Democracy in the Republic
In Plato's Republic democracy made a controversial issue in a critique by Socrates. The theory of the soul accounts for the controversy as it states that the soul is divided into three parts: the rational, the spirited, and the appetite which are ranked respectively. The idea of the soul's three parts and the soul being ruled by a dominant part is used as the basis for identifying justice and virtue. However, the theory of the soul is not only used to identify justice and virtue, but also used to show that the virtue within a city reflects that of its inhabitants.
Socrates evaluates four city constitutions that evolve from aristocracy: timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and tyranny. As a result that these four
…show more content…
Individuals within a timocracy are ruled by the spirited part of the soul and as a result are constantly in search of honor. The spirited part of the soul aides the rational and therefore is valued as the second best part of the soul. The principle of specialization is still apparent among the individuals within the timocratic city but it is not governed as well as an aristocracy.
Oligarchy is valued above a democracy although they are both ruled by the appetite of the soul. Those within an oligarchy pursue necessary appetites whereas democratic individuals pursue unnecessary appetites. Rulers are present within an oligarchy, but they are acquired based on the wealth of the individual, appetites are kept in tact within an oligarchy through frugality. The wealth an oligarchic individual acquires is not squandered on their desires. Only as a result that constitutions do not last forever do these other forms of constitutions and individuals actually
…show more content…
respond to a situation experienced by other people in theory. However, it is only until that individual either experiences first-hand what is experienced by others or receives input to relate to that which is experienced by others will they truly know to best respond to that situation, empathy is cultivated by relation and experience. Until then, that individual with all of that ?acquired knowledge? can only speculate what the best course of action is, people should not be ruled by speculation. A ruler should either live the life of those that they rule, as an equal, or as a superior allow the necessary input of those whom they rule, to decide the best course of action, as is done in a
In his philosophical text, The Republic, Plato argues that justice can only be realized by the moderation of the soul, which he claims reflects as the moderation of the city. He engages in a debate, via the persona of Socrates, with Ademantus and Gaucon on the benefit, or lack thereof, for the man who leads a just life. I shall argue that this analogy reflecting the governing of forces in the soul and in city serves as a sufficient device in proving that justice is beneficial to those who believe in, and practice it. I shall further argue that Plato establishes that the metaphorical bridge between the city and soul analogy and reality is the leader, and that in the city governed by justice the philosopher is king.
In Plato’s Republic, justice and the soul are examined in the views of the multiple characters as well as the Republic’s chief character, Socrates. As the arguments progress through the Republic, the effect of justice on the soul is analyzed, as the question of whether or not the unjust soul is happier than the just soul. Also, Plato’s theories of justice in the man, the state, and the philosopher king are clearly linked to the cardinal virtues, as Plato describes the structure of the ideal society and developing harmony between the social classes. Therefore, the statement “justice is the art which gives to each man what is good for his soul” has to be examined through the definitions of justice given in the Republic and the idea of the good
During the time period of The Republic, the problems and challenges that each community was faced with were all dealt with in a different way. In the world today, a lot of people care about themselves. For many people, the word justice can mean many different things, but because some only look out for themselves, many of these people do not think about everyone else’s role in the world of society. The struggle for justice is still demonstrated in contemporary culture today. One particular concept from Plato’s The Republic, which relates to contemporary culture is this concept of justice. In the beginning of The Republic, Socrates listeners, Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, ask Socrates whether justice is stronger than injustice, and
An authoritarian government is ruled by the few, where there is hardly any freedom or mobility. The construction of an authoritarian political hierarchy begins with trying to figure out the meaning of justice. Plato’s Republic is a defense of authoritarian political hierarchy. Socrates portrays the concept of an ideal city with the notion of making it into an authoritarian government. He creates the guardians, auxiliaries and the craftsmen, each group having a different type of metal to define them. In this paper I will argue that, Plato’s Republic is a defense of authoritarian political hierarchy because he incorporates the idea of a strict central government within a city. Three ways this is shown in The Republic are with the ideas of, the
With a history of abuse of so the called, “untouchables” it should come as no surprise that when Socrates offers a caste system that questions of freedom and human rights come to the fore front. Socrates explains the false origins saying, “But when god made you, he used a mixture of gold in the creation of those of you who were fit to be rulers … He used silver for those who were to be auxiliaries, and iron and bronze for the farmers and the rest of the skilled workers” (pg. 108 415a). Socrates has built this, what he calls a noble lie, to convince the people of predestination, however; it is not clear whether Socrates believes this claim, or if he just uses is as a vessel to control the population so they may become perfect. What is clear is that this system is impossible. No one is specifically designed for a single purpose, or a specific skill. As well as the idea that people will lie down and do whatever they are told by the law. This lie will come crashing down on Socrates and his perfect city. While explaining the lifestyle of the guardians Socrates explains how people will live in his city, stating, “… no one is to have any private property beyond what is absolutely essential” (pg. 110 416d). This limitation of wealth and status may seem to be just, however; the limitation of one’s personal freedom jeopardizes of the people. Thus, the city becomes unfair to its people. The role of government should be to help its people, and by limiting its people, it loses sight of its role. Socrates continues explaining the life of the guardians and its people saying, “… they should impose a levy on the rest of the citizens, and receive and annual payment for their role as guardians which leaves them with neither a surplus nor a deficiency” (pg. 110 416e). This further limits the freedoms of the population, without funds to purchase an excess of goods,
Socrates and I grew up alongside the Athenian democracy, and experienced her vicissitudes in the past seventy years. We have both heard and experienced cycle of five types of governments that Socrates had mentioned. (Plato, Republic 8.547e) Our democracy was established hundreds years ago under Cleisthenes and turned to tyranny under Isagoras. In our childhood, Athens was a timarchy, and then Pericles ruled Athens with the
Plato states that as the just city (i.e. an aristocratic society) develops, it will inadvertently fall into depravity, because despite the excellent constitutions of its wise leaders, they are still fallible human beings. He outlines four distinct forms of government—of which he considers to be depraved—that the just city will transform into, with each one being worse than its predecessors. The four systems, which are ordered by their appearances in the line of succession, are: timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and finally tyranny. The focus of this essay will be on Plato’s criticisms of democracy. Since democracy is recognized and practiced by most of modern western societies, it is especially relevant and important to examine whether this model
In Plato’s republic, a philosophical account on the kallipolis (the beautiful city) is built on the perspective of Socrates and his discussion between his companions. In the republic, the city in which ones live in depends on the soul and the character of the city one lives in. In this paper the character of human nature and politics will be discussed in how a city is ought to be by the influence of human nature and politics. Firstly, the influence of human nature on politics will be looked at, for example according to Plato on behalf of Socrates; he claims that a just soul creates a just society, where it is human nature to be just, that influences in creating a just political system. Secondly, politics influences human nature, where in the republic when the discussion of guardians starts out between Socrates and the companions, there is political thought discussed between them, where Socrates wants to create the perfect guardians through specific training in all types of skills instituted to creating a perfect protector. Lastly, human nature is human soul if the soul is just the city is going to be just. It is the human nature which has created communities without any political thought put in place; it political thought that forms rules and laws. Thus, human nature is part of the individual understanding of its society that creates an understanding of how one ought to be, which in turns creates rules and laws that is essentially viewed as politics.
In the Republic, by C.D.C. Reeve Socrates is trying to answer the question is justice greater than injustice. In order to provide an accurate answer, he must look at an ideal city. Socrates describes what would make an ideal city and how to make it just. Socrates believes that in order to have an ideal city, any stories that contain falsehood need to be thrown out because children are not capable of distinguishing the truth from the lie, can cause hatred, and ultimately lead to chaos in the city.
The subject matter of the “Republic” is the nature of justice and its relation to human existence. Book I of the “republic” contains a critical examination of the nature and virtue of justice. Socrates engages in a dialectic with Thrasymachus, Polemarchus, and Cephalus, a method which leads to the asking and answering of questions which directs to a logical refutation and thus leading to a convincing argument of the true nature of justice. And that is the main function of Book I, to clear the ground of mistaken or inadequate accounts of justice in order to make room for the new theory. Socrates attempts to show that certain beliefs and attitudes of justice and its nature are inadequate or inconsistent, and present a way in which those views about justice are to be overcome.
In book VIII, we see Plato, through Socrates, trying to rationalize democracy and how governmental structures eventually corrode over time. I also see Socrates wrestling with the same problem that modern America wrestles with and that is of personal freedom versus equality for all. Are my own freedoms worth giving up in order to secure equality for the city as a whole? I also see Socrates drawing on ideas that resemble that of capitalism or of a proto-capitalistic society. As society in the city, “degrades”, it increasingly has the tendencies and characteristics of capitalism. There are movements within the city to move away from old ideas of virtue and wisdom to ones of more humanly desires, mainly private property and wealth. Both of which
One of Plato's goals in The Republic, as he defines the Just City, is to illustrate what kind of leader and government could bring about the downfall of his ideal society. To prevent pride and greed in leaders would ensure that they would not compromise the well being of the city to obtain monetary gains or to obtain more power. If this state of affairs becomes firmly rooted in the society, the fall to Tyranny begins. This is the most dangerous state that the City become on i...
The Republic is an examination of the "Good Life"; the harmony reached by applying pure reason and justice. The ideas and arguments of Plato center on the social settings of an ideal republic - those that lead each person to the most perfect possible life for him. Socrates was Plato's early mentor in real life. As a tribute to his teacher, Plato uses Socrates in several of his works and dialogues. Socrates moderates the discussion throughout, as Plato's mouthpiece. Through Socrates' powerful and brilliant questions and explanations on a series of topics, the reader comes to understand what Plato's model society would look like. The basic plan of the Republic is to draw an analogy between the operation of society as a whole and the life of any individual human being. In this paper I will present Plato’s argument that the soul is divides into three parts. I will examine what these parts are, and I will also explain his arguments behind this conclusion. Finally, I will describe how Plato relates the three parts of the soul to a city the different social classes within that city.
In Plato’s Republic, the main argument is dedicated to answering Glaucon and Adeimantus, who question the reason for just behavior. They argue it is against one’s self-interest to be just, but Plato believes the behavior is in fact in one’s self-interest because justice is inherently good. Plato tries to prove this through his depiction of an ideal city, which he builds from the ground up, and ultimately concludes that justice requires the philosopher to perform the task of ruling. Since the overall argument is that justice pays, it follows that it would be in the philosopher’s self-interest to rule – however, Plato also states that whenever people with political power believe they benefit from ruling, a good government is impossible. Thus, those who rule regard the task of ruling as not in their self-interest, but something intrinsically evil. This is where Plato’s argument that justice is in one’s self-interest is disturbed. This paper will discuss the idea that justice is not in one’s self-interest, and thus does not pay.
In Plato’s The Republic, the primary focus for a significant portion of the text is establishing the ideal state in order to determine the nature of justice and virtue. In doing so, Socrates, who is the primary speaker in the text, determines several requirements for the existence of the ideal state. The third requirement according to Socrates is that philosophers must rule as kings (or kings must adequately philosophize). Until this occurs, “cities will have no rest from evils” (473d). However, there is some objection, or anticipated objection, to Socrates’ requirement. Adeimantus, one of Socrates interlocutors in The Republic, raises the objection that those who actively philosophize into adulthood are made up of a great number of cranks and,