Kallipolis As A Just City

1564 Words4 Pages

In the book Republic by Plato, Socrates argues with his colleagues that there is a just city, Kallipolis, and there is a certain way that this just city can be obtained. It involves a semi-communistic form of rule that is guided by a philosopher king and a three-part hierarchy. The hierarchy represents all the people in the city, and is set up in a pyramidal shape to represent the ratios that the three classes make up. The top group, and by far the smallest, is composed of the rulers. The middle group, and still fairly small group, comprises of the warriors. The common people (proles) make up the increasingly dominant bottom portion of the pyramid. The placement of the people in the pyramid also represents the importance of the citizens within each class; with the people on the top (rulers) being most important and the common people of the bottom being the least important. Contrasting to Socrates’ ideas, in The City and Man, Leo Strauss argues that the just city is impossible for two main reasons. Throughout this paper, I will argue for Strauss’ view on the impossibility of the just city. However, I believe that there are other points, besides Strauss’, on why the just city is infeasible. I will then argue through Plato’s text how Socrates’ idea of Kallipolis is unreasonable and defies the ideas of realism.
Strauss opposes Socrates by saying that achieving the just city of Kallipolis is virtually impossible. His reasoning starts with the very thing that rules the city, the philosophers. He says that the philosophers would not be compelled enough to come back and rule the people. Strauss uses Socrates’ analogy of the cave to demonstrate how he formed his stance on the impossibility of the just city. In the cave analogy, a group of...

... middle of paper ...

...of the people. Even though they are philosophers, they are not selfless, because they are not perfect. Socrates has a very narrow point of view on this topic, and Strauss is asking questions outside of his point of view, which can push the city Kallipolis farther from reality.
Strauss and Socrates have opposite points of view when it comes to Kallipolis. I agree with Strauss, because the reality of Socrates’ points being implemented without questions or riots from the proles are very unlikely. Socrates doesn’t create realistic situations in which a just city could be created. The just city is impossible ultimately because its ruler does not physically exist, because the requirements for this person defy its definition itself. Using this combination, Strauss defeats Socrates’ arguments, and then he creates a realistic point of view implemented in philosophy today.

Open Document