and the pessimistic view is warranted here from the point of view of someone who has already ventured out of their own cave and their own darkness. For those still in the darkness who are ignorant to critical thought and have not even tried to critically examine enough to leave the comfort of their darkness, perhaps this concept is meaningless. Once you have seen enlightenment though, the thought that people could be mired in ignorance and darkness is a rather depressing one and thus could be a reason that the allegory of the cave may read as a pessimistic allegory for some.
This was a very interesting read. In fact, it's not surprising that there is this shared imagery, as many significant christian scholars took over their ontology or theory of being from the Greeks.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with the point that enlightenment is something you must practice yourself. It's not something you can learn from somebody else