You all know the saying of this one thing, right?
The rest of the Republic answers this challenge. It does so by way of an analogy. Socrates says that it is difficult to distinguish what is going on in the soul, but it is easier to see what is going on in the state. Thus the state will be examined by analogy to the soul. Now we would say that the state is the macrocosm (makros, "large," kosmos, "universe"), the large scale analogue, and the soul is the microcosm (mikros, "small"), the small scale analogue. When matters are sorted out for the state, then the soul can be understood in its own right.
Well wisdom is bestowed upon us all, when we consider this one thing. Is it the stuff all dreams are made up of?
Hooft, Witten and now Lauglin himself understands, that we have come face to face with a problem? By arguing "stuff", would we have divested ourselves of recognition of this Third Superstring Revolution? Of course not.:)
So instead of defining the state of the cosmo and the insignificance of the microscopic views of man's soulful journey, what value had we'd be lured in too, but by Curlies Pot of Gold?
The Republic: "You must contrive for your future rulers another and a better life than that of a ruler, and then you may have a well-ordered State; for only in the State which offers this, will they rule who are truly rich, not in silver and gold, but in virtue and wisdom, which are the true blessings of life."
I don't think so. The expansive nature of the cosmo is still very relevant to the expansiveness yet to be contained with our humble brains? Some cannot leave the four-square of earth, and wonder about the shape, representing God, yet the diversity of opinion reocgnizes that a view has formed, of a world so few recognize.