1407818

8/14/2019 1407818

1/23

On Plato's Political PhilosophyAuthor(s): Christopher BruellSource: The Review of Politics, Vol. 56, No. 2 (Spring, 1994), pp. 261-282Published by: Cambridge University Pressfor the University of Notre Dame du lac on behalf of Review ofPolitics

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1407818.

Accessed: 14/11/2013 00:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Pressand University of Notre Dame du lac on behalf of Review of Politicsare

collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Review of Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 00:06:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=notredamepoliticshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=notredamepoliticshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1407818?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1407818?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=notredamepoliticshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=notredamepoliticshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

8/14/2019 1407818

2/23

On Plato'sPoliticalPhilosophyChristopherruellThearticle onsists hieflynanexaminationftheRepublic,utthat xami-nation ttemptso determineheplaceoftheRepublicnrelationo Plato'sotherworks especially heLaws nd the tatesman)s well as their lace nrelation oit. This comparative ffort ermits moreprecisespecificationhanwould

otherwise epossibleofthemost mportantuestionswhich re raised nthoseworks nd ofthe ntentionfthe uthor ntreatinghose uestions s hedoes.Plato's politicalphilosophy s accessible to us primarilythrough hethreegreatworkswhose verytitlespointto theirpolitical hemes: theRepublic,heLaws, nd theStatesman. heRepublicnd theLaws,whichhappentobe hislongestworksbyfar,redevoted hieflyodeveloping ery horoughgoingchemes

ofpolitical eform;heStatesmans devotedtothesearchfor herarequalities rqualificationshatwould makea manworthyfthat ame.Plato'spolitical hilosophy irstomes osight hen sboth riticalndreformist:testablishesmmediatelytsdistancefrom ctualpolitics nd looksto thetruepolitics,whichPlato'sown educational ffortsrepresumablyntended ohelpbringabout. Itcan thushave an apparentlyontraryffect,owever.Even as itraises tsreaders'politicalhopes, tmaylowertheirwillingness oparticipaten theonlypolitics vailable to them;for hesmallgood thatmight e done there eemssmaller tillwhen t s comparedwith hegoodtheyhave been ed toexpectfrom he schemesof radicalreform hattheyhave becomeac-quaintedwith nPlato.We maytakeas a typical xampleof suchreadersRaphaelHythloday, hewould-bePlatonist owhomThomasMore as-cribeshis Utopia.Raphaelrefuses o giveadvice to kingsandprinces n theground hat-unlesstheyweretobecomephiloso-phersthemselves-theywould be unwilling o acceptthefullmeasure fPlatonic eform,othinghort fwhichwillsufficeo

Thisarticlewas writtenriginallys a lecture o be givenat theSiemensFoundation nMunichn the ummer f1995; he ecturewill ppear, nGermantranslation,s part f collection f ectures npolitical hilosophy iven ttheFoundation,obepublished ySeriePiper.

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Thu, 14 Nov 2013 00:06:04 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/14/2019 1407818

3/23

262 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSremedytheir ountries' lls. Now, Raphael's refusaldoes notmeet with the approval of More. More rebukesRaphael foradopting schoolphilosophy.. which hinkethll thingsmeetfor very lace, and he offers imthefollowingounsel: thereis anotherphilosophymorecivil,which knoweth .. her ownstage, nd thereafterrderingnd behavingherself n theplaythat he hath nhand,playethherpart ccordingly ith omeli-ness,uttering othing ut ofdue order nd fashion.And this sthephilosophy hatyoumustuse. ... So the case standethn acommonwealth,nd so it is in theconsultations fkingsandprinces. If evil opinionsand naughtypersuasionscannotbeutterlynd quite pluckedoutoftheir earts,fyoucannot, venas you would, remedyvices which use and customhathcon-firmed:yetfor his cause you mustnot leave and forsake hecommonwealth... For t s notpossiblefor ll things obewell,unlessall menweregood. Which,Moreconcludes, I thinkwillnotbeyet hesegood manyyears. 1Now theremaywellbe someadvantagetokeeping ealots ikeRaphaelout ofpolitics, nd itmaythereforee doubted thatMoreexpected rdesired to en-courage Raphaelorhis like to take an activepolitical ole. Butthere an be littledoubtthatthegraceful nd wittyMore,notRaphael,was thegenuine latonist-nor hat, ycontrastingim-selfwiththe character e had created,More was attemptingoputhis ownreaders nthepathtoa more dequateappreciationofthemaster's ntention. utpreciselyf, ollowingMore's ead,we hesitateto acceptthe opinionthatPlato put forwardhisradical chemes ither odiscourage oliticalmenfromttempt-ing to accomplish hegood within heirreach or to have theschemes themselves akenas practicalproposals (one shouldconsulthereMore'scriticismsfcommunism t theend ofeachbook oftheUtopia),henwe arecompelled oraise, s iffromhebeginning nd witha combinationfpuzzlement nd wonder,theelementaryuestion fwhyhedidputthem orward.We willattemptobegintoanswer hat uestionby ookingat Plato's three reatpoliticalworks-first nd most xtensivelyat theRepublic, hich s morefundamentalhanthe Lawsandeasier of access thantheStatesman. he Statesman,s thethird

1.SirThomasMore,UtopiaNewYork:A. L. Burt ompany, .d.,)pp. 208-209.


8/14/2019 1407818

4/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 263member f trilogy, ust e approached ywayoftheTheaetetusand theSophist,wo formidable orks hat pparently ave littleto do withpolitics; nd theLaws'selaborationfa second-bestregime xplicitlyelaxesthe more severe demands on politicallifemade in theRepublicseeLaws739a-e)2nd thuspresupposesfamiliarityith heRepublics with priorwork.Butwe must, n addition,notneglect ntirely lato's otherdialogues,which alongwith heRepublic)remostly evotedtomemorializingheconversationsrrefutationsfSocrates.As itwas thetaskofconducting hoserefutationshatkeptSocrateshimself rom ngaging n politics-to judge, at least,fromhisown statementnhisApology23b7-9; f.31c4-el)-we might einclined opay them ittle rno attentionn an examination fPlato'spolitical hilosophy.But oyield othatnclination ouldbe tooverlook he fact hat, uasi-public s at least someof therefutations ere 21dl,23c2,33b9-c4) nd devotedto moral m-provement--especiallyhe moral mprovementfSocrates'fel-low citizens-as all of themapparentlywere (29d5-30a4and31b1-5; f. 0d6-21d7nd33a6-7), heymightwell bedescribed spolitical hemselves,ndeed as constitutinghetruepolitical c-tivity.ndeed,this s thewayinwhich hey redescribed ythatsame SocratesntheGorgias, hereheclaims hathealone ofhisfellowAthenians ngages npolitics 521d6-8). There are thentwo versions fthetruepolitics resentedo usbyPlato'spoliti-calphilosophy: he neelaborated nvariousways nhis chemesofpolitical eformndtheoneactually racticed ySocrates.Asfortherelationbetween the two versions, t is not free fromperplexity. o mentionnly hemostmassivepoint, heregimesof both theRepublicnd the Laws would place rather evererestrictionsn the sortofrefutingctivityhatSocrates arriedout virtually nhindered n Athens-in particular,n thephi-losophers'access to theyoung.3Just s we were compelledto

2. All citations o Platoaretothe tandardGreek dition fBurnetOxfordUniversityress).Unlessotherwise oted, hepassagescited nthe ext re tobefound nthedialogueunderdiscussionwhere he itations made.3. Republic97d8-498d1nd 537c9-540b7;aws634d4-635a5,52c5-d2 ndcontext,nd theregulations egardinghe ompositionnd conduct f theNoc-turnal ouncilmoregenerally: 51d4ff.nd961alff.Onemight onsidernthislight ocrates' ulogyofdemocracy,f ifen a democracynRepublic57c4ff.,especially 57dl1-2.


8/14/2019 1407818

5/23

264 THE REVIEWOF POLITICSwonder, then,about Plato's intentionn puttingforwardhisschemes fpolitical eform,e mustwonder lsoabouthis nten-tion n memorializingheSocratic efutations.n otherwords,whymusthispolitical hilosophy rticulate woversions fthetrue olitics,ndhowdo thoseversions omplementneanotherso as to standtogethers parts f onewhole?

TheRepublic resentstself s a consideration f ustice.Thefirst eneralquestiontobe raisedin thework s thequestion,What s justice? It is raised and pursued,by a mannamedPolemarchus,mongothers, otas a merelyheoreticaluestionbut as a question fvital mport o allwho wishtheirives tobegoverned y ustice nd who are,orbecome, wareof the nad-equacy of theirunderstandingf usticeand henceof what itdemandsofus (cf. 34b7-9with 35e-336a nd336e). Thepursuitofthe uestion, What s ustice? s interruptedt a certain ointbya mannamedThrasymachus,hohas nodesireto oin nthesearchforustice nd whose nterventionould wellbe seenas anattemptoputanend tothat earch.His reasons renot he ameas those which motivatesimilar attemptscloser to home.Thrasymachuss not so-called elativist,ne ofthosewho com-bine thebelief hat necannot nswerbyreasoned rgumenthequestionof what ustice s (since, s they nsist, here s no trueanswertoit)with hefear hat o allow eventhe earchfor uchananswer, o eaveopenthebarepossibilityhat, or llweknow,theremighte an answer oit, s toopenthedoor todogmatismandintolerancewhich hey ake obe injustice ureandsimple).Thrasymachus iffers rom urcontemporaryould-berelativ-istsboth nhisawareness hathebelieveshe knowswhat usticeis and ina belief hat etshimapartnotonlyfrom hem utalsofromocrates' thernterlocutorsntheRepublic. his s hisbelief(whichhe iswilling lso tostate nplainterms) hatustice sbadfor heustpersonhimself hilebeinggoodfor thers,speciallyhisrulers,whoprofitrom is ustice. hrasymachusontends,nshort, hata lifeofinjustices superior o a just life 347e2-4).Thosewhocannot ccepthiscontentionaturallyooktoSocratesfor defense f ustice cf.367d8-el, 58d2-3); nd, nhiseager-nesstoprovide uch a defense, ocrates bandons ordefers he


8/14/2019 1407818

6/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 265pursuit fhisoriginal uestion s to what ustice s (cf.345b9-clwith347e2);but thisverydeferral endershis first efenseofjustice inthe atter art fbook1) inadequate 354c1-3):how canthegoodnessor badness ofsomethinge established efore neknowswhatthe hingnquestion s? SinceSocrates' irst efenseof ustice s admittedlynadequate, hedemand canreasonablybemade thathe undertake seconddefense.Andthat emand smade,and made withconsiderable orce nd eloquence,bythetwobrothers lauconandAdeimantusatthebeginningfbook2). Glauconand Adeimantus roperlynsist hatthisnew de-fensebegin from n adequate explanationof what justice s.More precisely,whattheywant to know is not so much whatjustice s (orthedefinitionf ustice) swhatpower thas when tispresentn oursouls,whatpower thasallby tself, hether rnot tspresence s notedbyothers358b4-6, 67b3-5, 2-4, 3-5).Theirrequest s a reflectionf their elief as to whichtheymaybehardly onscious) hat hey re not ntirelygnorants to whatjustice s;they elieve hat hey nowof tat eastthismuch:thatit involves thewillingness o subordinate ne's own good tosomething lse (to a higher ause, as we would say); and theywantSocrates o convince rto reassure hem hat uch subordi-nation s compatiblewith,naydemandedby,one's own truestgood. Theirrequest s thus notentirelyoherent; ut,for hatveryreason, tgives testimonyotheirove of ustice. And thestrengthf their ove of usticemakessignificant,n turn, re-ciselytheir cknowledgmentfthefundamental act. Thatfacthad beenacknowledged,t s true, venprior o the nterventionofThrasymachus331c1-dl, 32all-b4,b9-c4, 35c1-5), utonlyimplicitly;t s given ts most xalted xpressionntheteaching(inwhichthemost mportantartoftheRepubliculminates) fthesupremacy f the dea of theGood (504d2-6, 05a2-4, 5-el,508el-509c4).Socrates utlines heveryradical chemeofpolitical eformforwhich heRepublics ustly amous y wayofresponse o thebrothers' equest. That s,he respondsto their equestby con-structing city n speechtogether iththem nd byobservingwith them tscoming-into-being. is procedure s apparentlybased on thefollowingonsideration:while there s usticeofaman as well as justice f city rcountry,he ustice nthe argerbeing-where there s presumablymoreof t-will be easier to


8/14/2019 1407818

7/23

266 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSdiscern; fterheyhave discoveredtthere,hey an look n thesmaller eing,nman,for ts ikeness368e-369a).But, ven fwegrant hatusticehas the ame formn an individual s ithas in acommunity,he onsiderationeferredo wouldnot xplainwhythey urn oconstructing city nspeech. The reason s appar-ently asedon thefurtheronsiderationthough his s notmadeclearuntil heconstructions well on itswaytocompletion)hatjustice s to befound speciallyn a good city; nd,as we can wellsuppose,noneofthe ctually xistingitieswas sufficientlyoodfor heir urpose 434d6-e2,20b5-cl; f. 27d3-5 s well as 369a6-7, 371e12,372e2-6). We mustassume, then, hatthecity o beconstructednspeech s intended ySocrates rom hebeginningto be a good one. This stilldoes notexplain,however,whywemust bserve tscoming-into-being;ordoes it suffice oexplaintheparticularequenceof measures nd stagesbywhich t doescome ntobeing. Forsome of those tages repuzzling nthem-selves (I have inmind,for xample, hefirsttageof thecity'sdevelopment, hich s based on Socrates' uggestionhatpoliti-cal life ngeneral,ndhence heir itynparticular,as itsoriginin our lack of economic elf-sufficiency,n our economicneedalone, suggestionhatgnores mongother hingshedesireforprocreationndtheroleofthefamily)4;nd, nother ases,whatappear to be measuresdesignedto servecertain nds are puz-zlinginsofar s theyproveto serve more mportantnds thanthosethey re suggested o serve whenthey re introduced reventobe suchends themselvesthemost bviousexamples rethe ducation ftheruling lass, s that sfirstescribed,nd theinstitutionf thephilosopher-kings)5.s we will see, the atterdifficulty,specially,an be tracedn argepart o therole hat hetwo brothers lay ntheconstructionfthecity,whosedevelop-ment s affected othbywhattheynsist ponandbywhattheyresist372c2-e6,or xample, swell as 473e6ff.nd487blff.). utthisonlyraises the furtheruestionofwhy the brothers reallowed,and evenencouraged,oplaysucha role.Thenecessary ssumption,hen, hat hecity s intended y

4. Cf.369b5-elwithAristotle,olitics,k1,chap.2.5. Cf.376c7-8in ight f373d4-374a2 nd375b9-c5)with 99e5-7; f. 73b4-e2,toward hebeginningf a sectionwhich uns hrough02c5-9,with543al-6and d1f. s wellas with 96c5-497d6,hich tands 73b4-e2 n itshead.


8/14/2019 1407818

8/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 267Socrates rom hebeginningo be a goodone, s the xpression fan enigmarather hanitself solution. At theminimum,tcompelsus to wonderwhatSocrates akes hegoodnessofa citytoconsistn: bywhatunderstandingf city's oodnessdoes hetakehisbearingsn nitiatinghe tepswhichhe takeson hisownand inturningohisuse the tepswhich reforced ponhimbyothers?Toputthis notherway,fromwhichpoint fview s thegoodnessofthe ity o be udged? Theadequacyoftheudgmentwilldependonthe dequacyof hepoint fview fromwhich t smade. Now,accordingoPlatoand hisSocrates, opoint fviewismore dequateormoreworthyfrespect han hat fphiloso-phy,of thephilosophers.But thephilosophers' tandard s rea-sort.What conceivable nds,then, f a political ommunityrereasonable nes? Andwhatwould thepolitical ommunityaveto be, if t is to pursuereasonable nds alone? In setting ut,together ith hebrothers,o construct iscity,ocratesssettingoutafter uch a political ommunity:s thebest ommentatorntheRepublic as said, In theRepublic,eason orintellect uidesthefoundation fthecityfrom hebeginning,nd eventuallyrules the city n broad daylightwithout ny dilution or dis-guise. 6And, nobservinghecoming-into-beingfthat ity nspeech,we aremeant o cometo understandtscharacter,t thesame time s we cometounderstandandlargely yvirtue fourcoming ounderstand)heobstacleswhich tscoming-into-beingmust onfront.Thissuggestion s totheunderstandingfgoodnesswhichguidesSocratesnhisconstructionfthecitynspeech s admit-tedlyan hypothesis, ut it has the advantageofpermittingresolution fmost, fnotall,of theperplexitiesonnectedwiththat onstruction hichwe werecompelledtonote. The pres-ence ofthebrothers,or xample, s participantsntheconstruc-tion s requiredfthecharacter fSocrates' ity s determinedsmuchbytheobstaclestmust onfrontnd themeans tmustuseto overcome hem s bythe nds t eekstoserve-as muchby tseffortsoremove heresistanceo theruleofreason s bytheruleofreason tself. heparticipationfthebrotherssrequired,hatis,iftheresistance o the ruleof reason s to be treatednot ust

6. Leo Strauss, heArgumentndtheActionfPlato'sLAWS Chicago: Uni-versityfChicagoPress, 975), . 38.


8/14/2019 1407818

9/23

8/14/2019 1407818

10/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 269citizens r tself y nternecinearfare.Only fter hediscussionof the ducationhas had onGlauconan effectkinto thatwhichthe ducationtselfs ntended ohaveon the oldiers,an Socratesrevealto him that t has rather,without heirnoticing his,purgedthecity f thoseverydesireswhichhad madeexpansionappear to be necessary.The purgingwhichGlauconis at thatpointreadytoaccept s theveryone thathehas tosome extentalreadyundergoneseethepassagescited nthefirstartofnotefive). Similarly,he rule ofphilosopher-kingss introduced smerely henecessarymeans tothecoming-into-beingndeed ofthegoodcity nd not s anintegralart f he ity,withoutwhichthecity'sgoodnesswould be incomplete. In imitation f thisfeature ftheRepublic,ocrates'discussion fthe ameregimenthe Timaeus mits mention f thephilosopher-kingsrom hesummaryroper,s distinct rom is ubsequent emarks.)8nlyafter he considerable ppositionwhich tsintroductionmeetswitheventhenhas beenassuaged,can the rule ofphilosopher-kings e revealed obe also (or rather) art fthepeak,nottosaythepeak itselfsee thepassages cited nthe secondpartofnotefive).As for he uggestionhatpolitical ife ngeneral, nd hencetheir itynparticular,as itsoriginn our ack ofeconomic elf-sufficiency,n our economicneed alone,Socratesmakes itbe-cause he regards hatneed as a trueneed and the contributionmade to fulfillingtby cooperation mongfellow itizens s agenuine,ndperhaps vennecessary369e2-370c6),ontribution.He goesso far s tocall the itywhich imitstselfopursuit f ogenuinea good the true or truthful)ity 372e6-7). But,as isshownbyhisreadyacceptance fGlaucon'srevolt gainstthatcity therevoltwhich xpresses tself n a demand for uxuries),Socrates oesnotreally xpect hepolitical ommunityobe ableto restricttself o thepursuitof this imited,frational, nd(372e2-4).Moreover, laucon's nsistence n uxuries,longwiththeattemptoexpandthecity's erritoryhich tentails,makesnecessary nd hencepossibletheintroductionnto thecityofeducation,n the ense offormationfcharacter376c7ff.). ow,Socrates ses that ducation, s wehaveseen, opurge he ity f

8.Cf.Timaeus 7c1-19blwith19e5.


8/14/2019 1407818

11/23

270 THE REVIEWOF POLITICStheverydesireswhichhisacceptance fGlaucon's demandhadallowedtogrow trongn t;and,as he indicates,his s ina wayto takethecity back to tspre-corruptedtate cf. 99e5-6with372e7).Butonly n a way: theposition owhich he ity eturnssdifferentrom hatwhich Glaucon forced t to leave. Its self-restraint,hichwasformerlyheunconscious hild f nnocence,has been reestablishedn thebasisofa frankonfrontationithdesire nda taming f t. Innocence asbeenreplacedbyvirtue.9We havereached, hen, nothertage n thegoodcity's evelop-ment-apparently higher ne. Thecity hat ffereds nomorethan to provide efficientlyorour bodilywell-beinghas beentransformedntoonethat romotes irtue.Andvirtues an endwhich, s thebrotherselieveor wish tobelieve cf. 59b6-7with358c6 nd366c6-dl), sdearer othemnotonly hanbodilywell-beingbuteventhan ife tself--deservedlyo,as theyhope thatSocrateswill confirmseeespecially,nGlaucon'sspeech, 61b5-d3). Thephilosophers, ho udgefromwhatthey nowof hem-selves and observeofothers, otleast ofsuchnobleyouths sGlauconandAdeimantus,greetothis xtent: hedissatisfactionwiththe imit hatnature etstoour life nd thereforelso withthepursuitmerely f thewell-being four mortalbodies,thedissatisfactionhich heclaimmade on behalf fvirtue nd thehopes connectedwiththatclaimso noblybespeak, s notonlyapparentlynescapable or s,whocallourselves uman, ut lsoreasonablebutconsider tatesman72bl-d2).Theonlyquestionis whether ur situation eaves us any genuinerecourseotherthanresignationnd the ife f erenefreedomhat uchresigna-tion penstous. InthePhaedo, hich s seton thedayofhis owndeath, ocrates quatesphilosophizing ith hepractice fnoth-ingelsebutto die and be dead.10ntheRepublic,elimits imselfto indicatinghatthe Isles of theBlessed, towhich theothercitizensof thegood city re tobelieve their hilosopher-rulersdepartwhentheydie, are believedby thephilosophers hem-selvestobe their rdinarywelling-place hilethey re alive cf.540b5-c2with 19c5-6).We shouldnotbevery urprised,hen, ofindof this econdstage n thegood city'sdevelopment hat t,

9. Cf.Laws679b7-e5n the ight f678b1-4.10.Phaedo 4a4-6.


8/14/2019 1407818

12/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 271too,will have to be surpassed. Itis, nfact, transitionaltage.The virtueswhich hecity as now undertaken opromoteink twithboththefirsttageand with hethird r final ne. On theone hand, as Socrateswill explainlateron, those virtues resomehowclosetobodilyvirtues518d9-e2): his s so notmerelybecauseofthe ort feducation ywhich hey re nculcated,neducationwhichrelies n habit nd exercise, ut also (as we canadd on thebasisofour earlier onsideration fthat ducation-pages 268 and 269 above) because the virtues n questionarenecessary o thebodilywell-being fthecitizens.Indeed,theyare hardly ess necessary o thatend than s theeconomicex-change hatwas introducednthefirsttage.On theother and,insofar s their ank ppearsto us totranscendhat fmeans tosuch an end,thosevirtues ointto a third tage cf.543d1f.),stage nwhich hecitys notonlyruledbyphilosophers ut alsotakes as itspurpose, bove all,thefosteringf thecapacityforphilosophizingn the natures uitable for t (540b5-6 nd theeducation cheme fbook7). Thus t sonly here hatwe finallyarrive, s it wouldseem, tthecity oodwithout ualification,city uledbyreason nddevotedtoreasonable nds.Thegood citywas tobe constructed,e recall, nd we weretoobservets oming-into-beingstensiblyecause twasthoughtthatbydiscerning irst he usticeofthe argerbeing, nd thenlookingfor tslikeness n man,we mightmoreeasilydiscoverwhat ustice s. Buttheconsideration fthegood city ontinuesthrough ook7, longafter,hat s,it has served tsallegedpur-pose ofleadingus to thediscovery f ustice,which tdoes inbook4. Moreover,whatwe learnfromtabout ustice s ambigu-ous: ifwe takeourbearings ythegoodcitytself, e are ed toconclude thatusticerequires fus nothingo muchas thatwefulfill ur own task that orwhichwe are mostnaturallyuited)within hepolitical ommunity433al-b4);whereas, f we takeourbearings ythe ikeness f this ustice nthe ndividual,weare ed to conclude hatustice equires fus nothingo much sthatwe tendtothehealth f our ownsouls 441d5-e3, 43b7-d3).Socrates oes call ourattentiono theneed toremove nyappar-entdivergence etweenthe usticethatwe find n thecity ndthatwhichwe find n the ndividual byrubbing hedivergentunderstandingsogetherntil heflame fthetrueusticebursts


8/14/2019 1407818

13/23

8/14/2019 1407818

14/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 273vice to thepolitical ommunity,hequestionof thegoodnessofjusticecanalmostbe reducedto thequestion f thegoodnessofsuch service. For the reasonalready ndicated see page 267above), thatquestioncan thenbe restatedn thismorepreciseform:n which aseorcasesdo thephilosophersegard ervice othepolitical ommunitys somethingmore thana necessity-that s, as a positivegood? The case or cases in questionarepresumablyobe sought mong hose nwhich he ndspursuedbythepolitical ommunityrereasonable nes. Hence the earchfor political ommunityhatwouldpursuereasonable ndsandreasonable nds alone. Butthis uggestions tothemeaning rpurposeofSocrates' onstructionfthegood citywould renderhisresponse othebrothers'equest omewhat layful;ndplay-fulnessmaywell appeartobe out ofplace inconnectionwithmatterfsuchgravity.It is impossibleand impermissibleo doubt thatSocrateswished torespond othebrothers'equest rthathedidrespondto it nsomefashion; ut t s equally mpossible, s itseems tome,tomake theconsiderationfthegoodcity it eatlynto nyconceivable lanof response, oconclude hat hemeaning ndpurposeof onsideringt reexhausted ywhateverontributionthat onsiderationmaymake tosucha plan. But fthey renotexhausted ythis, henwe arecompelled o wonderwhetherheconstructionf thegood city nd theobservation f tscoming-into-beingnspeechwerenotof nterestoPlato andhisSocratesintheir wnright.We thus eturno the uestion romwhichwebegan as to the character f Plato's interestn theschemeofreform hat s outlinedntheRepublic.Whatwe believe tohaveseeninthemeantimes somethingfthecharacter fthereformitself ndsomethingfwhat s tobe learned bout that haracterfrombservinghegood city s itcomes nto eing nspeech.Forthe imofthereformsnothingess than truly ational olitics.And such a politics, orPlatoas well as forhisSocrates,wouldrequirenothing ess thanthe rule of fully ationalhumanbe-ings-that s,philosophers, horulemoreover ot nthemannerthatMore recommended o Raphaelbut rather s philosophers,responsibleonoother uthorityhan hemselves. o observe hecoming-into-beingn speech of the good city s, therefore,obecome aware of the obstacles to philosophicrule.Those ob-stacles would in all probability,o say the east,prevent hilo-


8/14/2019 1407818

15/23

274 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSsophicrulefrom vercomingntobeing lso indeed; and,as wenoted arlierpage267above),they lacetheirtamp ven onthecitynspeech ntheform f themeasureswhich rerequired orovercoming hem. As we also noted earlier page 268 above),regardingmeasureswhich rerequired or vercomingbstaclestoproposals hatwouldbe unacceptablef hemeasures nques-tionwerenotalready nplace,thosemeasures annotbe intro-duced as serving hepurposes they re trulymeant to serve.Whatwe are nowina position oadd is that hemost mportantmeasures ntroducedn thecourseoftheRepublic,hatever heymaybe said to be introduced or,must be understood o berequiredrather or hepurposeofovercomingbstaclesof onesort ranother ophilosophic ule. Moreprecisely,heymustbeunderstood o be requiredforovercomingheobstacleswhichprevent on-philosophers,r themostpoliticallyignificantlassofnon-philosophers,rom cceptingphilosophicrule,with allthat uch rule entails. Butthe most mportantmeasure ntro-duced intheRepublic,measurewhichhas a greaterffecthananythingpartfrom hilosophic ule tself n the haracter fthecity r whichgoes furtherntransformingolitical ife s ithasalwaysbeen known as thereaction o tofSocrates' nterlocutorsconfirms),s thenotorious ommunismfwomenand children,together ith he exualequalitywhichpaves thewayfor t seethetransition t 458c6-e2). There s a link, hen, ccording oPlato,between the implementationf such a communism swould deprive manofanyspouse orchildren f hisown andthecapacity fthebestkindofnon-philosophersoacceptphilo-sophicrule nd all that tentails.In order to understand henature ofthat ink,we wouldprobablyhave tostudyPlato'seroticworks, heSymposiumndthePhaedrus,naddition o hispolitical nes;butwe canconfirmthatPlatodoes indeedpointto itsexistence yglancing t theTimaeusndCritias, hichformogethersort f ppendix otheRepublic,nd at theLaws. TheTimaeus nd Critias akeplace onthedayafterocrates asprovidedto groupncluding imaeus,Critias ndHermocrates) discussion f political egimewhich,from he ummary egivesofthediscussion tthebeginning ftheTimaeus,oundsverymuch iketheregime utlined n theRepublic.ocrates'summarys a preludeto his repetitionf arequest hathe has made ofhislisteners fthedaybefore:that


8/14/2019 1407818

16/23

8/14/2019 1407818

17/23

276 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSanymention fa class ofpriests. imilarlyntheLaws,where heregimet etsforth iffers ost bviously rom hat ftheRepub-lic ntheabsence ofphilosophic ulers-the so-calledNocturnalCouncil ntroducednthe atter tagesof thework s buta dimreflectionf them-theonlypassagewhichexplicitlyomparesthetworegimes races he nferiorityftheonebeing et forthntheLaws o the bsenceofcommunism,specially ommunismfwomenand children739a1-740a2).To conclude, hen, ur dis-cussion oftheRepublic, e suggest hat heconsideration f thegood city s meant o revealhowpolitical ifewouldhave to betransformednorder o admitofphilosophic uleand why t sunreasonable oexpect, erhapseven todesire, ucha transfor-mation.

We turnnowto a brief iscussion f theLawsand theStates-man. ftheregime utlinedntheRepublicsmeant o showhowthepolitical ommunity ould have tobe transformednorder oadmit of a truly ationalpolitics, heregime laborated n theLawsmaybe said tobe meant oshowhowfar reform ovingnthe same direction an proceed n a political ommunity hichdoes notundergo hetransformationffectedrcalled for ntheRepublic.14 s we have already seen,there s no communismntheregime ftheLaws-in particular,o communism fwomenandchildren-andhencenophilosophic ule. The Laws s thusmorepracticalworkthantheRepublic,nd thisdifferences re-flectedn thedifferencenconversationalettings.An old phi-losopher-not Socratesbut anotherAthenian 5-conversesotwith nexperienced outhsnotto mention foreignhetorician)butwith woold citizens fhighly egardedaw-abiding egimes,experienced oliticalmen, ne ofwhom hasbeenentrusted itha grave political esponsibility,or hecarryingut ofwhichheseeks guidancefrom he conversation.Butthe morepracticalcharacter f the Laws does notmeanthat he work s devoid oftheoreticalnterest r ntent. o the ontrary,orwhat sdifficult

14.Cf.Aristotleolitics 265a2-6.15. Butcf.Aristotleolitics,k2,chap.5,as wellas Strauss, lato'sLAWS.,pp. 1-2.


8/14/2019 1407818

18/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 277to see fromn examinationfthegood city ftheRepublicloneand can be better eenbycontrastinghecity ftheRepublic ithprecisely hatcitywhich s elaborated n theLaws, s what theabsenceofcommunism ndphilosophic ulemeans or hepoliti-cal community.We must imitour considerationo the mostimportantoint. ftheRepubliculminatesinbooks5 through)in a discussion fphilosophyndofthe o-called deas orForms(which resupposedtosupplythePlatonic nswertotheques-tionof thehighest auses),theLawsmaybe said toculminateinbook10) na demonstrationf he xistence f providentialodor gods: the more important f the Athenian's nterlocutorsregards uch a demonstration-in articular, demonstrationfthe existence fpunishing ods-as thenoblest nd best intro-duction o theiraw code as a whole (887b5-c2).We maygrantthat he connection etween hegod orgodswhose existence sdemonstratedntheLaws ndtheOlympian ods worshipped yordinary reeks emains ark cf. 98c1-899c1 ith904a9-bl nde4).16Still, hetheologicaleaching ftheLaws s far loser otheordinary nderstandinghan sthe heologicaleaching fbook2oftheRepublic, hosegodsdo notharm nyone nd are, ntheirexemption rom ll change, refigurationsftheForms r deasintroduced ateron (379a5-b10 nd 380a5-c3; 80dl-381c10 nd381d1-4).17Now, thetheology f Book Two maybe diluted nother assages 427bl-c5, or xample, s wellas 540b7-c2); ut tis notaltogethermisleading osaythat heregime ftheRepublicstands orfallsbythesuccess orfailure f theattempto formcitizen odythat anaccept t.18ntheregime ftheLaws-andthis s itssignificanceorus-the attempt o introduce uch atheology s noteven made. That s,evenintheregime hat smeantto come as close as is practicable739e3-4) o thatof theRepublic,t s impossible,nPlato'sview,togoso far.In order o makethem eceptive othereform e intends opropose, heAthenian fthe Laws must nduce thetwoold citi-zens withwhomhe speakstoadmitthat he aw codes oftheir

16. Cf.Timaeus0d6-41a5with 9e3-40d5.17. Cf.Sophist48e6-249b1egardinghe heological-or nti-theological-implicationsfthe deas.18. Foran indications to wherethechief bstacle ies,compareRepublic603d9-604a9 ith 87d1-e10.


8/14/2019 1407818

19/23

278 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSown countriesCrete ndSparta) reflawed nd thus apableofbeing mproved pon. The chief arrier osuch an admission stheir laimorcontentionhat he codes are ofdivineorigin cf.624a1-b4with628c9-e5 nd 630d2-3) nd henceperfect. n thissituation,he Athenian roceedsby grantingheir remise ndeven insisting pon its implication630d4-631a8); e onlyre-quests nreturn-andthis s a requestwhich hedefendersfthecodesproveto be unable to refuse im-thatthey onsiderwhattheperfection, hichdivinelynspired aws of coursepossess,mustconsist n (631a8-632d1).He thensuggeststhat the lawcodes ofCreteand Spartabe examined o see how theypursuethegoodswhich perfectode hasbeenagreed oprocure632d1-633a3). Notsurprisingly,heir ursuit fthosegoodsmanifestlyfalls hort fthe standardwhichtheir efenders aveaccepted(634b7-c9).Byproceedingnthisway,theAthenianucceeds nmaking tcleartotheoldmenthemselvesorclearer han thadbeen) that heclaimsofdivineoriginhad been made toprotecttheir odes from nwisecriticism,specially n thepartoftheyoung 634d4-635a2).Thisdevelopment ftheearlypartof theLaws inksthe Laws withtheStatesman. he counterpartn theStatesmanothe ritique f he woparticularivine odes carriedout ntheLaws sa critique f aw,of he uleof aw,as such. Thatcritique,oo, stheworknotofSocrateswhomerelyistens o t)butofanother hilosopher.Rule of aw or according o law iscompared n it withruleof a man whopossessesthekingly rttogether ithprudence 294a7-8).Such a manwouldbe able totake nto ccountwhatno lawcan,howeverwisely twas framed:thecountlessdifferenceshatdistinguish rom ne another hecases as towhich disposition as tobemade, nparticular,hedifferencesmong hehumanbeings nvolved nd theirctivities(294a10-c9; f.296e1-297a5nd 301c6-d6). Rule oflaw is com-paredalso, mplicitly,ia a mythicalccount f heAgeofCronospresented arlier n thedialogue,with directdivinerule overhumanbeings 271e4-272a1nd context).Now, as thephiloso-pherpointsout, laws, which n theirgenerality isregard hedifferenceseferredo,are nevertheless ecessary 294c10-dl).No one would be capable of sitting eside each humanbeingthroughout is life n ordertoprescribewhat s fittingorhim(294d3-295b2).Or, f omeonewerecapableof this thephiloso-phermustbe thinking ereoftherulebelonging o theAge of


8/14/2019 1407818

20/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 279Cronos),he would neverputobstaclesnthewayof theexerciseof hisdiscretiony ayingdown lawswhich resupposedtobeincapableofbeing mproved pon 295b2-6; f.295b7-296a3nd300c9-d3with 97d4-e14nd299b2-dl).ThecritiquentheStates-man hus eemstogofurtherhan hatntheLawsbycallingntoquestion heverypossibilityf divine aw; but,while t exceedsthe critiqueof the Lawsin itsreach, t may fallshortofthatcritiquenitsgrasp. Itspersuasivenesss limited ythefact hatthephilosopherwhocarriestoutappearsto rest isargumentna premisenotnecessarilyharedorgranted ytheadherents ftheviewopposedtohis own.We havealready alledattentionothefact hat heStatesmanis the thirdmember f a trilogy onsistinglso ofthe Theaetetusand theSophist. n theTheaetetus,ocrateshas a conversationwith everalmathematicians hich ttemptso answer heques-tion, What sknowledge? Muchofthat onversation,owever,is takenup bya consideration f a positionofProtagoras hatwould seemto denytheverypossibilityfknowledge 151e8-183c4).Theattemptfthe nterlocutorsoanswer he uestion owhich heTheaetetuss ostensiblyevoted nds nfailure210a9-dl); and the same canbe said of their ttempto vindicate hepossibilityfknowledgenthefaceoftheProtagoreanahallenge(183b7-cl).19Whenthegroupreassembles,s theyhad agreedtodo, the nextday,the mathematiciansring longwiththemaphilosopher rom lea,a member f heParmenideanircle here.Socrates sks thismanwhether,ccording otheParmenideans,thethreenames sophist, statesman, nd philosopher, reproperly pplied all to the same individualor to two or threeindividuals. hephilosopher's laboration fhis nitial rprovi-sional answer Sophist17b1-3) onstituteshebulk oftheSophistand the Statesman.According oourPlatonic ommentator,Itcould seemthat he uestion egardinghe dentityrnonidentityofthe ophist, he tatesman,ndthephilosopherakes heplaceofthequestion, r is a morearticulate ersionofthequestion,What sknowledge? 20Sincethe uestion What sknowledge?

19.On this assage, nd what s atstakemoregenerallyntheProtagoreanchallenge,ee David Bolotin,TheTheaetetusnd thePossibilityfFalseOpin-ion, nterpretation,JournalfPoliticalhilosophy5 1987):179-93.20.Leo Strauss,Plato, nHistoryfPoliticalhilosophy,d.Leo Strauss ndJoseph ropsey, rded. (Chicago:UniversityfChicagoPress, 987), . 68.


8/14/2019 1407818

21/23

280 THE REVIEWOF POLITICSis shownin theTheaetetuso includeor implythequestion Isknowledgepossible? we take thissuggestion o mean that norder o answer hequestion fthepossibilityfknowledge,wemust ask whether ophist, tatesman,nd philosopher re thesameor not he ame.Surely part f he uestionwhich ocratesasks of thephilosopher romElea, and not its least importantpart,s thequestionwhether genuine hilosophersnecessarilyalso a statesman,nthe ensethathenecessarily nows lso whatthe statesman s statesman nows. And inraising nd address-ingthis atter uestion, heSophistndStatesmanpproachpoliti-cal matters rom direction ppositeto thatfromwhichtheywere pproachedntheworkswe havealreadydiscussed.There,a philosopherddressedmenwho took he mportancefpoliticsfor ranted,nd he tried o ead the onversationo, ratanyratetowards, hilosophy.21 In theSophistnd Statesman,philoso-pher onverseswithmathematicians,ho take he mportanceftheoryforgranted, nd he exploreswith them the questionwhether-preciselyn theoreticalrounds-a philosophermustturnhis attention opolitics. Thephilosopher's nswer to thatquestionmustbe gatheredfrom he elaboration fhis initialresponse oSocrates, ather hanfrom he nitial esponse tself;and thehighpointofthat laboration,s far s theStatesmansconcerned,s thecritique f aw whichwe have alreadyconsid-ered.Could thephilosopherwho carries ut thatcritiquehavethoughttnecessaryohistheoreticalnterprisehathe be able todo so?Werecall,nthis onnection,hatheisanEleatic, hat s,afollowerof sorts)of thephilosopherwhose thought eems tohaveushered nor bornewitness o thefirst reat risis fphilo-sophicself-doubtr self-criticism. oreoverhe himself,n theSophist, ives an account of the difficultiesttending ll pre-Socratic hilosophic ositions242b6-250e7).22twas inresponseto suchdifficultieshat ocrateshad turned rom he direct x-amination fthebeings o the peeches boutthem,s hetellsusinthePhaedo95e7-100a7),ndeventuallyo his refutationsfhisfellowAtheniansndothers.Thephilosopher ftheSophistnd

21.RegardingheLaws, ee especially.63a10-965c8.22. The Theory f Ideas in the formn which t was presented y theyoungSocrates o Parmenides imselfor riticismsproperlyncluded mongthepre-SocraticositionsParmenides28e5-135d6).


8/14/2019 1407818

22/23

PLATO'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 281Statesmanoes notseem tohavegonethisfar:to whatwe havealready bservedpages278 and 279above),we canadd that hemathematicianho ntroduces im oSocrates emarks hat e isof too measured manner otakeverbaldisputes eristics)eri-ously,and thathe himselfin theSophist)s highly ritical feristics224e6-226a5,32a1-235a7,67e4-268d5;f.229e1-231b8).On the otherhand,or for thisveryreason,he is able to callattentionintheStatesman)o a most mportantolitical-rhetori-cal taskwhichonly philosopher anaccomplish utwhich, sonecansee fromheClitophons a whole, philosopherngagingin Socraticrefutations ightfind tespeciallydifficultven totakeup (306al-310bl).The task s that freconcilinghenaturallymoderate umanbeings for xample, heyoung ddressee ftheTheaetetusnd theSophist)23nd thenaturallymanlyones (forexample, heyoungaddresseeoftheStatesman)24nd thusben-efitingoththepolitical ommunityndphilosophy yproduc-ingharmony mong heirpotential)dherents.Andit s accom-plishedby teaching heright pinions boutthenoble,ust, ndgood things nd their pposites 309c5-6, 10-el,e5-6). Plato'spoliticalphilosophy,whichshows us-in theRepublicnd theLaws-what is at stake n thequarrelbetweenphilosophy ndpolitics nd-in its memorials o theSocratic efutations-pre-sents he ctivity ywhich ocrates ried ovindicate hephiloso-phers' side of the quarrel, eems also to have takenup andaccomplished hepolitical-rheforicalaskthathisspokesman ntheSophistnd Statesmanalls toour attention.It is difficult or us to appreciate odaythemagnitude fPlato'srhetoricalccomplishment.his sdue,at east npart, othefact hatwe inthemodernWest iveunderforms fgovern-mentwhichowe their rigin ophilosophy,omodernpoliticalphilosophy,nd which ppearto haveaccomplished hegoal ofthephilosophic olitics hatPlatoexperimented ith n theRe-public,specially,nd intheLaws,without skingofus the acri-ficeswhich he felt ompelledto demand. At the same time,however,we apparentlyecome, ay-by-day,vermore ndiffer-

23.Sophist65cl-e2.24. Statesman61e8-262b7,63c3-el: in order to appreciate roperly heStranger'sehemence,ne must sk oneselfwhether hehypotheticalase he hasinmind s trulyhat fthinkingranes.


8/14/2019 1407818

23/23

282 THE REVIEW OF POLITICSentto theproblemthatboth unitedand divided thetwo pre-modern amps itunited hemnmutual cknowledgmentf tssuprememportancend dividedthem yvirtue fthediametri-callyopposed characterftheir esponses o t). As a result,webecome evermoreblindeven to themeaningof thepoliticalvictoryhatmodern olitical hilosophychieved. This ndiffer-encewouldprobably e understood ymodern olitical hiloso-phy tselfs a confirmationf tsview that henatural oncerns fhumanbeingsdo not ookbeyond uchgoodsas humanbeingscan themselves rocure preventionfviolenteath, or xample,or recognition ).As we have seen(page 270 above),thisviewof the naturalhuman concerns s not Plato's view. Fromhisperspective,he ndifferenceeferredo smerelypparentndif-ference nd itsroot s notnature ut rather hemodern eachingaboutnature. fheiscorrect,hepolitical chievementfmodernpoliticalphilosophy,o farfrom eingwithout ost,mayhavecome at thepriceof our estrangementrom ur fundamentalconcernhroughossof elf-awareness. o testwhetherhis sthecase isperhaps hemost rgent easonfor tudying lato'sworks.

1407818

Documents

Transcript of 1407818