
Ethics Explainer: Plato’s Cave
ArticleBig Thinkers + Explainers
BY Dr Laura D’Olimpio 18 MAR 2019
Plato’s allegory of the cave is a classical philosophical thought experiment designed to probe our intuitions about epistemology – the study of knowledge.
This story offers the reader an insight into one of Plato’s central concepts, namely, that eternal and unchanging ideas exist in an intellectual realm which we can only access through pure Reason.
Western philosophy may be traced back to Ancient Greece. We have a record of Socrates’ (469-399 BCE) oral teachings through the writings of his student, Plato (427-347 BCE). In these Socratic Dialogues, Socrates argues with his interlocutors in an effort to seek truth, meaning, and knowledge. Plato’s Republic is the best known of these and, in book VII, Socrates presents Glaucon (Plato’s older brother) with an unusual image:
Imagine a number of people living in an underground cave, which has an entrance that opens towards the daylight. The people have been in this dwelling since childhood, shackled by the legs and neck, such that they cannot move nor turn their heads to look around. There is a fire behind them, and between these prisoners and the fire, there is a low wall.
Rather like a shadow puppet play, objects are carried before the fire, from behind the low wall, casting shadows on the wall of the cave for the prisoners to see. Those carrying the objects may be talking, or making noises, or they may be silent. What might the prisoners make of these shadows, of the noises, when they can never turn their heads to see the objects or what is behind them?
Socrates and Glaucon agree that the prisoners would believe the shadows are making the sounds they hear. They imagine the prisoners playing games that include naming and identifying the shadows as objects – such as a book, for instance – when its corresponding shadow flickers against the cave wall. But the only experience of a ‘book’ that these people have is its shadow.
After suggesting that these prisoners are much like us – like all human beings – the narrative continues. Socrates tells of one prisoner being unshackled and released, turning to see the low wall, the objects that cast the shadows, the source of the noises as well as the fire.
While the prisoner’s eyes would take some time to adjust, it is imagined that they now feel they have a better understanding of what was causing the shadows, the noises, and they may feel superior to the other prisoners.
This first stage of freedom is further enhanced as the former prisoner leaves the cave (they must be forced, as they do not wish to leave that which they know), initially painfully blinded by the bright light of the sun.
The liberated one stumbles around, looking firstly only at reflections of things, such as in the water, then at the flowers and trees themselves, and, eventually, at the sun. They would feel as though they now have an even better understanding of the world.
Yet, if this same person returned to the dimly lit cave, they would struggle to see what they previously took for granted as all that existed. They may no longer be any good at the game of guessing what the shadows were – because they are only pale imitations of actual objects in the world.
The other prisoners may pity them, thinking they have lost rather than gained knowledge. If this free individual tried to tell the other prisoners of what they had seen, would they be believed? Could they ever return to be like the others?
The remaining prisoners certainly would not wish to be like the individual who returned, suddenly not knowing anything about the shadows on the cave wall!
Socrates concludes that the prisoners would surely try to kill one who tried to release them, forcing them into the painful, glaring sun, talking of such things that had never been seen or experienced by those in the cave.
Interpreting the Allegory of the Cave
There are multiple readings of this allegory. The text demonstrates that the Idea of the Good (Plato capitalises these concepts in order to elevate their significance and refer to the idea in itself rather than any one particular instantiation of that concept), which we are all seeking, is only grasped with much effort.
Our initial experience is only of the good as reflected in an earthly, embodied manner. It is only by reflecting on these instantiations of what we see to be good, that we can start to consider what may be good in itself. The closest we can come to truly understanding such Forms (the name he gives these concepts), is through our intellect.
Human beings are aiming at the Good, which Medieval philosophers and theologians equated with God, but working out what the good life consists of is not easy! Plato claims each Soul (or mind) chooses what is good, saying:
“But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort.”
Ethics in your inbox.
Get the latest inspiration, intelligence, events & more.
By signing up you agree to our privacy policy
MOST POPULAR
ArticleLifestyle + Health
Vaccines: compulsory or conditional?
ArticleLaw + Human Rights
He said, she said: Investigating the Christian Porter Case
ArticleBeing Human
Free speech has failed us
ArticleBig Thinkers + Explainers
Ethics Explainer: Ethics, morality & law

BY Dr Laura D’Olimpio
Dr Laura D’Olimpio is senior lecturer in philosophy of education at the University of Birmingham, UK, and co-edits the Journal of Philosophy in Schools.
12 Comments
This analogy reminds me of Chomsky’s books : “Manufacturing Consent” and “Media Control” regarding media propaganda.
This also reminds me of Jung’s archetypes (as the puppets that cast the shadows) and also of Chomsky’s ideas on universally compatible lexicons shared between languages because of the shared structure of the brain.
Plato’s Cave is a very fertile analogy that goes beyond Postmodernism and the apparent dichotomy with objective reality. I have certainly estranged friends and family through my insistence on propaganda and puppet shows. Some would rather think that collusion is illusion.
The TED talks guy says there are many people like me. That is cheery news. I hope you are in a spaceship and not in cave ‘down here’ like you say. I am leaving my details below. Please email me or abduct me in your space ship.
Hi Laura, thank you very much for your article, in particular, your readings on the allegory of Plato’s cave. Is the first stage of freedom that experienced by an unshackled prisoner equivalent to the freedom in the decision of remain in the cave taken by others prisoners? Thanks.
ReplyYes, at once. We do not exist in isolation. The shackled in the cave could not have equally and collectively stumbled on the idea the sounds were related to the shapes – someone would have put this to them – one brave individual idea, to a consensus of what was collectively known…. until it wasn’t. So, if there are only 2 in the cave and they disagree about the sounds and shadows, who is ignorant?
ReplyGreat question Jason! And deeper still, if ‘knowledge’ is an outcome of our own ‘caves’, is there indeed such a thing as ‘ignorance’? And is the very idea of truth independent, or subject to acceptance or agreement?
ReplyYes, there is ignorance because we don’t know what we don’t know … didn’t Socrates/Plato say that? I think truth is subject to acceptance and agreement because it can change over time as further knowledge and evidence evolves e.g phlogiston. Perhaps truth is as much about cultural, social mores and politics as fact or evidence e.g. climate change deniers?
ReplyOf those who have ruined my blissful ignorance many have done so through their own blissful ignorance… the less ignorant I become the more bliss there is in the wonder of the nature of ignorance and the delight in the greatness of diversity… until I realise how ignorant I am. I am just the same.
ReplyThanks Scott – Would it be fair to say the more we learn the more we realise we have to learn?
ReplyHi Laura, as always a delight to read your work. In answer to your question, it depends. A true example when I chose not to ruin a friends bliss concerns a time when I was driving a friend of mine somewhere. This friend is blind. While stopped a traffic lights, she commented on how lovely it was to hear the breeze rustling the leaves of the trees. I looked around for the trees, but they weren’t there, so I listened for the sound that illicited my friends’ comment., the noise was made by the breeze rustling the the multicoloured plastic streamers around the high posts of a car sales yard. I wasn’t going to ruin my friends’ blissful moment by telling her we were actually in a grey concreted suburbia. In this example though, no harm was done.
ReplyHello Laura, I so enjoyed reading your piece on Plato’s the allegory of the cave. As to the question…it depends on the friend and the nature of the friendship. With some friends, at times, we ‘ruin each other’s blissful ignorance’ 😊. I trust all is going well for you in ‘brummy land’.
Reply
Join the conversation
Would you ruin a friends blissful ignorance?