In Praise of Madness, Erasmus creates a character who is critical, but indebted to philosophical wisdom. Through Folly, Erasmus weaves his own ideas into his message, confusing readers who are unable to distinguish the two voices. In In Praise of Madness, Folly references Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" in The Republic to reinforce his self-praising statements. His interpretation of this philosophical piece deviates from Plato's intentions, and at the end of the text, Erasmus proposes his reconciliation between the two accounts. Folly's narrative revolves around the benefits of living in a material world, while Plato describes the positive aspects of living in an immaterial realm of thought. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Folly begins his lecture against the idea of ​​Platonic Enlightenment: To destroy the illusion is to ruin the whole piece, for it is really the illusion and creation-up that holds the public eye. Now, what is the whole of man's life if not a kind of game? The actors arrive with their different masks and each play their role... it's all just a kind of pretense, but it's the only way to play this farce (Erasmus 44). She believes that life lacks substance beyond what the eyes perceive. She lives in a material world where the sense of sight controls the outlook on life, and so the people in her world only understand what is on the surface. The “comedy of life” (45) lies in the overall illusion of humanity. According to Folly, life is scripted and people play the roles assigned to them, oblivious to any other realm of existence. Madness finds joy in this lifestyle because it keeps people, or its "audience", engaged and allows the justification of madness, or stupidity, to enter their lives. Madness finds outlets for self-praise by associating life with superficiality. She believes the message of life as a theatrical illusion and refuses to accept any significance in life outside the "cave". Once Platonic enlightenment destroys the illusions of life, it then ruins the “farce” of Folly’s life. In the “Allegory of the Cave,” Plato disagrees with Madness’s desire for mental simplicity and fails to find it redemptive. Plato does not associate happiness or tranquility with the outer, material surface of life, but rather with the path that leads to knowledge. The actors in Madness are “strange prisoners…no different from us” (Plato 241). His use of the word “prisoners” identifies a limiting force, for example a mental bond, prohibiting the experience of knowledge. According to Plato, people living in the “pretense” of Madness are “attached in a way that keeps them in one place and allows them to look only straight ahead, but not to turn their heads” (240). Madness describes "the public eye" as the most important sense needed in life, while Plato believes that the public's attention on costumes, or "the shadows cast by fire on the walls of the cave" , (241) suggests that they live in a material, superficial environment. world. The “Allegory of the Cave” makes a distinction between a tortured, inferior material world and an intangible, superior, immaterial world of ideas. Folly argues that curious men who seek a deeper understanding of the world disrespect the greatest force of Nature: I seem to hear philosophers protest that living in madness, illusion, deception and ignorance cannot be nothing but misery. But that’s not the case – that’s human. I don't see whythey call it misery when you are all born, formed and shaped according to this model, and it is the common lot of humanity (Erasmus 50). She continues with nature as justification for rejecting Plato's ideas. For example, by comparing humans to animals, she supports the need for humans, like animals, to rely on their natural abilities. “But a horse that knows nothing of grammar is not unhappy, and a foolish man is not unhappy, because that is in accordance with his nature” (50). His argument states that nature gives humanity what it needs to live a happy life. Nature does not give wisdom to humanity, and that is why wisdom produces unhappiness. However, Folly contradicts herself when she asserts that “nature hates all counterfeits and that everything happens much more happily when it is not spoiled by artifice” (53). Earlier, Folly compares life to a play, or a type of artifice, with no depth beneath the one-dimensional surface. These two interpretations of nature's desires confuse his argument. Plato, however, believes that nature provides humanity with a complex and complex world, and that people like Folly live in the shadow of artifice, which conceals nature's demands for knowledge-seeking. Plato's understanding with nature involves the elimination of shadows and illusions through a process of enlightenment. The Platonic vision of the Enlightenment involves reconciliation and understanding with nature, not opposition. The view of the prisoners, or actors, represents an imprisoned material world. The glow of fire corresponds to “the light of the sun” (Plato 244) which illuminates and enlightens the world to new areas of study. Furthermore, “the ascent of the mind toward the intelligible realm” is equivalent to “the seeing of things on the surface of the earth” (244). Folly uses Plato's arguments to demonstrate that nature deliberately limits understanding. Plato believes that nature forms these dual worlds to increase the possibilities of the human condition rather than to impose limits. Additionally, people like Folly refuse to appreciate the natural vastness of the world, which takes humanity's natural state away from "the light of the sun." Another way in which Folly misinterprets the two stories concerns their respective views on wisdom and its role in the progression of life: Then comes adolescence, which everyone finds delightful... youth has so little wisdom and so few frowns... as soon as the young grow up and develop a kind of sense of maturity that comes from experience and education, the blossoming of youthful beauty begins to fade d 'suddenly... (then) old age with its troubles, unwanted for others but just as much for itself (Erasmus 22).Folly explains that in the cycle of life, wisdom ages the physical body and mind until they become "foolish" in old age before reverting to a childhood mentality. His description of these changes brought about by wisdom upends a common impression of maturity. Madness equates the acquisition of wisdom with a mental decline toward immaturity. Adult children and dying elderly people conform to Folly's idea of ​​nature. On the other hand, the adult population deviates from the limited and acceptable knowledge of nature into an unsatisfactory state like immaturity. “But if mortals had henceforth no connection with wisdom...there would be no more old age and they could be happy to enjoy eternal youth” (24). While Madness speaks of useless wisdom, Plato believes that wisdom is essential. According to Plato, without wisdom, humans never leave their prison cells.“People who have traveled there do not want to engage in human affairs: there is nowhere else their minds would rather be than in the upper region” (Plato 244). In Plato's journey to wisdom, man finds fulfillment and substance as he progresses. Children and the elderly represent happiness for Madness, but they are useless for Plato. His allegory admits that life and the pursuit of knowledge involve “pain and distress” (242), but the incorporation of wisdom into life transports us to a transcendental universe without material pain. However, insanity is more concerned with physical comfort through reducing pain and increasing tranquility than with mental fulfillment. Plato describes this world of the soul as "goodness [...] [which] leads one to infer that it is responsible for everything that is just and beautiful, whatever the circumstances [...] ancestor of light [...] source and provider of truth and knowledge” (242). Plato's understanding of the human world as misery and the divine world as happiness contrast with Folly's understanding of life. Erasmus's interpretation of Plato mediates between the two accounts, and he finds a reconciliation between the privilege of wisdom and the assurance of tranquility. Erasmus offers an interpretation that is both ironic and sincere of Plato's “Allegory of the Cave”. First of all, it is in Folly's voice and not in Erasmus's that the ironic view of the world occurs: What difference do you think there is between those in Plato's cave who can marvel at the shadows and images of various objects, provided they are content and I do not know what they lack, and the philosopher who has come out of the cave and sees the real things? (Erasmus 72). In the text, Erasmus means that Folly's lecture is confusing, ridiculous and sometimes unjustified. This quote from Folly highlights the extent to which Erasmus allows him to misread a text. It admits the existence of two worlds, the natural and the unnatural, but ignores their differences. The evidence of contentment contradicts the previous passages where it balances the dual world based on an unequal amount of happiness. Furthermore, she warns readers that the search for truth leads to the suppression of tranquility. This invites readers to search for answers and doubt Folly's message of truth. But Erasmus also displays a sincere side of Madness when he implements his views in his speech: "Philosophers [...] insist that they alone have wisdom and that all other mortals are only ephemeral shadows” (Erasmus 84). Erasmus struggles more with the attitudes of philosophers than with their ideas. He creates Folly as a compromise between vanity and humility. He moves away from the stereotype of the arrogant philosopher. Madness's criticism of philosophers who ignore "human affairs" (Plato 244) shows Erasmus's concern for an intellectual midpoint that allows ascension to Plato's immaterial realm without the arrogant transition. Finally, Erasmus unifies the accounts of Madness and Plato on the "Allegory of the Cave" at the end of the text. Madness has moved from the status of a rejecter of Platonic philosophy to that of a supporter. Erasmus reconciles the two ideas, emphasizing that both Plato and Madness have correct, though different, opinions about the world: The happiness which Christians seek by so much labor is nothing other than a certain kind of madness and insanity. do not be discouraged by words, but consider the reality. In the first place, Christians almost agree with the Platonists that the soul is stifled and bound by the chains of the body, which, by its gross matter,, 1993. 240-45.