It is my view that Socrates, the death of Jacks Louis David’s death, has recently emerged in the popular culture, especially through AI -made 3D entertainment locations where viewers can go through the scene. Although it is noteworthy to see Plato and Socrates’ souls alive in the new media, I cannot help but cannot feel that AI takes risk of losing some essential elements when the art and history’s surface is filtered. The challenge is that the details are the ones that complete a painting, a story, or a moment of history.
Many people have wondered why this particular painting has become so severe, while countless others have tried to present this historic moment. What is the reason for David’s work to stand as the most representative of Socrates’s death? Some people say that the success of the painting is amazing, seeing that about 2,000 2,000 years separate Socrates’ death from David’s canvas. I am watching it differently. I am sure the painting resonates so firmly, because it directly pulls it directly on the feedo of Plato, a dialogue that offers one of the most detailed and accurate accounts of the moment. In fact, Phaedo presents the scene so clearly that it still feels immediately. Yet this is an important relationship online, where the dialogue itself is ignored. With a measure of curiosity and research, no one can know that Socrates’ death in this dialogue is described in extraordinary detail, because philosophy teachers often present Fedo as a real forgiveness of Socrates.
In my view, the success of David’s painting is only in the depth of its accuracy and understanding. Fedo describes the scene in strict detail, and David’s work reflects careful engagement with the text. Philosophy schools still dedicate the entire seminar to Fedo to deliberately read, especially because of the immense importance in each sentence, and often in every word. By reinforcing its place as a deep testimony of Socrates’ last moments, pack countless secondary studies. All well -designed works, whether in art, philosophy, or any other discipline, suffer from research and understanding.
For example, David’s painting is one of the few people in which Socrates is shown on the ground one foot and on the other bed, a detail that is completely aligned with Plato’s explanation and is filled with a symbol. While other paintings have increased the scene with more emotions, dramatic, or artistic flourishing, David’s sincere commitment provides his work with a close photography rather than a completely explanatory scene. And since Plato and Socrates themselves criticize artists, especially poets for beautifying the world and disagreeing the truth, one can suggest that Plato may have praised David’s denial.
Fedo itself is a notable text. It conveys Socrates’ true beliefs: its calm acceptance of death, its belief that philosophy is a life -long preparation, and by understanding that leaving the incomplete body behind is a way of the perfect world of ideas. The drug that drinks, which means poison and treatment, takes the double in its grip: it destroys the body but liberates the soul. The grief of his disciples, his lining with his ground presence, only highlights that he still had to travel in philosophy to explain and share peace.
David alone managed to translate it into a visual form: Socrates’ comfort, the frustration of his young priests, the presence of fear in Socrates, and his power to fight him, and by understanding that he is dying of frustration, but also moving towards the realm of ideology, where eternal, absolute truth and love.
And likewise, in today’s conversation about AI, art and creativity, we will serve well, irrespective of the level of level of level. Curiosity and research are the most sure leaders.
Plato deserves more than decreasing in the passing trend or level of digital spectacles. Read phaedo. With it, engage deeply. We and ourselves, at least so much more debt. Especially if we want to be confident when talking about this topic.
My 2 cents
Happiness