This city moves 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” calling it a “community of pigs”. R. Martin backs this up claiming that it is “one dimensional for all its energies are focused on physical well being”. So Socrates proceeds to add elements of refinement changing his “healthy” Kallipolis into a more luxurious “gold and ivory” community. Socrates therefore embarks on the enlargement of the state to include occupations not concerned with necessities. This would include spheres of entertainment (actors, painters, sculptors and musicians), more luxury clothes and foods (requiring hunters, fishermen, etc.) 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 might prove inadequate and that the community would have to take it from their neighbours as the principals of “unlimited material possessions” is now in people’s minds. This would lead to war, for which is needed an army, where “soldiers go out and defend” 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”. 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.
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” who should contain “physical strength, courage” and “a disposition gentle and full of spirit”. This means 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”. The Guardians function as the administrators of the city and the Auxiliaries “assist the rulers in the execution of their decisions”. 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” and are men that “besides being intelligent and capable, really care for the community“. 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.
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”. To distinguish between these classes and discover to which class each person belongs Plato brings in education and also his theory of a tripartite soul. Through this education process which is a “concern of the state” , all people reach their full potential and thereby acknowledge their social position. To understand the nature of the philosopher kings we 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”; 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 their 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” they will only have acquired a “level of virtue to act prudently”. This is the producer classes. For these money is the best way of satisfying their desires. Further education “leaves people ruled by their spirited desires”; 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 right through the education system are the philosopher kings who are bound by rational desires of the soul. They are fully “virtuous” and “knowledgeable” and C.Reeve argues that the education process will make them distribute the benefits of this knowledge among the citizens whilst ruling. There are 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” (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. They will not be corrupted by ruling because they recognise that others, lacking their knowledge, would do a worse job than themselves. It is a duty they must perform, to spend the rest of their time doing what they really want to do – philosophical research. 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 we have to understand the “forms of the good”. Kraut defines them as “eternal, changeless, imperceptible and bodiless objects…a pre-eminent good” 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. All mankind is situated within the cave and are all initially chained to the wall, seeing shadows of the forms which they believe are the real things. Those that break free, the philosophers, are “free from illusion” 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”, often known as the “noble lie”. 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”. This myth was propagated to “serve to increase their (civilians) loyalty to the state and to each other” 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”. It promotes the fact that there are “natural differences between human beings” 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 necessarily make anyone more virtuous than others. The Bible states that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” 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 a state education system 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.
2,045 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
Plato, “The Republic”, P 56 – Quote of a sub title
Rex Martin, “The Ideal State in Plato’s Republic” P1
Plato “The Republic” P56, Quote from Editor, Desmond Lee
Rex, Martin “The Ideal State In Plato’s Republic”, P2
Plato, “The Republic” P63
Plato, “The Republic”, P65
Christopher Rowe, “From Plato to Nato” P23
Plato, “The Republic” P119
Christopher Rowe, “From Plato to Nato” P23
Christopher Rowe, “From Plato to Nato” P23
C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers “An overview of the Republic”
C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers “An overview of the Republic” P3 of article
C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers “An overview of the Republic”
Christopher Rowe, “From Plato to Nato” P24
Plato, “The Republic”, P239
Richard Kraut, “The defence of justice in the Republic”, The Cambridge companion to Plato
C.D Reeve in Political Thinkers “An overview of the Republic”
Plato, “The Republic”, P213
Edward Andrew, “Equality of Opportunity as the Noble Lie” P 577
R.Martin, “The Ideal State In Plato’s Republic” P10
Plato, “The Republic” P123
R.Martin, “The Ideal State in Plato’s Republic” P 9
Edward Andrew, “Equality of Opportunity as the Noble Lie” P1