In my first semester in the Honors Program at my university, I read Plato’s The Allegory of the Cave. Of course, the reading went straight over my head the first time. I can honestly say that I wasn’t at a place in my critical thinking development where I could really appreciate it. Sure, I took what my teacher said in stride and even made a good attempt at convincing her that I understood it (though I’m almost positive that she knew I was faking). Two years later however, I have come across this reading again. I have encountered it not once, but twice in the last month! What is even more strange is that Plato’s lessons were applied to two different ideas. Or were they?
The first opportunity came during the weekend of my matriculation into the Honors College. My peers and I were discussing knowledge and truth and how the Honors College fit into the process of seeking these things. Our moderator happened to remember reading Plato’s Allegory and wondered what we thought about his writing and how it applied to finding truth.
After some long discussion, we agreed that Plato was saying that we, who are stuck in darkness and can only determine truth by the shadows, do not really know truth at all. We must turn around and face the flames that cause the shadows to be cast – and then we would know truth. However, the truth as we know it by the fire would be only be relative. True knowledge could only come by removing oneself totally from the cave. What the cave, fire, shadows, and the outside world represent was a point of difference between us. To me, the cave is a container – something that binds and makes it referable. It can be a time period, a culture, or even a geographic location. The fire is a relative truth that fits into the time period, culture, or location. And the shadows are different viewpoints or philosophies regarding that truth. Of course, the outside world represents the absolute truth that can be appied across all caves, fires, and shadows.
The second application of Plato’s allegory came to me just last weekend. My boyfriend and his family were in Little Rock for the weekend for his state swim meet. Anyone who has ever been to a swim meet will understand that its like watching the grass grow. So I was very glad for his mother’s company – especially since she is one of the few from my home who has a critical mind like that of my Honors peers. She brought up the Allegory in reference to Christianity and religion in general. I did a lot of listening that day.
I was astounded at how my opinions about Plato’s writing as it applies to truth and knowledge coincided with her opinions on the same writing about truth and religion. The cave was our world on earth, Christ the fire, and the shadows were all the interpretations of Christ’s teachings. God’s truth was the outside light. Some of the statements she made that I most vividly remember were something like these: religion is quite a futile endeavor, because it is based on the shadows; to seek God is to turn around and really see Christ and believe in him; to have faith is to walk past the fire, step out of the cave, and see God in his glory; and to fulfill the great commission is to return to the cave and try to convince others to turn around without being cast out as a “heretic.”
I found this arguement very plausible, but maybe this is because I respect her immensely as a mother and woman…and it was only the two of us talking. I am used to hearing many opinions in discussions, as well as giving my own, before really making a fixed decision on the matter. I love what she had to say, but I am wary of it all the same. So I write this here in hopes of turing some cogs and getting some feedback.
However, something even more surprising has dawned on me. One writing was applied to two seemingly different topics. After all, it is an Allegory, so maybe that’s the way it’s supposed to be. The nature of allegory is a strange thing indeed.
