Imagining Other:
Political Philosophy Part 1
Week 2: Plato - extracts
Links: Imagining
Other Home Page
Plato – The Republic.
A sample of the kind of
argument presented in Plato’s Republic.
From Book (iv) (in modern
words – adapted from the translation by Jowett (originally published in 1892,
used in ‘Masters of Political Thought’ Volume One, by Michael B. Foster, Harrap
1979, first published 1942 – page 70):
I shall begin with the
assumption that a perfect state is one that is rightly ordered, and is
therefore [because being perfect means having the four cardinal virtues] wise, brave, temperate and just.
[Note: Plato assumes that a good state is like a good
person – see also below on ‘temperance’]
If we take wisdom first, then this means having
knowledge, and ‘good counsel’. But there are many kinds of knowledge in the
state: for example the knowledge of a carpenter or a smith. This kind of
knowledge would not be useful to make a good state, because it is knowledge
about a particular thing in the state, and not about the whole.
[Those who have knowledge about the whole state, and
about its relation with other states, Plato calls ‘guardians’. Accounts of
Plato usually describe these as ‘philosopher-rulers.’ The best state, for
Plato, is one in which philosophers are rulers and rulers are philosophers.]
Will there be more guardians
in the state than carpenters, smiths etc [workers]?
Won’t the guardians be the smallest of all the classes who have some knowledge?
The guardians will bring wisdom to the state, and thus the state will be both
wise and ‘constituted according to nature’ [i.e.
to run a state on the basis of guidance by a class who have wisdom - knowledge
of the whole state - is the ‘natural’ way to run a state].
How do we decide if a state
is brave? We consider that part of
the state that fights and goes to war on the state’s behalf - i.e. soldiers. The rest of the citizens may
be courageous or cowardly, but this will not make the state itself brave or
cowardly. The kind of knowledge that courage is based on is knowledge of what
things should be feared or not. [Note
Plato adds here: ‘as our legislator has educated them – he believed that states
were most likely to be set up, or established, by a ‘legislator’ – one who drew
up the original rules/laws/constitution.]
Soldiers need training so
that they understand and will obey the laws of the land, as well as being aware
of dangers to the state. Then they will have the courage that the state
requires – and this will be different from ‘mere uninstructed courage, such as
that of a wild beast or slave.’ They will have the courage ‘of a citizen’ –
i.e. someone who considers, and acts on the interests of, the state (not someone
being courageous on their own behalf).
What is meant by temperance in the state? It must mean
the ‘ordering or controlling of pleasures and desires.’ Someone who is
temperate is described as ‘master of himself.’
That is, ‘in the human soul there is a better and also a worse
principle; and when the better has the worse under control, then a man is said
to be master of himself.’ If the worse side dominates the best, then someone is
‘unprincipled.’
‘The simple and moderate
desires which follow reason, and are under the guidance of the mind and true
opinion, are to be found only in a few, and those best born and educated.’
Whereas ‘children and women and servants, and ... the freemen so called who are
of the lowest and most numerous class’ are not temperate.
In a good state the rulers
and the ruled will agree as to their different positions. Thus there is a kind
of harmony. ‘Temperance is the agreement of the naturally superior and inferior,
as to the right to rule, both is states and individuals.’ [See above: a good state is like a good individual – it is also made
up of good individuals. A good citizen is, for Plato, the same thing as a
good person...]
Finally, the state will be
fair and just provided each man
practices ‘one thing only, the thing to which his nature was best
adapted.’ If someone who only knows how
to be a cobbler or a trader attempts to do the job of a soldier, or if a
soldier attempts to be a legislator then ‘this meddling of one with another is
the ruin of the state.’
There are, then, ‘three
distinct classes, [and] any meddling of one with another... is the greatest
harm to the state.’