The following is a letter sent to a friend after a crescendo of arguments we had concerning my interest in philosophy, whether that makes me elitist, and my disagreement with his take that the world of WALL-E aboard the Axiom is a utopia. You can read his response here.
Arguments have recently become the focus of our friendship. I see this as a downside because they have caused needless conflict. Like on that bus ride to the housecooling with the awkward silence and the apologies and then getting into it again. It’s obviously a trivial problem, solved by admitting our faults and forgiving and moving on. But why sulk? Why waste time? If we aim to have dialogue ending in “consensus achieved,” we can do better. Much better.
Take our quarrel over the word “elite,” a side issue that ballooned into something more. It seemed, ultimately, you wanted to ask why the philosopher in Plato’s allegory is trying to pull prisoners out of the cave. I say this because when pushed to define what “elite” means, you said “people who like philosophy.” We, in fact, differed on the definition, which needed clarifying. Your answer was that the prisoners know best, an interesting point, but based on misunderstandings which I will now take up.
First, let’s establish the absurdity of hearing the story and responding that the prisoners know what’s going on and are best left alone. The text says the prisoners won’t believe the escapee, will mock and would even kill him if they could. This because they know no world outside the cave. This because they are shackled and forced to look at shadows all day (but they don’t know what a day is!). Really imagine this. I think you must agree if this is the world you live in, you’d rather escape. Your issue is with philosophers applying the allegory too seriously to life.
But allegories always point elsewhere. Plato writes that this allegory is about the effect of education, and it’s not hard to understand what he means. When you learn something earth-shattering — not just new facts, but a clearer way of seeing the world — you see that you were under an illusion. Assuming this worked out well for you, you naturally want to disillusion others. The allegory indicates the person who does this should not expect understanding or sympathy from anyone else.
Your best argument is that in reality, philosophers don’t have such knowledge or that such knowledge is detrimental. Perhaps it is elitist if only those with leisure can escape, but it is not elitist to tell people something one finds crucial. In any case, both responses to Plato have been played out. You could deny, challenge, or leave aside access to transcendent, Platonic reality. For example, you can say Plato didn’t go far enough. Who’s to say the escapee isn’t in a yet bigger cave? Descartes, in a similar bind, needed a god to give him transparent access to the outside world, without whom it might be simulations all the way down. Or you can look at the other question, how philosophers have handled knowledge thought too dangerous for the masses, which we can talk about if you want. But suffice it to say that the question you pose only puts Plato and his camp under fire, not philosophy as a whole. If I was unable to respond to this — not the knockdown argument or unsettling thought you imagined it to be — it’s because I’m not a Platonist. You were attacking a straw man without asking me what I think philosophy is about. I needed the time and space afforded in this letter to arrange my response.
The example you want is the juicy steak from The Matrix. Outside the simulation it’s bleak. Blissful ignorance, Plato’s allegory inverted. Do you wake people up, then? It’s tough. VR technology forces the question. You have bought into virtual reality and WALL-E world. Maybe most people would, too, if they could — I don’t know. I haven’t. That’s a live problem. Philosophy is but a tool for adding and sifting through perspectives on such questions. It doesn’t relieve you of answering the questions yourself, or of living the answer out. That’s what growing up, what maturity is. You already know this, so why do I repeat myself? Because frankly, your lobotomy talk isn’t funny or endearing and seems to me to betray that you do not feel this point in your bones. You complain about a five minute golf ball joke but have no trouble wasting hours of my time with this one. Irony lets you hide behind words and gestures, but when you say this, my genuine reaction is “who raised you?” Win the argument, and where does that leave you? If you want to plug into the experience machine, do it already. Want easy answers? Join a cult, but don’t talk to me about it. But since you’re still around and since you keep sending me articles about how it’s all collapsing and since you want to get into it with everyone, you must still be concerned to work it out yourself. Good. Do it in writing.