The Poetics - Aristotle.

GCSE Religious Studies (Philosophy & Ethics)

The audience sank even further into their seats. They were afraid to blink, scared that they might miss a critical moment in the fate of their tragic hero. The crowd silently thought, “How could a man who was once ranked so highly for his virtuous life become entangled in such a scandalous plot?” His dignity will be forever scarred all due to a single mistake that was merely made in ignorance. And then the audience imagined, “Could this happen to me?” While viewing this tragedy, the Platonist would argue that the souls of the audience are being corrupted through the eventual downfall and negative attributes of the tragic hero. The appetitive parts of their souls are being fed by imitations, causing their rational functioning to slowly diminish in wake of their heightened desires. While Plato believes poetry plays an inferior role in his city, compared to other structural topics such as philosophy and mathematics, Aristotle discerns that tragedy and the process of katharsis enhance one’s ability in understanding to become a just and ethical denizen.

Taken at a superficial level, The Poetics illustrates an in-depth blueprint for how tragedies should be written. Although Aristotle indeed influenced the world’s greatest tragedians in their future work, The Poetics also provides an ethical context in which Aristotle believes all people should strive to attain. While identifying the purpose of plot, which is the most important aspect of a tragedy according to Aristotle, the term katharsis is described. In defining a tragedy Aristotle states, “…each of its species separated in different parts; performed by actors, not through narration; effecting through pity and fear of the purification of such emotions” (The Poetics, 49b,6). Katharsis is the release of built up emotional energy or simply the purging of an excess of such emotions. For instance, in context of the audience watching a tragedy, those who are prone to pity, fear, or other emotions may experience katharsis. However, katharsis does not necessarily purge emotions in the sense that it rids all feelings. Instead, katharsis flushes away excess feelings in order to bring one to a neutral, balanced state of life. Therefore, a citizen can view a tragedy, realize the faults of characters, and find a similar blemish in himself to link emotional flaws. On the other hand, Plato disagrees and considers that those who view such tragedies will be overcome with appetitive desires from imitations and consequently cannot live a just or ethical existence.

This is a preview of the whole essay

In The Republic, Plato blatantly asserts that tragic poetry has a limited role within his city. Socrates states, “All such poetry is likely to distort the thought of anyone who hears it, unless he has knowledge of what it is really like, as a drug to counteract it” (The Republic, 595b). In Plato’s opinion, poets are imitators who have the power to manipulate people into becoming unjust citizens. Through their imitations of objects and ideas for which they have no grasp upon, tragic poets obviously lie to the people who view their work. Socrates states, “He’ll go on imitating, even though he doesn’t know the good or bad qualities of anything, but what he’ll imitate, it seems, is what appears fine or beautiful to the majority of the people who know nothing” (The Republic, 602b). For example, poetry or art pleases the appetitive part of the soul, which in turn has the capability to override the rational side. If this were to happen, his citizens would lose their ability to calculate and eventually go astray. Socrates posits, “So we were right not to admit him (the poet and/or artist) into a city that is to be well-governed, for he arouses, nourishes, and strengthens this part of the soul and so destroys the rational one, in just the way that someone destroys the better sort of citizens when he strengthens the vicious ones and surrenders the city to them” (The Republic, 605b). Plato’s concept of poetry, non-imitations such as hymns to the gods and eulogies to good people, yields only a rational citizen. However, Aristotle claims a citizen can view tragedy and still nourish both rational and appetitive parts of the soul in order to become an ethical citizen.

While Socrates argues that imitation, especially in poetry and art, stands three degrees from the truth, Aristotle speculates that imitation is innate within all humans. He states, “Imitation comes naturally to human beings from childhood (and in this they differ from animals, i.e. in having a strong propensity to imitation and in learning their earliest lessons through imitation); so does the universal pleasure in imitation” (The Poetics, 48b,4). While Plato asserts that poetry leads to a less rational citizen, Aristotle perceives that poetry merely allows humans to understand other perspectives through these replications. Art does not limit one’s capacity to learn; however, art and tragedy enhance one’s ability to understand. People are drawn to tragedy only to learn from one another. Aristotle states, “The reason for this is that understanding is extremely pleasant, not just for philosophers but for others too in the same way, despite their limited capacity for it” (The Poetics, 48b,4). While viewing a tragic hero, the spectator undergoes katharsis and empathizes with the character. By understanding the downfall of a tragic hero, Aristotle implores that the audience can reconcile their flaws that are shown through the character; thus, they can lead a more ethical life. In this sense, a citizen can become just and rational through the means of art, which is also the ultimate goal of Plato’s citizen in The Republic.

Both Plato and Aristotle offer different paths that eventually lead to justice and ethical reasoning. However, through tragedy which a Platonist lacks, an Aristotelian will have more experience emotionally. A dearth or excess of emotion can cause a citizen to make poor ethical decisions (Heath, 39). For example, a man in battle may be overcome with fear and leave his post and appears cowardly. However a man, if he does not fear battle and is reckless, can endanger the lives of his comrades. Hence, one should not be a coward or overly self-confident, but strive to be courageous and attain a balanced sense of fear (Heath, 39). Therefore, a citizen’s ethical reasoning is established through his emotional understanding. Tragedy and other poetry, even as imitational ideas, stand as forms that develop one’s emotions. In this logic, as opposed to a citizen of The Republic, a citizen of The Poetics will attain an emotionally balanced life, in which he will be better suitable to make rational and ethical decisions.

“So for Aristotle the crucial point is not, as it is with Plato, to suppress your emotions; it is rather to feel the right degree of emotion in the right circumstances” (Heath, 39). Emotion and thought should not be separated; however, the two play roles in a symbiotic relationship to achieve an ideal citizen. Aristotle strives for an integration of thought and emotion, while Plato seeks only thought and rational reasoning. According to Aristotle, tragedy reveals the individual motivations of characters and their reactions to certain emotions, which in turn teaches ethical standards of life. While Aristotle and Plato portray their images of their model citizen, Aristotle’s vision of the ethical citizen must entail exposure to tragic plots and katharsis. As the audience empathizes with the character’s tragic performance, they can only learn from those experiences and gain philosophical understanding. The audience does not need to suffer the same fate of their tragic hero, since the process of katharsis will undoubtedly arouse emotion and awareness and hopefully encourage them to become ideal citizens.

Works Cited

Aristotle. The Poetics. Trans. Malcolm Heath. Penguin Books: London, 1996.

Plato. The Republic. Trans. G.M.A. Grube. Hackett Publishing: Indianapolis, 1992.