Plato

Theory of philosopher king

Philosopher Ruler: Plato's Ideal State
Plato's theory of the philosopher ruler is central to his vision of the Ideal State.
He believed that philosophers, with their knowledge, intellect, and training,
were uniquely qualified to govern. This belief was rooted in the idea that
philosophy is the only key to heaven, as it engages with the immortality of the
soul. Plato argued that ruling is a skill requiring specific qualifications aimed at
the general well-being of society. A good ruler not only preserves the lives of
his subjects but also transforms them as human beings. He suggested that the
best state would emerge when political power and philosophical wisdom are
united in the same individuals.
Definition of a Philosopher
A philosopher, according to Plato through Socrates, is someone who loves
wisdom, has a passion for knowledge, and is always eager to learn. Unlike
theatre fans or music lovers, who only appreciate beautiful things, a true
philosopher understands the nature of Beauty itself. Socrates distinguished
between knowledge and belief: knowledge is based on things that truly exist,
while belief pertains to things that are less real. For Plato, the Ideal is Real,
meaning that the forms, such as Beauty itself, exist in a fuller sense than their
manifestations in the world.
Why Should Philosophers Rule?
Plato argued that philosophers, by their understanding of the Idea of Good, are
best suited to rule. He believed that only a select few, who had the leisure and
material comfort to pursue wisdom, could achieve this understanding.
Philosophers would rule with justice, discipline, courage, and truthfulness,
prioritizing the good of the community over personal gain. Plato contended
that good men would avoid ruling for wealth or honors and would only govern
to prevent worse individuals from taking power. In a well-ordered city, rulers
would serve the interests of their subjects, not their own.
Challenges to the Philosopher Ruler Concept
Adeimantus, a character in Plato's dialogues, questioned the suitability of
philosophers as rulers, noting that philosophers are often seen as useless or
even harmful to society. Socrates acknowledged this criticism but blamed
society for valuing wealth and success over wisdom. In a corrupted society,
politicians are admired for their ability to flatter and manipulate, not for their
wisdom. Plato proposed that just as a sick person needs a doctor, a diseased
polity requires wise and noble rulers to restore order.
Plato's Vision of Political Philosophy
Plato's political philosophy combined a rigorous critique of existing political
practices with an affirmation of the ideal political order. He believed that
politics and philosophy should protect and enhance each other, with
philosopher rulers creating laws aligned with the Idea of Good. For Plato, the
Ideal State, ruled by philosopher rulers, was a divine institution worthy of
emulation. Political philosophy was a practical endeavor aimed at establishing a
good society based on the philosopher's vision of the Good, which is the
highest form of knowledge.
The Ideal State and Political Order
Plato's Ideal State was based on timeless principles, suggesting that an ideal
pattern could be used to reform a corrupt polity. He believed that political
phenomena were comprehensible and malleable to human effort. Plato saw
political philosophy as an architectonic art, shaping political "matter" to receive
the right form. Political knowledge was seen as a science of order, focused on
defining proper relationships, identifying sources of evil, and prescribing the
overarching pattern for society. Plato emphasized the moral urgency of political
vision, aiming to project a more perfect order into the future.
Philosophic Absolutism
Plato's idea of "philosophic absolutism" is rooted in the belief that governance
should be led by reason, unrestrained by rigid laws. Plato, through Socrates,
suggested that a philosophic ruler, like a skilled doctor, could adapt rules and
strategies as needed to address the challenges of governance. Philosophic rule
was guided by four core principles: maintaining the state’s size, ensuring a
balanced distribution of wealth to avoid extremes of poverty and riches,
preserving the educational system geared towards creating the Ideal State, and
framing laws aligned with philosophic ideals. Plato was wary of change but also
desired intellectual freedom, revealing a contradiction in his views.
Plato justified absolute power for the philosopher ruler to achieve two primary
aims: avoiding tyranny and ensuring communal welfare. Strict control over
aspects like education, family, and property was designed to prevent rulers
from becoming corrupt. Plato believed that a ruler devoted to philosophy
would act selflessly, promoting harmony and moral goodness within the
community. He argued that absolute power in the hands of a philosopher
would not corrupt but instead benefit both ruler and subjects because it would
be guided by timeless truths rather than personal interests.
Criticism of the Philosopher Ruler
Plato's concept of philosopher rulers was criticized for its exclusion of ordinary
citizens from political participation. He defined citizenship not as active
participation but as enjoying the benefits provided by enlightened rule. Critics
argued that by ignoring public opinion and dissent, Plato's model risked
becoming authoritarian and stifling growth. Reasonable dissent is essential for
progress, both for individuals and the state. Aristotle criticized Plato's vision,
suggesting that true political communities thrive on diversity and that unity
should not come at the expense of political freedom and representation.
Plato's belief that philosopher rulers were uniquely qualified to wield absolute
power was seen as overly idealistic. Critics like Karl Popper argued that no
individual, regardless of their wisdom, should hold unchecked power, as it
inevitably leads to corruption. Absolute power, even under a philosopher, could
be dangerous, necessitating checks and balances to prevent its misuse.
Criticism of the Philosopher Ruler:
 Exclusion from Politics: Plato's concept denied political participation to
the average person, as he believed only philosophers could comprehend
absolute truth and the Idea of Good. This exclusion was seen as
authoritarian and dismissive of diverse perspectives.
 Errors in Plato's Argument: Critics argued that even philosophers could
not fully grasp absolute truth. Dissent and criticism are essential for
growth, and the absence of these could lead to an unjust and unstable
state.
 Nature of Truth: Philosophical critics like Popper and Kuhn suggested
that truth is relative and evolves over time, challenging Plato's notion of
a fixed absolute truth.
  Dangers of Absolute Power: Plato's belief that philosophers could safely
wield absolute power was criticized as unrealistic. Concentration of
power, regardless of the ruler's virtue, could lead to corruption. Effective
governance requires checks and balances to prevent misuse of power.
 Shift in Plato's Thought: In his later work "Laws," Plato acknowledged
the need for legal regulations to maintain unity and prevent disorder.
The Nocturnal Council, composed of the wisest citizens, would regulate
all aspects of life, demonstrating a shift from idealistic to more pragmatic
approaches to governance.

Plato’s Shift in the "Laws"

In his later work, "Laws," Plato adjusted his views on governance. While still
advocating for a unified political community, he emphasized rule by law rather
than absolute power. The "Nocturnal Council," composed of the wisest citizens,
would oversee laws covering all aspects of life. While this maintained a highly
regulated state, Plato acknowledged the value of collective wisdom and legal
sovereignty. The underlying belief that governance should reflect a vision of the
Good remained central to Plato's thought, but he recognized the need for laws
to secure this ideal.
Theory of Ideal state
In recent years, scholars have questioned Plato's intent in proposing the Ideal
State in the Republic. Leo Strauss (1964) argued that the Republic should be
viewed as a profound critique of political idealism rather than a literal proposal
for a political system. According to Strauss, the dialogue serves as a satire that
illustrates the impracticality and limitations of political idealism, revealing the
challenges in implementing such an ideal state. Strauss suggested that the
philosopher, who is not naturally inclined to rule, takes on governance
reluctantly, driven by a sense of duty to benefit the community. This
interpretation positions the Republic as a work that tempers the excessive
desire for justice by highlighting what is feasible in a political context.
Different Interpretations of the Republic
John Herman Randall (1970) interpreted the Republic as a comic irony meant to
critique the Spartan model, arguing it was absurd and impractical. Allan Bloom
(1968) echoed Strauss's views, stating that the Republic critiques political
idealism by emphasizing the limitations of what can be demanded and
expected of a city. Both Strauss and Bloom argued that Plato did not
adequately connect the two dimensions of justice—psychic harmony and
happiness (eudaemonia)—particularly concerning the philosopher-ruler. They
contended there was no compelling evidence that ruling would bring happiness
to the philosopher-ruler, challenging the traditional interpretation.
Traditional Viewpoint on the Philosopher-Ruler’s Motivation
The traditional perspective, supported by scholars like Ernest Barker (1964),
Ernst Cassirer (1946), Francis Cornford (1945), Richard Nettleship (1967),
George Sabine (1973), and T.A. Sinclair (1951), argued that philosopher-rulers
governed out of a sense of duty to promote the common good, viewing the
good of others as an extension of their self-interest. This interpretation
suggests that the philosopher-ruler’s motivation was altruistic, driven by a
moral obligation to serve the community.
Fundamental Assumptions of Plato’s Political Philosophy
George Sabine further explained Plato’s political philosophy by outlining two
fundamental assumptions:
1. Government as an Art Based on Exact Knowledge: Plato believed that
governance should be treated as an art, requiring precise knowledge.
 This perspective suggests that governance should be performed by
experts who possess the necessary training and knowledge to rule
effectively.
2. Society as a Mechanism for Mutual Satisfaction of Needs: Plato viewed
society as an entity where individuals' diverse capacities complement
one another, fulfilling mutual needs. This assumption underscores the
importance of education and experience in shaping competent rulers.
The Role of Philosophers in Governance
According to Plato, if governance were entrusted to well-trained experts, it
would transcend mediocrity and short-term expediency. This approach to
political leadership would produce a dynasty of skilled rulers, rather than
occasional leaders chosen by popular vote, thereby eliminating factionalism
and petty politics. Plato saw political philosophy as a means to prevent
incompetence and corruption in public life, emphasizing that the philosopher's
vision of the Forms and the Good was a moralizing experience that justified
their role as architects of the Ideal State.
Philosophers' Duty to Society
Plato believed that every individual had a social dimension and that
philosophers, besides ensuring their own well-being, had a duty to be useful to
society. Philosophers should rule to prevent the community from being
subjected to inferior rulers. Governance, in Plato's view, was about molding
and transforming the state and its citizens according to absolute standards,
with philosophers providing active, critical intelligence to the state (Klosko
1986).
Justice
An ideal state for Plato possessed the four cardinal virtues of wisdom, courage,
temperance or self-control and justice. It would have wisdom because its rulers
were persons of knowledge, courage because its warriors were brave, self-
control because of the harmony that pervaded the societal matrix due to a
common agreement as to who ought to rule, and finally, justice of doing one’s
job for which one was naturally fitted without interfering with other people.
For Plato, the state was the Ideal, of which justice was the reality. Justice was
the principle on which the state had to be founded and a contribution made
towards the excellence of the city. The central question of the Republic was the
meaning of justice or right conduct or morality. It did not refer to legality (Berki
1977; Cross and Woozley 1951). Plato critically examined contemporary views
on justice and then defined the concept. Subsequently, he elaborated the
application of the concept and its realization within an individual and the state.
Justice in the individual was defined analogously to justice in the state.

Different Definitions of Justice

Cephalus' Definition of Justice
Cephalus, an elderly and prosperous man, begins the discussion by defining
justice as telling the truth and paying one’s debts. He argues that wealth, while
not the source of happiness, provides comfort and the means to lead a morally
upright life. To Cephalus, justice is about honesty in word and deed, fulfilling
one’s obligations to others, and doing what is morally right. Socrates quickly
dismisses this view by pointing out that there are situations where telling the
truth or returning what one owes could be harmful, such as returning a
weapon to a madman or telling a painful truth. Socrates’ critique suggests that
justice cannot merely be about strict honesty or repayment if such actions
could cause harm. This sets the stage for a deeper exploration of justice,
beyond the simplicity of Cephalus' definition.
Polemarchus' Definition of Justice
Polemarchus, Cephalus’ son, revises his father's definition by stating that
justice means “giving each man his due” or “doing good to friends and harm to
enemies.” This view reflects traditional Greek values, which emphasized loyalty
to friends and hostility to enemies. However, Socrates challenges this definition
through three arguments. First, he points out that helping friends could
sometimes involve unjust acts, such as lying or stealing. Second, he argues that
people can be mistaken about who their true friends and enemies are, leading
to potential injustice. Third, Socrates claims that justice, as a form of human
excellence, should not involve harming anyone, as harming others would only
make them more unjust. He concludes that a just person would not harm
anyone, including themselves. Polemarchus eventually acknowledges, but
Socrates’ arguments push the discussion toward a more complex
understanding of justice that transcends simple notions of retribution or
loyalty.
Thrasymachus' Definition of Justice
Thrasymachus, a Sophist, presents a more cynical definition of justice, arguing
that it is the interest of the stronger party or the ruler. He asserts that each
type of government—democracy, tyranny, or otherwise—creates laws that
serve its own interests, and thus, justice is merely a tool used by those in
power to maintain control. Socrates counters by suggesting that rulers can
make mistakes and enact laws that are not in their own best interests,
challenging the idea that justice is always aligned with the ruler’s advantage.
Thrasymachus initially resists but eventually concedes that rulers, if they make
mistakes, are not truly rulers in the proper sense. Socrates further argues that
true rulers, like doctors or shepherds, should serve the interests of their
charges (the people), not their own. This debate highlights the tension
between might and right, with Thrasymachus emphasizing realpolitik while
Socrates seeks a more principled understanding of justice.
Glaucon and Adeimantus' Challenge
Glaucon and Adeimantus, both followers of Socrates, challenge him to prove
that justice is inherently good and not just a social necessity. Glaucon argues
that justice is practiced out of necessity and fear of punishment rather than any
intrinsic value. He suggests that, given the opportunity, people would act
unjustly if it benefited them, as all societal rules, including those related to
justice, are imposed by social contracts and sanctions. Adeimantus extends this
argument by criticizing how religious and educational teachings often portray
injustice as beneficial, encouraging people to act unjustly if it results in good
reputation or rewards. They challenge Socrates to demonstrate that justice is
valuable not only for its consequences but also as an intrinsic quality of the
soul.
Socrates' Constructive Response
Faced with these challenges, Socrates proposes a more constructive approach
to defining justice. He suggests examining justice on a larger scale, specifically
within the state, to better understand its application at the individual level. By
using the analogy of “large letters” versus “small letters,” Socrates argues that
understanding justice in the context of a state can provide clarity on its nature
within an individual. This method sets up the framework for Socrates to argue
that justice is not merely about external actions or social contracts but is a
fundamental virtue that benefits both the individual and the community. This
approach allows Socrates to develop a comprehensive view of justice as an
essential quality that contributes to the harmony and well-being of both the
soul and the state.

Justice in the State and Individual

Origin of States and Specialization
Socrates explores the origins of states and cities, attributing their emergence to
two primary factors: mutual need and differences in individual aptitudes.
Mutual need arises because individuals cannot be self-sufficient and rely on
each other for various services and resources. This necessity for
interdependence leads to the division of labor and specialization, where
individuals focus on specific tasks according to their unique skills and
capacities. Specialization, in this context, is not about assigning superiority but
about recognizing and utilizing each individual's unique abilities to achieve
excellence and perfection in their respective roles. This approach fosters social
benefit, cooperation, and harmony within the community, as diverse aptitudes
are organized to contribute to the overall well-being of society.
Functional Units and Social Harmony
Plato’s conceptualization of society is based on the idea that each individual
serves as a functional unit, assigned a specific role with corresponding
obligations and privileges. This system requires individuals to be trained and
skilled in their assigned functions, ensuring that everyone contributes
effectively to society. By engaging everyone in fulfilling socially necessary roles,
the likelihood of free-riding or shirking responsibilities is minimized.
Additionally, Plato envisioned society as a harmonious, orderly whole where
the roles of ruling, defense, and production (including trades and crafts) are
distinctly defined. This structure emphasizes the importance of clear role
definitions to avoid confusion and ensure that each function contributes to the
functioning of the entire system.
Plato’s Vision of Political Society
Plato’s innovative vision of political society involved a system of distinct,
differentiated roles, each essential to maintaining the overall structure of the
community. Each role was defined by its contribution to the societal whole,
with specific rights, duties, and expectations guiding individual behavior and
defining their place within the system. This approach required a clear
demarcation among the three primary classes—rulers, defenders, and
producers—to prevent role confusion and ensure that each functioned
effectively within the integrated whole. Plato’s model set a precedent for
viewing political society as a functioning system, with each part working
interdependently to sustain the community. This systemic perspective became
a defining feature of political philosophy, emphasizing the need for structured
roles and harmonious integration to achieve a well-functioning society.
Theory of Three Classes and Three Souls
Plato's argument for differing individual capacities is rooted in his theory of
three classes and three souls, drawing on Pythagorean ideas. He posits that
each human soul has three qualities: rational, spirited, and appetitive, with
justice as the overarching virtue that harmonizes and balances these qualities.
Justice is seen as essential for psychological harmony, ensuring that each
quality performs its proper function without conflict.
Classes and Their Corresponding Souls
In Plato's framework, individuals with a predominant rational quality form the
ruling class, with the virtue of wisdom. These individuals are characterized by
their ability to understand the Idea of Good. Those with a predominant spirited
quality become the auxiliaries or warriors, possessing the virtue of courage,
which enables them to stand firm in their convictions, especially in adversity.
The rulers and warriors together form the guardian class. Socrates likens
spirited individuals to watchdogs—brave, public-spirited, and willing to
sacrifice personal desires for the common good. These individuals are driven by
honor and victory, crucial for societal survival but must be kept under reasoned
control.
The Appetitive Soul and Temperance
Individuals whose souls are predominantly appetitive are focused on material
gain and money, forming the artisan or producing class. Their virtue is
temperance, though Plato sees temperance as necessary for all individuals, not
just artisans. Plato uses analogies from Pythagoras to illustrate that a balanced
individual, akin to a well-tuned string or healthy body, achieves justice by
maintaining harmony among the soul’s elements. Justice ensures that each
element—rational, spirited, and appetitive—functions properly, leading to
happiness.
Reason’s Role in Controlling Passions
Plato emphasizes that reason must ultimately govern emotions and passions to
achieve justice. This explains why the rational soul embodied in the
philosopher-ruler should govern. Unlike Socrates, Plato accounts for the
irrational aspects of the soul, asserting that reason must control these
elements to ensure a harmonious and just life. Justice in the individual is about
assigning roles according to natural aptitudes and skills, achieving
departmental excellence, and maintaining psychological harmony.
Justice as Social Harmony
Justice in the state mirrors individual justice. Each of the three classes—rulers,
warriors, and producers—must perform their designated roles without
interfering with others. This system ensures that each individual’s skills and
aptitudes are utilized effectively, creating a balanced and harmonious society.
Plato’s view of justice is distributive, assigning individuals roles based on their
qualities and ensuring proper fulfillment of societal functions. He equates
justice with ensuring that each person performs their designated task, thus
maintaining societal order and harmony.
The Ideal State and Individual Justice
Plato’s conception of justice involves a well-ordered state where each class
performs its designated function, contributing to the overall harmony and
effectiveness of the society. Injustice arises from interference or role confusion
among the classes. A just society, therefore, is one where the rulers govern, the
warriors defend, and the artisans produce, each contributing to the mutual
exchange of services and satisfaction of needs. Plato's ideal state is
characterized by a system where individual roles and societal functions align
with the principle of justice, ensuring both personal and collective well-being.
Myth of Metals and Earth-born
Plato used the "Myth of Metals and of the Earth-born" to justify and rationalize
social class distinctions within his Ideal State. This myth posited that individuals
were born from the earth and mixed with different metals: gold for the rational
(philosophical rulers), silver for the spirited (warriors), and bronze for the
appetitive (producers). The myth aimed to explain and justify the hierarchical
social structure by making it understandable to the populace and convincing
them of their rightful place and obligations in society. It also emphasized a
shared origin among all individuals, despite their different roles.
Criticisms of the Myth
Critics, including Nietzsche, challenged the validity and ethical implications of
Plato's myth. Nietzsche argued that Plato's use of the myth, while intended to
protect philosophy and provide political influence, compromised intellectual
integrity and promoted social rigidity. Bertrand Russell and Karl Popper also
criticized the myth for reinforcing rigid class divisions and undermining
principles of equality before the law. They contended that Plato's ideal society,
which emphasized natural privileges and social hierarchy, contradicted
democratic ideals of equalitarianism and humanitarianism.
Social Mobility and Functional Roles
Plato’s system aimed to counteract hereditary privilege by assigning roles
based on individuals' natural aptitudes rather than parental lineage. To prevent
manipulation, children were entrusted to the state, which would educate and
place them according to their inherent qualities. This system was seen as
revolutionary for its time, allowing social mobility and challenging the class-
conscious nature of ancient societies like Athens. However, critics noted that
despite the promise of social mobility, the system was vulnerable to
manipulation by the guardians responsible for assigning roles.
Guardians and Individual Freedom
Plato’s arrangement placed significant power in the hands of the guardians,
who were responsible for categorizing and educating individuals. Critics
pointed out that the lack of safeguards against manipulation by these
guardians could undermine the system’s fairness. The structure, while intended
to ensure that each person found their rightful place based on their talents,
risked excessive regulation of individual lives. Plato's critics argued that his
model was elitist and meritocratic, potentially stifling individual freedom and
privacy in pursuit of social order.
Summary of Criticisms
Overall, Plato's myth and the resulting social structure were criticized for
prioritizing the needs of the state over individual rights and freedoms. Critics
argued that Plato’s ideal society, while aiming for a fair allocation of roles based
on individual talents, ultimately imposed a rigid, controlled system that could
lead to abuse and suppress individual development. The critics' perspective
highlighted the tension between the needs of the
society and the rights of the individual within Plato’s philosophical framework.
Education
The Centrality of Education in Plato's Ideal State:
 Plato envisioned a state where education was the primary function and
foundation. He believed that if the state focused on providing and
supervising a proper education system, it would naturally succeed in
achieving its goals.
 Education was not just a tool for knowledge gaining but an instrument
for moral and ethical reform. Plato saw it as a means to shape the soul
and instil virtues that would lead to a harmonious and just society.
 In his view, the state had a pivotal role in directing education to mold
citizens who could fulfill their societal functions effectively and attain
personal and communal fulfillment.
Comprehensive Approach to Education:
 Plato's emphasis on education is evident in his extensive discussions in
"The Republic," particularly in Books II, III, and X. These sections highlight
the importance he placed on the systematic and thorough education of
citizens, particularly the guardians or rulers.
 Unlike the idea of communal ownership of wives and property, which
Plato discusses briefly, education is treated as the core mechanism for
preventing social and moral ills. It addresses problems at their root by
shaping the character and intellect of individuals from an early age.
 Education was more important to Plato than other forms of social
engineering because it targeted the soul directly, aiming to prevent
corruption before it could take hold.
Philosophical Basis and Objectives:
 Plato’s emphasis on education was rooted in the Socratic belief that
“virtue is knowledge.” He argued that knowing what is good naturally
leads to doing good; hence, education aimed to cultivate wisdom and
virtue.
 Plato viewed the state as an educational institution, describing it as the
"one great thing." He believed that the salvation of the state lay in the
development of well-educated citizens who could govern wisely and
 justly. The educational system was designed to cultivate both intellectual
and moral virtues, emphasizing the development of reason and the
control of passions.
Integration of Athenian and Spartan Educational Values:
 Plato sought to create a balanced education system that integrated the
strengths of both Athens and Sparta. From Athens, he borrowed the
focus on creativity, excellence, and individual achievement, promoting
intellectual and artistic pursuits.
 From Sparta, he incorporated elements of civic training and martial
discipline, aiming to instill a sense of duty, loyalty, and service to the
state.
 His goal was to develop well-rounded individuals who were both
intellectually capable and socially responsible, blending the Athenian
ideals of personal development with Spartan ideals of civic responsibility.
Education as a Lifelong Process:
 Plato believed that the human soul was capable of learning throughout
its existence, making education a lifelong endeavor. He emphasized
continuous intellectual and moral development, from childhood to old
age.
 Knowledge was pursued for its own sake, aimed at achieving personal
excellence and spiritual perfection. The ultimate goal of education was to
turn the "inward eye" towards higher truths and ideals, cultivating a love
for wisdom and virtue.
 Plato saw the mind as active and self-directing, capable of focusing on
objects of study and becoming receptive to the beauty and truth present
in the world.
The Role of Nature and Nurture in Education:
 Plato recognized the interplay between nature (innate qualities and
intelligence) and nurture (education and environment) in shaping human
character.
 He accepted that individuals had inherent differences in intelligence and
capacities, which were largely determined at birth and relatively
 permanent. However, within these limits, he believed that proper
education could significantly mold and develop individuals.
 Plato argued that a combination of natural talent and rigorous training
was necessary to bring out the best in a person. He believed that the
right education could mitigate disadvantages of birth and enable
individuals to reach their full potential.
Importance of Early Education and Moral Development:
 Early education was crucial in Plato's system for developing self-control
and the ability to restrain desires. He saw this as essential for harnessing
the non-rational aspects of the soul, which needed to be disciplined for
the rational soul to fully develop.
 Elementary education focused on cultivating virtues and controlling
appetites, while higher education aimed to develop rational faculties and
philosophical understanding.
 Plato emphasized that young minds were highly receptive and could be
shaped effectively if guided by capable teachers who could stimulate and
nurture thought.
Philosophical Goals of Education:
 Education, for Plato, was not merely about imparting knowledge but
about ordering the soul to achieve virtue. He believed that the soul’s
virtue depended on its orderly and harmonious arrangement, which
education could foster.
 While Socrates viewed education as an awakening of thought due to the
soul's rational nature, Plato extended this view by considering
education's role in shaping both rational and non-rational elements of
the soul.
 By integrating the Pythagorean concept of the immortality and
transmigration of souls, Plato viewed education as a process of
recollection, helping individuals remember knowledge from previous
existences and reach higher truths.
Educator’s Role in Plato’s Educational Scheme:
  An able teacher was crucial in Plato's educational system, tasked with
nurturing and directing the student’s intellect and character towards the
good.
 The teacher's role was to stimulate thought, encourage inquiry, and
provide the right environment for the student to flourish both
intellectually and morally.
 Plato believed that under proper guidance, the human mind could be
shaped to be receptive to true and beautiful things, leading to the
development of a virtuous character.
Critique and Enduring Influence of Plato’s Educational Philosophy:
 Plato’s focus on education as the foundation for an ideal state has been
widely recognized and debated by scholars. Rousseau, for instance,
praised "The Republic" as one of the finest treatises on education ever
written.
 His ideas have significantly influenced subsequent educational theories,
emphasizing the importance of both intellectual and moral education in
personal and social development.
 Scholars have long debated the balance between nature and nurture in
education, with recent views aligning with Plato’s belief in their
combined influence on human development.

Elementary Education in Plato's Philosophy

1. Structure of Education:
Plato proposed a state-controlled, compulsory, and comprehensive
education system in two phases. The first phase is elementary education
until age 18, followed by two years of compulsory military training. The
second phase involves higher education for selected individuals of both
sexes from ages 20 to 35, who are intended to become members of the
ruling class.
2. Aims of Elementary Education:
Plato's elementary education aimed at ensuring universal literacy and
providing proper training for the ruling class. It was designed to make the
soul responsive to its environment and prepare it for the pursuit of truth
through discipline and hard work. This education fostered both
 theoretical and practical experiences, moral and aesthetic judgment, and
physical health.
3. Gender Equality in Education:
Plato advocated for the same type of education for both boys and girls,
disregarding physical distinctions. He saw no difference in the talents and
skills of the sexes, subtly criticizing the secondary status of women in
ancient Greece.
4. Content of Elementary Education:
The curriculum included music and gymnastics. Music aimed to develop
reasoning and moral character, while gymnastics focused on physical
health and emotional poise. This education sought to blend gentle and
fierce qualities, creating a harmonious individual.
5. Censorship and Moral Education:
Plato recommended censorship in literature and music to promote
virtues essential for the guardian class. Only certain harmonies were
permitted to encourage courage and temperance. He opposed works
that depicted gods poorly, believing such portrayals could corrupt young
minds. The objective was to shield youth from vice and negativity,
cultivating a fearless and morally upright character.
6. Controlled Exposure to War:
Plato suggested that children be exposed to actual war scenes by sitting
on horseback to develop a fearless attitude toward death, necessary for
their future roles as warriors and leaders.
7. Regulation of Arts and Lifestyle:
Plato permitted only simple musical instruments and controlled the
choice of poetry, literature, and arts, like painting and furniture making,
to ensure they aligned with the desired moral and aesthetic values. Diet
was also regulated to promote health and prevent illness, reflecting his
belief in a disciplined and austere life.
8. Environment and Upbringing:
Plato emphasized creating a beautiful and harmonious environment to
positively influence the soul. He believed that constant exposure to
virtue and beauty would foster good character in the guardians.
 9. Physical and Military Training:
Elementary education was complemented by military training to build
professional warriors. Luxury and indulgence were prohibited to
strengthen the spirit, fostering a balanced temperament.
10.Outcome of Elementary Education:
The purpose of elementary education was to cultivate souls receptive to
habit and conditioning, preparing them to become auxiliaries who would
support the ruling class with a strong foundation in virtue and discipline.

Higher Education in Plato's Philosophy

1. Selection and Advanced Study (Ages 20-30):
At the age of 20, a selection process determined the best candidates to
continue into higher education. These selected individuals would
undertake an advanced 10-year course in mathematics, covering
subjects like arithmetic, geometry (both plane and solid), astronomy, and
harmonics. These disciplines were chosen for their dual purpose:
o Philosophical Value: Arithmetic was essential for developing pure
thought and understanding truth, which Plato believed resided in
thought rather than sensory experiences. Geometry and
astronomy helped elevate the mind beyond sense perceptions,
cultivating reason and an understanding of the "Idea of Good."
Harmonics fostered a similar philosophical mindset.
o Practical Value: Arithmetic and geometry were useful for military
strategy, such as troop arrangement and tactical planning.
2. Purpose of Higher Education:
Plato's higher education aimed to foster free intellectual inquiry and
cultivate a rational, philosophical mind. This education prepared the
most capable individuals to become philosopher-kings, capable of
grasping the Idea of Good and ruling justly.
3. Training of Soldiers:
Those who did not qualify for higher education would become soldiers,
forming a secondary tier of the ruling class. This group would have
received sufficient training to serve effectively but not the deeper
philosophical education reserved for future rulers.
4. Further Specialization (Ages 30-35):
At the age of 30, another selection was made to identify those who
would study dialectics, metaphysics, logic, and philosophy for the next
five years. This period focused on understanding the Idea of Good and
the first principles of Being. Students would gain partial experience in
ruling by accepting junior positions in military and political life.
5. Preparation for Leadership (Ages 35-50):
From ages 35 to 50, the selected philosopher-rulers would continue their
education while participating in governance. This phase involved
practical training in political and military roles, further developing their
capacity to rule.
6. Philosopher-Rulers (Post-Age 50):
By the age of 50, those who completed this extensive training would
become philosopher-rulers. They would devote themselves primarily to
contemplation and philosophy, while also fulfilling political duties. Their
understanding of the Idea of Good would enable them to govern in a
manner that ensured the welfare of the state and its citizens.
7. Integration of Training and Knowledge:
Plato emphasized that education should combine training with
investigation, ensuring that both professional skills and scientific
knowledge were developed. This approach was innovative in Plato's
time, as it linked education to a pursuit of truth and a scientific standard
of knowledge.
8. Civic Virtues and State Stability:
The ultimate goal of education for Plato (and Aristotle) was to inculcate
civic virtues and create citizens who would act justly, responsibly, and
selflessly in public affairs. They believed that a state-controlled
educational system could teach citizens the traditions and laws of the
state, fostering stability and reducing corruption.
9. Mutual Support of Education and Political Order:
Plato argued that education and political order were mutually
reinforcing. Education would sustain political order by producing wise
and virtuous leaders, while political stability would provide the necessary
environment for intellectual and philosophical pursuits. Without order,
the tranquillity required for study and contemplation would be
 impossible. Conversely, without philosophical insight, the wisdom
needed to maintain political stability would be lacking.

Theory of communism
Plato's concept of the "community of wives and property" is an integral part of
his philosophical vision outlined in The Republic, where he describes an ideal
society structured to eliminate social evils and ensure justice and harmony. This
idea is rooted in his belief that to achieve a just society, personal interests must
be subordinated to the common good. Here's a detailed exploration of his
vision:
1. Purpose and Rationale
Plato's notion of the "community of wives and property" was designed to
address several societal issues:
 Elimination of Nepotism and Corruption: Plato believed that private
property and family ties were the root causes of nepotism, favoritism,
and factionalism. By abolishing these, he aimed to ensure that rulers
would not act out of self-interest or favoritism towards their relatives but
rather in the best interest of society as a whole.
 Promotion of a Meritocratic Society: In Plato's ideal society, individuals
would be selected for roles based on their abilities and virtues rather
than their wealth, family background, or other arbitrary factors. This
meritocratic principle ensured that only the most capable and deserving
would govern, creating a society where governance was a specialized
function entrusted to those most qualified.
2. Living Arrangements for the Guardian Class
The guardian class, consisting of the ruling philosopher-kings and the warrior
class, would live communally under strict regulations:
 Common Living: Guardians were to live together in a communal setting,
much like soldiers in a barrack. They would not own any personal
property, including houses, gold, or silver. Instead, they would share
everything, including meals and lodgings, which would foster a sense of
unity and common purpose.
  No Private Property: Guardians would not possess private property
beyond what was necessary for their basic needs. They would receive a
fixed quota from the producing class, ensuring they had enough for
subsistence but not enough to foster greed or accumulation of wealth.
3. The Role of Family and Marriage
Plato's proposals for the guardian class extended to family structures and
marriage:
 Abolition of the Private Family: Plato argued that private families should
be abolished for the guardian class. He believed that families promote
exclusivity, favoritism, and attachment, which could interfere with an
individual's duty to the state.
 Community of Wives and Children: Plato proposed a communal system
where wives and children were shared among the guardian class. The
idea was to create a community where familial loyalties would not
disrupt the state's functioning. By removing the private family, all citizens
would see each other as part of a larger familial network, reducing
conflict and promoting social cohesion.
 Temporary Unions for Reproduction: Rather than permanent
monogamous marriages, Plato suggested temporary unions specifically
arranged for the purpose of reproduction. These unions would be
regulated by the philosopher rulers, who would ensure that the best
individuals were paired together to produce strong and capable
offspring.
4. Equality and Emancipation of Women
Plato's views on women were notably progressive for his time:
 Equal Natural Endowments: Plato believed that men and women had
similar natural endowments and faculties, making them equally capable
of participating in society's political and military life. He proposed that
women should receive the same education and training as men,
including physical training and philosophical education.
 Women as Rulers and Legislators: Unlike the traditional Greek view that
confined women to domestic roles, Plato proposed that women could be
rulers and legislators in his ideal state. This idea was influenced by his
 belief in natural equality and the need for a merit-based society where
roles were assigned according to ability, not gender.
5. Controlled Reproduction and Eugenics
Plato introduced a system of controlled reproduction based on eugenic
principles to maintain the quality of the guardian class:
 State-Regulated Unions: Sexual unions would be strictly regulated by the
state to ensure that only the best and fittest individuals reproduced. The
philosopher rulers would oversee these unions, using methods like
rigged lotteries to determine pairings while keeping the process
seemingly fair to avoid resentment.
 Ideal Age for Reproduction: Plato specified the ideal age for marriage
and reproduction to ensure healthy offspring. He suggested men should
reproduce between the ages of 25 and 55 and women between 20 and
40. Relationships outside these age limits or those resulting in children
outside state-sanctioned unions were discouraged.
 Abortion and Infanticide: Plato controversially suggested that children
born outside of these regulated unions or those deemed "inferior"
should be aborted or quietly disposed of. This extreme measure was
intended to maintain the quality of the population, although it has been
heavily criticized for its lack of compassion.
6. Raising of Children
Plato proposed a communal upbringing for children to prevent the
development of familial loyalties:
 State-Maintained Nurseries: Once born, children would be taken to
state-run nurseries and raised communally, without knowing their
biological parents. This arrangement would foster a sense of equality and
prevent any child from receiving special treatment.
 Universal Respect and Affection: The goal was to create a society where
all children would show respect to all elders as if they were their parents
and where all elders would love all children as if they were their own.
This system aimed to break down the barriers created by private families
and promote a sense of collective responsibility and unity.
7. Critique and Controversy
Plato's proposals have been subject to significant criticism:
 Ethical Concerns: Modern critics argue that Plato's ideas on communal
living, controlled reproduction, and the abolition of private families are
excessively authoritarian and violate individual rights and freedoms. His
endorsement of eugenics and infanticide, in particular, is viewed as
morally reprehensible.
 Practicality and Human Nature: Critics also question the practicality of
Plato's ideas, arguing that they ignore fundamental aspects of human
nature, such as the desire for personal relationships, familial bonds, and
private property. Plato's vision of communal living and shared children is
seen as unrealistic and unlikely to be accepted by any society.
 Lack of Compassion: Plato's suggestions, such as disposing of "inferior"
offspring and denying medical care to chronic invalids, are seen as
lacking compassion and empathy, qualities considered essential for any
humane society.
8. Plato's Views on Slavery
Despite his radical proposals for other aspects of society, Plato did not
advocate for the abolition of slavery. In The Republic, he barely mentioned the
institution, considering it a given in Athenian society. This omission is seen as a
significant contradiction in his vision of a just society, where all individuals
would ideally be treated equally and fairly.
Conclusion
Plato's idea of a "community of wives and property" represents an attempt to
create an ideal society based on merit, equality, and the common good. While
his proposals were groundbreaking in their challenge to traditional social
norms, they are also highly controversial, reflecting both the innovative and the
authoritarian aspects of his political philosophy. Plato’s vision has sparked
debates on governance, equality, and justice that continue to resonate in
modern philosophical and political discourse.
CRITISM – FROM THE BOOK