table ideal, however I want to be able to ignore reason when emotions begin to pus reason away. This argument is not flawless, by any means. A society that flourishes needs community that requires great characteristics from individuals, if a society was influenced more by desire then reason, we would be left with hedonistic selfishness. So as society is concerned, yes it is important for reason to play a greater role than emotion, but is Plato's idea that all strong displays of emotion our wrong, correct? I can not agree with him in that assertion. I believe a very important aspect in communities is the ability for humans to relate to one another based on experiences, feelings and common ideas. While Plato's model may enforce a moral norm for emotions, I do not believe it can be a natural state of nature. Another reason I have issues with both Plato and Aristotle's views of the correct use of emotion is that I do not agree that their idea of flourishing would actually be flourishing. Flourishing should deal with feeling good when you do something good, but the ideas of what is good should not be so ingrained in ones mind by education that they can not discover this themselves. If all my life I am told that strong emotion is wrong, I feel I will miss out on many of the parts of life that make it unique to myself, as an individual and as a person. In analyzing education popular culture, which Plato refers to as "poetry," is not necessarily a social ill in my opinion. It expands the horizons of one's view to be encompassing of many more ideas and opinions of life and its abilities, which seems to be what Plato opposes. I also believe it is an outlet for the individual to experience and express the emotions and ideals we discover in life. However, this is also something Plato disagrees with, because it would refer to popular culture as an expression of emotions and desires. Emotion, in my mind, is such an important aspect to flour...
