"Society originates because the individual is not self sufficient and no two of us are born exactly alike". How does Plato get from that claim to the view that philosophers should rule? Are you convinced by his claims that philosophers should rule?
"Society originates because the individual is not self sufficient and no two of us are born exactly alike". How does Plato get from that claim to the view that philosophers should rule? Are you convinced by his claims that philosophers should rule?
It is in Plato's Republic that we first get a discussion of an ideal state and the components needed for it to function properly. Plato's model, known as Kallipolis, is introduced by Socrates during his dialogues with his friends and it is throughout Books I-VIII that this state is built up through three distinct stages to the point where Plato concludes that only philosopher kings should rule. Socrates first starts with what Plato labels the "first principals of social organization"1, namely the basics which are needed for an "economically self sufficient city"2; in the second stage he goes on to develop this idea. He adds more luxury to the state necessitating the presence of armed forces which in turn become the governing class. From this class the philosopher kings come into being, selected by the process of the education system that Plato has set up and with a pure knowledge above everyone else that makes them best qualified to rule.
The first stage is very primitive at best and simply contains the key elements needed to fulfil the "underlying principles of any society"3. The two principles Socrates found were first, mutual need, as "The individual is not self sufficient but has many needs which he can't supply himself"4. Therefore humans need to live together in societies in order to survive. Plato lists the basic needs of the basic community as being provision of food, shelter, and clothing requiring tradesmen to provide services such as farming, weaving and building as well as others providing support by making the necessary equipment for them. So from this, a small state is begun on a purely economic basis. Adequate provision for people's own needs is what for the time being ties this community together rather than friendship. The second principal is "different natural aptitudes which fit us for different jobs"5, and therefore it is "better to exercise one skill"6 and "specialise on a single job for which he (an individual) is naturally fitted and neglects all others"7. Therefore people should attend to their specific trades and be prepared to share the produce with all so that the community can survive. The need for imports is raised thereby bringing Socrates to construct another trade which would go abroad to trade and would need a surplus from the community in order to get other goods. This would require the use of "experts on ships and seafaring"8, a "market"9 to buy and sell the imports and other goods and a "currency as the medium of exchange"10. The marketplace would also require a "class of retailers"11 whose sole job is to run the market thereby allowing others to get on with their own tasks. The final touch Socrates puts to the state is to add a class of "wage-earners"12 whose strength means they can contribute most through manual labour. They "market their strength in return for wages"13. And thus Socrates concludes that "our complement of citizens seems to be complete"14.
This city moves on to its second stage in Book 2, Section 2 of the Republic where Glaucon, Socrates friend protests at the "uncivilised nature of the life of this primitive society"15 calling it a "community of pigs"16. R. Martin backs this up claiming that it is "one dimensional for all its energies are focused on physical well being"17. So Socrates proceeds to add elements of refinement changing his "healthy"18 Kallipolis into a more luxurious "gold and ivory"19 community. Socrates therefore embarks on is the enlargement of the state to include occupations which are not concerned with necessities. ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
This city moves on to its second stage in Book 2, Section 2 of the Republic where Glaucon, Socrates friend protests at the "uncivilised nature of the life of this primitive society"15 calling it a "community of pigs"16. R. Martin backs this up claiming that it is "one dimensional for all its energies are focused on physical well being"17. So Socrates proceeds to add elements of refinement changing his "healthy"18 Kallipolis into a more luxurious "gold and ivory"19 community. Socrates therefore embarks on is the enlargement of the state to include occupations which are not concerned with necessities. This would include the spheres of entertainment (actors, painters, sculptors and musicians), more luxury clothes and foods (requiring hunters, fishermen, and other such trades) and more servants (such as tutors, nannies, butchers, cooks and barbers). There would also be the need for doctors. This enlargement of the state means that the current territory would be inadequate and that the community would have to take it from their neighbours as the principals of "unlimited material possessions"20 is now in peoples minds. This will lead to war, for which is needed an army, where "soldiers go out and defend"21 the lives and guard the property of the civilians. They have a natural aptitude that makes them suited to this job alone and are called "Guardians"22. Once this class is established we begin the final transition towards the ideal state where Plato deals with the qualities of the Guardians and how they turn into Philosopher kings.
The Guardians are developed by Plato into the ruling class of the state and although initially a defence force, their governing function soon overshadows their military function. However Socrates initially describes his Guardians as "watch-dogs"23 who should contain "physical strength, courage"24 and "a disposition gentle and full of spirit"25. This means that the Guardians should be gentle towards their fellow citizens but savage towards threatening outsiders. Then later on in his discussion Socrates divides the Guardian class into two sections, "Guardians" and "Auxiliaries"26. The Guardians function as the administrators of the city and the auxiliaries "assist the rulers in the execution of their decisions"27. The Rulers exercise "supreme authority" in the state and are extracted by the educational process which will be discussed further on in this essay. They will "rule by virtue of their superior rational endowment, which gives them access to the relevant knowledge"28 and are men that "besides being intelligent and capable, really care for the community"29.Auxiliaries retain their military function, as well as policing internally and carrying out executive duties. So the city now consists not of economic equals but of people pursuing their economic function. They co-operate with each other to make life pleasant for others preparing each to subordinate his own interests to those of others.
So Kallipolis now has three classes, the producers, the Guardians and the Philosopher-Kings and "each member will perform that function, and only that function, for which he is destined by nature"30. To distinguish between these classes and discover to which class each person belongs Plato turns to education and also his idea of a tripartite soul. Plato made education a "concern of the state"31 and it was through the process of education, for all people that they would each reach their highest potential and thereby acknowledge their social position. To understand the nature of the philosopher kings we have to examine Plato's theory of the soul. There are three types of desire in the "tripartite soul" which "correspond to the three parts of the state"32; appetitive desires (base ones for things such as food, money and sex), spirited desires (for honour, victory and reputation) and rational desires (for knowledge and truth). In each person one of the three desires rules, thereby determining his class and values. Uneducated people are ruled by their appetites and although they can be "trained through physical education and a mix of reading, writing, dance and song"33 they will only have acquired a "level of virtue to act prudently"34. These are the people in the producer classes. For them money is the best way of satisfying their desires. Further education "leaves people ruled by their spirited desires"35; this is the Guardian class that want honour. They are more virtuous than the producers but not as virtuous as the philosopher kings. Those that make it the whole way through the education system are the philosopher kings who are bound by rational desires of the soul. They are fully "virtuous" and "knowledgeable"36 and C.Reeve argues that the education process will make them distribute the benefits of this knowledge among the citizens whist ruling. There are also other proposals for the production of citizens of the right sort including "restriction of the arts, the institution of mating festivals and private property is to be abolished"37 (for the two higher classes so they can focus solely on their function as rulers.
Plato states the philosophers are above any corruption due to their education and training which makes them designed solely to govern and it means they possess knowledge and understanding no one else in the city does. Therefore with this new insight it changes there approach to things. They will not be corrupted by ruling as they do it because they recognise that others, lacking knowledge, would do a worse job than themselves. It is a duty they must perform as a price of the privilege of being allowed to spend the rest of their time doing what they really want to do - philosophical research. So there are no political ambitions. Plato also sets down strict guidelines for the guardian's way of life, especially the absence of family life and private property which he considers the greatest temptation in public life.
Plato has two ways to further explain this division of class to the reader and the people within the state. The first is the allegory of the Cave. To understand this allegory we have to understand the "forms of the good"38. Kraut defines them as "eternal, changeless, imperceptible and bodiless objects...a pre-eminent good"39 which will improve our lives we if understand and love them. Those that discover these forms, the philosophers, will attain complete happiness and will have a duty to relate these forms back to society. Within the allegory of the cave all mankind is situated. All are initially chained to the wall, seeing shadows of the forms which they believe are the real things. Those that break free, philosophers, are "free from illusion"40 and see not only the form of the good. They are able to exit the cave and see this light and have a duty to bring it back to society. The other story is the "myth of the metals"41, often known as the "noble lie"42. The tale goes that when each person was fashioned by the gods a metal was added to each person which qualifies their social class. Those with gold in them are rulers, silver in the auxiliaries and iron and bronze in the producers. Within each class however children can be born with a higher/lower metal in their souls than their parents. When this happens they are to be "promoted/demoted to their proper class"43. This myth was propagated to "serve to increase their (civilians) loyalty to the state and to each other"44 and to persuade people to accept their social class as their destiny and therefore not to challenge it. The Economic classes should therefore "take this rule without demur as the relationship of classes, like everything else in the state is perfect"45. It pushes the fact that there are "natural differences between human beings"46 and that through education these metals can be ascertained and streamlined.
However as a Christian I do not believe Plato's view, that the philosopher king should rule, is correct. There are several reasons for this. The first is education does not make anyone more virtuous than others. The Bible states clearly that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God"47 and this is shown in practise today by the fact that the educated rulers can be corrupt, unfaithful to their wives and motivated by money/involved in bribery. Since the Bible tells us that we all are selfish by nature, and education cannot remove this, we should not expect the rulers to solely put the needs of others above their own desires for power, wealth, property and status, however noble that may be. The taking away of the family from the philosopher class would also in my opinion make him a worse ruler, less in touch with society and less developed as a character. Also from a secular viewpoint it is not right to put only educated rulers from one strata of society in power when those from a less education background could be more in touch with society and its needs. Also the prospect of education selecting the leaders of the city is a matter of concern as the "relevant knowledge" which Plato advocates is purely a matter of opinion and therefore may be biased. Also these rational desires, that the philosopher king is supposed to have, are not I believe the monopoly of the educated. They can be found at all levels of society. Also Plato denies personal advancement in his city, especially once a person has been graded. In reality however once people have met their basic needs there is a desire for more. Also it is not natural for people to forgo private property even if they are a ruler. Therefore I would conclude that Plato's view, that the philosopher kings should rule, is incorrect and unrealistic in terms of any real society and its values.
2,127 words
Bibliography
TEXT USED
Plato, "The Republic", Penguin Classics 2nd edition 1987
OTHER WORKS
David Reece, "Plato" in Political Thinkers, pp 54-72
Edward Andrew, "Equality of opportunity as the noble lie" History of Political Thought X, 4 (1989), pp 577-596
Rex Martin, "The ideal state in Plato's Republic" History of Political Thought II,1 (1981) P1-30
Richard Kraut, "The defence of justice in Plato's Republic" The Cambridge Companion to Plato, Cambridge 1992, pp311-337
Christopher Rowe, "Plato: the search for an ideal form of state" Plato to Nato (1990), BBC books
Timothy Shiell, "The Unity of Plato's Political Thought" History of Political Though XII,3 (1991) pp377-390
The Republic, P 56 - Quote of a sub title
2 Rex Martin, "The Ideal State in Plato's Republic" P1
3 Ibid P56, Quote from Editor, Desmond Lee
4 Ibid P58
5 Ibid P59
6 Ibid P60
7 Ibid P60
8 Republic P61
9 Ibid P61
0 Ibid P61
1 Ibid P61
2 IbidP62
3 Ibid P62
4 Ibid P62
5 Ibid P63
6 Ibid P63
7 Rex, Martin The Ideal State In Plato's Republic P2
8 The Republic P63
9 Ibid P64
20 Ibid P64
21 Ibid P65
22 Ibid P66
23 The Republic P67
24 Ibid P66
25 Ibid P68
26 Ibid P121
27 Ibid P121
28 Christopher Rowe, "From Plato to Nato" P23
29 Ibid P119
30 Christopher Rowe, "From Plato to Nato" P23
31 Ibid P70
32 Christopher Rowe, "From Plato to Nato" P23
33 C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers "An overview of the Republic"
34 Ibid P3 of article
35 Ibid P3
36 C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers "An overview of the Republic"
37 Christopher Rowe, "From Plato to Nato" P24
38 Republic P239
39 Richard Kraut, "The defence of justice in the Republic", The Cambridge companion to Plato
40 C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers "An overview of the Republic"
41 Republic P213
42 Edward Andrew, "Equality of Opportunity as the Noble Lie" P 577
43 R.Martin, "The Ideal State In Plato's Republic" P10
44 Republic P123
45 R.Martin, "The Ideal State in Plato's Republic" P 9
46 Edward Andrew, "Equality of Opportunity as the Noble Lie" P1
47 Bible, NIV Romans 3 v 23
GV100 - Introduction to Political Theory, Essay No 1
Name: Sarah Pickwick Class: 7 Teacher: Mr J Olsson