Plato

i
«NATURgOP GREEK ROUTICACTHOUGHR*

Plato (427-347 B.C.) was ancient Greek philosopher who is regarded to be the first
• systematic political thinker in the Western tradition. Socrates (469-399 B.C.), his
mentor, did not produce any writing; his political thought is known to us chiefly
through Plato’s works. So for all practical purposes, Plato is the pioneer of Western
political thought.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ‘POLIS3
In fact the origins of Western literature, art and culture, science and philosophy-
including political thought may be traced back to ancient Greek philosophy. Euclid, the
founder of geometry, was born in Greece, in the third century B.C. The methodology
of geometry proved immensely useful in the development of scientific thinking. Then
many Greek philosophers and teachers of philosophy dwelled on certain fundamental
questions which are considered to be relevant even today. For example, they inquired
into the nature of truth and justice, knowledge and reason, types of virtue, foundations
of authority and rule of law, etc. The whole tradition of Western political thought
originated in thinking about the life of the ‘polls’ that refers to ancient Greek city-
state. The terms ‘politics’ and ‘political’ are derived from the word ‘polls’ itself.
Ancient Greece consisted of several city-states the tracts of land which were
separated from each other by natural barriers like mountains, dense forests, and the seas,
etc. These city.-states were so isolated that'transport and communication between them
were very difficult. So each of them was required to develop its own self-sufficient
economic life as well as independent political system. However, in spite ofgeographical
separation, these city-states were culturally very close to each other because they spoke a

|35]
 36 Western Political Thought
uniform language, and largely followed common religious traditions. All of them
believed in multiplicity of gods. The most prominent of these gods — Zeus and
Apollo were very close to the Greek heart.
In early Greek history till the eighth century B.C., kingship or monarchy was the
most widely prevalent form of government in the city-states. But from around 700
B.C. most of the city-states came to be controlled by oligarchies. In due course, these
oligarchies had to face internal conflicts. By 500 B.C. many city-states came to be
ruled by tyrants. Originally these rulers cared for their subjects, but later they became
corrupt and cruel. Then in most of these city-states, aristocracies were established
with the popular support. Later, in many city states aristocracies were replaced by
democracies. Greek political thought flourished against the backdrop of all these
experiences.
It is important to note that the so-called democracy found in some Greek city-
states was not a democracy in its modern' sense. Today universal citizenship is
regarded to be a necessary condition of democracy: it is a ‘rule by the people’ as
such, not by the selected few. But in a Greek city-state like Athens, there were about
400,000 inhabitants; of these about 250,000 were slaves or aliens who had no political
rights of any kind. Then of the 150,000 freemen or citizens, women had no political
rights. Of the remaining citizens (excluding children and ‘retired’ citizens), only a
small number was active in politics. Since it was a ‘direct democracy’ (i.e. where
citizens directly ran their government, and not through their representatives), only the
active citizens presented themselves at the ‘general assembly’ which discussed and '
determined the policies of the state. They also had a ‘supreme court’ which consisted
of over a thousand members, selected from the citizens by rotation. So in the Greek
model of democracy, political rights were restricted to the privileged few. However
within the qualified citizens, they made no discrimination between rich and poor
or high and low social strata; all citizens enjoyed equal political rights and equal
opportunities to participate in public decision-making. In this sense, the Greeks were
fairly familiar with the essence of democracy.
ETHICS AS THE FOUNDATIONS OF POLITICS
It is important to note that in Greek philosophical tradition, politics as a discipline
developed as.a sequel to ethics. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics had closed by
thenatur°ofl^justice,0fob>^,^T ^'Z’ P‘at° ^ treated the problem of'discovering

: central
common and politics was responsible for the

eth.cs which reaches its logical conclusion in the institution of the“ ‘SSl'e °f
 Plato 37

Ethics
Ethics refers to a branch of learning concerned with the principles of good conduct.
It inquires into moral beliefs and rules about right and wrong. This term is used
as a synonym of moral philosophy as well as a set of principles of good conduct
concerning a particular profession, such as 'medical ethics’ or 'business ethics'.

The Golden Mean

The golden mean refers to a famous ethical principle enunciated by Aristotle (384-322
B.C.), ancient Greek philosopher, in his Ethics. It holds the key to personal as well as
social morality and serves as a guide for political action. The doctrine of the golden mean
implies that virtue or excellence lies in finding a middle path between two extremes,
which would turn out to be vices in themselves. For example, courage is a virtue that
lies between cowardice and rashness; liberality, between stinginess and extravagance;
ambition, between sloth and greed; modesty, between humility and pride; and friendship,
between quarrelsomeness and flattery. Buddhism also commends 'middle path' as
the road to virtue.

The Mixed Constitution

The mixed constitution refers to a mixture of aristocracy and democracy, prescribed
by Aristotle as a remedy to cure the ills of political instability of his contemporary
Greek city-states. He observed that none of the prevailing forms of government {viz.
monarchy, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, polity and democracy) proved to be stable
because concentration of power in the hands of any ruler or ruling group gave rise to
discontent among those who were deprived of power, and also corrupted the rulers
because 'power and virtue cannot coexist'. He came to the conclusion that a judicious
mixture of aristocracy and democracy would prevent the possibility of corruption of
rulers as well as rebellion against the government. Under this arrangement, power
would be exercised by the chosen few who were rich, educated and cultured, but
their decisions would be subject to approval of the ordinary people, Aristotle argued
that though ordinary people were not capable to rule, they would prove to be the
best judge of the merits and demerits of a public policy.

GREEK THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE

The Greeks dwelled elaborately on the nature and types of knowledge. Their theory
of knowledge is regarded to be particularly illuminating even today. The Greeks
used a single word ‘episteme’ for ‘knowledge’ as well as ‘science’. It means that
they recognized ‘scientific knowledge’ as the real knowledge. Moreover, they were
convinced that true knowledge was inseparable from virtue. In other words, a person
having true knowledge would automatically follow the path of virtue. Knowledge made
a man wise and virtuous. Pursuit of true knowledge or wisdom led to the evolution
of philosophy. Philosophy literally means ‘the love of wisdom’. Hence philosophy
implies an effort for the acquisition of true knowledge. In modem times, we distinguish
between ‘science’ and ‘philosophy’ on the ground that science deals with the natural
 38 Western Political Thought
or material world whereas philosophy deals with abstract and conceptual entities. But
the Greeks did not recognize this distinction. For them, science and philosophy were
coterminous.
Socrates’ distinction between knowledge and opinion provides the key to the
Greek theory of knowledge. In his view, knowledge was based on sound principles,
and it could be proved like a geometrical theorem. On the other hand, opinion or belief
was merely based on impression; it was not bothered about finding the proof of what
we held. Knowledge was objective; opinion was subjective. Knowledge was uniform
and universal; it did not change with time and place, or from person to person. As the
proverb goes: “Wise men think alike.” On the contrary, different people held different
opinions about the same thing; their differences were symptomatic of their lack of
knowledge. Socrates argued that traditional morality was based on opinion which
changed with time and place, but true morality was based on knowledge which was
universal and eternal.
Then the Greeks also distinguished between ‘pure knowledge’ (theorea) and
‘applied knowledge’ (praxis). Pure knowledge was an end-in-itself; it represented the
‘knowledge for knowledge sake’. On the other hand, applied knowledge was a means
to an end; it embodied the knowledge for practical use. For example, the knowledge of
truth, good or beautiful was not meant to serve a worldly purpose; it belonged to the
category of pure knowledge, that is knowledge for knowledge sake. On the other hand
knowledge of agriculture, carpentry and other crafts was meant to produce useful things
. it belonged to the category of applied knowledge. The Greeks regarded pure knowledge

ge.
Distinction Between Knowledge and Opinion: Socrates'
View
Subject of Inquiry

1
f
Knowledge
Opinion
I 1
Based on sound principles
which can be proved (like a Based on impression;
geometrical theorem) not concerned with finding proof

I I
Subjective
Objective

I I
Different people have
Uniform and Universal
different opinions

applied knowledge embodied an ina.anmeni.l v„ne (, X ."ha, wf”,te»sTo

 Plato 39
end). The Greeks held that in order to attain good life (which was the goal of politics),
applied knowledge should be subordinated to virtue.

Relation Between Knowledge and Virtue: The Greek View

Knowledge
(Episteme)

1
I
Applied Knowledge
Pure Knowledge
{Theorea) (Praxis)

I
Knowledge for Knowledge Sake
1
Knowledge for Practical Use

I I
Lower Order Knowledge
Higher Order Knowledge
(Superior Knowledge) (Inferior Knowledge)

I
Inseparable from Virtue
I
Neutral to Virtue and Vice

I
Represents an Intrinsic Value
I
Represents an Instrumental Value

* In Greek view, knowledge and science were synonymous.

* Socrates held that a person having true knowledge shall not depart from the
path of virtue.
* Vicious behaviour is the symptom of lack of true knowledge.
* Applied knowledge must be deliberately subordinated to virtue.

DOMINANT THEMES OF POLITICAL INQUIRY

The Greeks were chiefly interested in philosophy. In this pursuit, they sought to
inquire into the laws governing the universe. They believed that the universe was the
product of the creative reason. All natural phenomena were therefore governed by
certain uniform and immutable laws which could be discovered by the human faculty
of reason. Initially the Greeks focused on the analysis of the external world. But by
the fifth century B.C. they became interested in the analysis of human nature — the
internal world of man. They noticed a world of difference between their own culture
and the culture of non-Greek people, whom they called ‘barbarians’. They began to
investigate the reasons behind this perceptible difference.
The Greeks who were intensely inspired by their religious beliefs and wonderful
narratives of their gods and goddesses, had become fearless about their destiny. They
firmly held that man himself was capable of moulding his society into an excellent
form. Indeed their intellectual curiosity was not bound by any limits. They realized
that man was endowed by nature with certain faculties; it was his duty to develop
and use them. In other words, man should apply his faculty of reason to improve
his life. This led to the need of political organization — the necessary instrument
of good life. Aristotle declared that ‘man is by nature a political animal. He argued
that a man who can live without a state is either a beast or a god. A man acquires and
 40 Western Political Thought
develops his human qualities only by living in a state which enables him to secure the
conditions of good life. Whereas other countries of the Orient - Egypt, Babylonia,
Assyria and Persia considered the submission to law and the state an act of submission
to an external power, the Greeks regarded it an act of following the dictates of one’s
own higher self.
Since man is treated an integral part of the state in Greek political thought, he
is expected to participate actively in its functioning. The environment of small, self-
sufficient city-states was quite suitable for such participation. All the citizens —
particularly the freemen in these states knew each other; so they could assemble from
time to time to take public decisions about their city. As an indispensable instrument
of good life, it was the state that regulated the entire life of man. There was no scope of
thinking that man has any natural rights (i.e. the rights derived by man from the nature
itself), or that the state was created for the protection of these rights. For Greeks, the
objectives of the individual coincided with those of the state; so they did not draw
a line of demarcation between the public and private affairs. Democracy in Greece
authorized men to constitute the state, and thereby provided them with political rights
but it did not recognize any rights of individual against the authority of the state’
I There was no scope for the concept of civil rights (i.e. the rights restricting the state
trom exercising its control over the individual).
The laws of ancient Greeks were rooted in their long-existent custom. So there
was no ^ope for the idea that law is the expression of anybody’s will, or it is the
product of dehberation of a legislative organ. The Greeks generally agreed that a true
pohs rehed on ‘rule by laws, not by men’. Even absolute monarch"' whemtthey
one that fl “ny " laW' Similarly’ no democratic regime like the .
uUr'Shtd thenS’ S°Ught t0 make any new law- Eventually the Greeks

not the
£? »fS.™ tr kwimd
and not its

be argued, defended ch„|enged by tan,™™ i," "y ““ "S “

ROLE OF SOPHISTS

sSSSSS^Massr' They
and

rather than outwards upon the world of things' M Up0n*e,r own thought and nature
of philosophy. The sophists did not constitute n any of tkem had Profound knowledge
of them developed his own ideas on the suhieetc ^k'.schooi^thought because each
wide variety of subjects. Will Durant (The Stonnfm,^ mq/ry- They Squired into a
observed: “There is hardly a problem or solution if™ ' °S°Phy: J954) has significantly
conduct which they did not realize and discu«” tu c“rrent Philosophy of mind and
cuss . They asked questions about anything
%

Plato 41
on earth or elsewhere. They took nothing for granted, and fearlessly proceeded to
challenge the prevailing religious beliefs and political restrictions. They sought to judge
everything from the perspective of reason. Illustrating the variety of the viewpoints
evolved by the sophists, Will Durant has further observed: “One, like Rousseau, argued
that nature is good, and civilization bad; that by nature all men are equal, becoming
unequal only by class-made institutions .... Another school, like Nietzsche, claimed
that nature is beyond good and evil, that by nature all men are unequal, that morality
is an invention of the weak to limit and deter the strong ... ”(ibid).
Protagoras sought to justify the profession of sophists as they helped to develop
the rational faculties of people. He argued that all men were endowed with the capacity
to share in the process of decision-making, but not in equal measure. Only good
educators would help to enhance their capacity in this respect and to prepare them
for political leadership. However, later sophists abandoned their quest for truth and
sought to use their skills for attaining material success and.developing their clients’
ability to argue a case in a convincing manner irrespective of its merits. Politicians of
those days widely learnt the art of oratory from many sophists for winning votes of
the people, but they neither acquired necessary competence nor developed a sense of
' duty to serve the state. Socrates and Plato were particularly disillusioned with such
politicians so much so that they were inclined to abandon democracy and switch over
to the rule of philosopher-kings to save the state from disaster!
~ ' : ” .... ^ ........................................................

SOCRATES’ INFLUENCE
Plato (427-347 B.C.) was the most brilliant disciple of Socrates (469-399 B.C.).
Socrates was an Athenian philosopher who moved from place to place, gathered
inquisitive young men around him, asked them questions after questions with a view
to revealing the nature of certain basic issues like truth and justice. Plis method of
educating people somewhat resembled that of sophists, but he was certainly different
from them. Although Socrates was primarily interested in humanistic studies, like
most of the sophists,.yet he strived to expose the hollowness of the views held by
the sophists. While sophists taught their clients how to achieve success in dealing
with public, Socrates taught his pupils how to gain scientific knowledge about the
basic issues. While the sophists held that goodness could be attained like an art
through professional knowledge, Socrates believed that goodness could be acquired
only through the knowledge of ultimate reality. Above all, while sophists chose only
rich people as their clients and demanded fee for the instruction imparted to them,
Socrates met and talked.to all sorts of persons, rich as well as poor, and never charged
any fee for his instruction.
Socrates was a real explorer of knowledge who was particularly conscious of
the ignorance of the so-called knowledgeable people. He utterly despised arrogance,
and very modestly accepted his own ignorance even when he was ‘the wisest of all’.
 42 Western Political Thought
According to the legend, once the Oracle of Delphi pronounced: ‘ Socrates, you are the
wisest man of Greece.” Socrates very modestly replied, “Because I am the only person
in Greece who knows that I know nothing!”
In his earlier career, Socrates served in the army. But he always acted according
to his conscience, and maintained his independence. He was likely to be executed
for defying the order of ‘Thirty Tyrants’ to arrest Leon of Salamis. But he was saved
because the ‘Thirty Tyrants’ were overthrown before they could fulfil their designs.
Later, when democratic party came to power and Socrates became a philosopher-
educator, the rulers suspected that he was undermining their authority by motivating
the youth to question all sorts of authority. They awarded him death sentence on the
>
ground that he did not recognize gods that the city recognized, and sought to introduce
other new divinities, and also corrupted young men! This event had a profound impact
on the young mind of Plato who then turned to most vigorous pursuit of philosophy.
Plato sought to immortalize Socrates by developing his basic ideas into a full-fledged
philosophy. Socrates had not produced any writing; Plato wrote many Dialogues
(including his celebrated work the Republic) in which Socrates is the chief spokesman
of his philosophy.
Plato himself was born in a noble, aristocratic family, and brought up in comfort.
His original name was Aristocles. He grew up as a handsome and vigorous youth. It
is said that he was called Plato because of his stout body with broad shoulders. He
turned out to be a great soldier and an excellent sportsman. But instead of following
the worldly pursuits, he was fascinated by philosophy — particularly by the style '
of his mentor who smashed all dogmas to focus on the search of truth. Plato paid a
rich tribute to his master in these words: “I thank God that I was born Greek and not i.
barbarian, freeman and not slave, man and not woman; but above all, that I was born
in the age of Socrates.”

r;;“les ,he fn"c,”in8 ot Hi*«■»*»»

LATER LIFE

he tad turned to be a great

 Plato 43
the Republic which is regarded to be a masterpiece on philosophy. The Republic is the
most outstanding contribution of Plato with a lot of flashes. It covers a wide range of
philosophical ideas which flourished before him, during his times, and even in later
ages. As Will Durant {The Story ofPhilosophy; 1954) has succinctly expressed: “The
Republic is a complete treatise .... Here we shall find his metaphysics, his theology,
his ethics, his psychology, his pedagogy, his politics, his theory of art. Here we shall
find problems reeking with modernity and contemporary savour: communism and
socialism, feminism and birth-control and eugenics, Nietzschean problems of morality
and aristocracy, Rousseauian problems of return to nature and libertarian education,
Bergsonian elan vital and Freudian psycho-analysis — everything is here.” After
dwelling on all aspects of the ills of the state and their possible solutions, Plato came
to the conclusion: “Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world
have the spirit and power of philosophy, and political greatness and wisdom meet in
one ... cities will never have rest from evils ... nor the human race.” So Plato’s concept
of the ideal state implied the rule of philosopher-kings.
In 387 B.C. Plato received an invitation from King Dionysius of Syracuse, capital
of Sicily, to convert his kingdom into the ideal state. Plato accepted this invitation,
but his attempt to train a tyrant to become a genuine philosopher failed. This led to
a bitter conflict between the two. It is said that the king condemned Plato to become
a slave. He was sold in market where he was freed only when a friend of his paid the
price. These experiences of Plato are reflected in his later works the Statesman (the
Politicus) and the Laws. These represent an effort to combine his ideal state with the
real world. Here Plato tends to consider natural weaknesses of man and concedes that
his ideal state cannot be realized on earth which is to be ruled by philosopher-kings.
So he proceeds to envisage a ‘sub-ideal state’ — ‘the second best’ — which would
be ruled by laws, not by men. This state would be far inferior to the ideal state, yet
it would be acceptable for its practicability. In short, in the absence of philosopher-
kings, supremacy of true knowledge in Plato’s sub-ideal state would be established
through the rule of laws.
Plato returned to Athens in 387 B.C. Shortly after this, he founded his famous
Academy which produced many brilliant philosophers including Aristotle (384-322
B.C.).

III
^PI?ATO!sNhEOR%'QFJUSTICE'.

PLATO’S METHODOLOGY
Discovering the principles of justice is the central problem of Plato’s Republic. It is
even subtitled as Concerning Justice. It follows the style of dialogue between Socrates
and his pupils who represent various streams of thought evolved by the Sophists.
Socrates asks them searching questions, and demolishes their views one by one, and
ultimately offers his own answer which embodies Plato’s theory ofjustice.
The style of dialogue represents the dialectical method which was introduced
by Socrates himself. It was meant to undertake a thorough examination of the
 44 Western Political Thought
various schools of thought, known in his times, and bring forth their inconsistencies,
contradictions and shortcomings with a view to arriving at a tenable position. Following
Socrates’ methodology, Plato sought to demonstrate that when mutually contradictory
ideas clash with each other, they tend to destroy each other’s untenable parts and only
truth is left behind. This dialectical method was applied in modern times by G.W.F.
Hegel (1770-1831), famous German philosopher, to evolve his theory of historical
development. Hegel argued that ‘idea’ (or consciousness) was the substance behind the
universe; that several rounds of clash between ‘thesis’ (the initial idea) and ‘antithesis’
(its opposite idea) results in ‘synthesis’ (a combination of truer parts of both ‘thesis’
and ‘antithesis’), and this process goes on until it reaches ‘the absolute idea’, which is
eternal.
Plato also follows his master’s footsteps in the use of‘analogies’, that is the style of
referring to simple and familiar things in order to explain the complex and unfamiliar
things which operate in a similar manner. Like Socrates before him, Plato uses the
analogies from the fields of arts as well as nature in order to explicate the problems of4
i morality, politics and human character. In dealing with the problems of administration
■ of the state> Plat0 uses the analogies of craftsman and physician. He complains that
whereas in simpler matters — like shoe-making — we think that only a specially-
trained person will serve our purpose, in politics we presume that every one who
knows how to get votes knows how to administer a state. When we are ill, we call for
a qualified and trained physician, whose degree is a guarantee of specific preparation
and technical competence - we do not ask for the most handsome physician or the
most eloquent one; well then, when the whole state is ill, should we not look for the
service and guidance of the wisest and the best?

some
uses the analog/ 7 dfne the functioning * « statesman; in another, he
rules in annlvfnP h 7 ^ purpose' NoW an artist is not b°und by any
Ws a®VeJST CntS’ WlTaS 3 PhySidan is always bound ^ ™L ia
time? ’ sponsible person can play these basically different roles at the same

the nature'of ‘° COn<*Ptualize an ideal ^ ^ order to understand

geometry in his quest for truth He aTeued thar ’nfluenCCd by the loSic underlying
drawing line diagrammes although we know W ^ l° discover laws by
on paper. For example, we conceptualize a DUre tr, dlagramme cannot be drawn
three sides consisting of right lines havino nr, h ,l, ang|e (le■ a tr*angle which has
governing a triangle in the actual world limilarlv we^h ^ t0 UnderStand the laws
state in order to understand the nature and Wi“ ,concePtuali“ a perfect
like Socrates, Plato used teleological method in sturi°n ^ a°tUal State' Again’
teleological method, we determine the nature of thin"18 th.® nat.ure of the state- In
cause or ultimate purpose for which they exist. Accordreference to
for which the state exists, we will be enlightened ahnlUV**WC identify the PurPose
S ned about the nature of the state itself.
 Plato 45
Purpose of the state can only be understood with reference to concept of an ideal state.
Plato argues that ‘justice’ is obviously the ultimate purpose of the state. Hence, an
ideal state must be based on justice. Being concerned with the study of the state, Plato
begins with politics. But since justice is primarily an ethical concept (i.e. concerned
with moral philosophy), study of ethics becomes necessary. Justice in society can be
established by determining the proper status and functions of various social classes, so
we are required to enter the realm of sociology. Analysis of social organization requires
us to understand the nature of man because the state or society is the ‘individual writ
large’. So we must be concerned with psychology. Development of natural capabilities
of man is the function of education, so we have to deal with theory and practice of
education. Plato devoted so much attention to this aspect of his study that Jean-Jaques
Rousseau (1712-78), French philosopher, declared the Republic to be the best treatise on
education. Finally, philosophy is an essential content of education. Hence the Republic
also includes an elaborate study ofphilosophy. According to Ernest Barker (1874-1960),
Plato’s the Republic embodies an effort to elucidate the whole philosophy of human
life.
Plato undoubtedly made an excellent effort to represent the whole body of
knowledge in a single work, but it must be conceded that further development of
knowledge depended on classification of various disciplines — a task that was
accomplished by Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), Plato’s illustrious disciple. While Plato was
an idealist, Aristotle was a realist. However, like Plato, Aristotle also founded his
politics on ethics. Aristotle criticized his mentor on the ground that he failed to detect
the natural weaknesses of man, and created a Utopia in the name of his ideal state.

Utopia
Utopia refers to the image of a perfect society or state that is very fascinating,
but unrealizable in actual practice.

THE QUEST FOR JUSTICE

Plato’s political thought begins with this dictum of Greek political thought: “The state
comes into existence for the sake of life and continues for the sake of good life.” Plato
argues that the state arises from the necessities of human life. Each human being
depends upon others for the fulfilment of his needs. That is why people live together
in a state or society. Can we think of any other reason behind the origin of the state?
Indeed ancient Greek philosophers did not distinguish between state and society.
While other living beings merely seek the means of their survival, human beings
further seek the means of good life. Justice is obviously a necessary condition of good
life. So the quest for justice assumes priority in the sphere of political philosophy. This
comprises the theme of Plato’s monumental dialogue, the Republic.
Discussion of this issue takes place in the house of Cephalus, a wealthy aristocrat.
Other participants in this discussion, apart from Socrates himself, include Glaucon,
Adeimantus and Thrasymachus. At the outset, Socrates asks Cephalus: “What
do you consider to be the greatest blessing which you have reaped from wealth?”
Cephalus replies that wealth is a great,blessing because it makes us generous, honest
46 Western Political Thought
and just. Since Cephalus refers to ‘justice’ as one of the virtues derived from wealth,
Socrates asks him to define ‘justice’. Cephalus tries to answer that justice consists in
speaking truth and paying one’s debts. But Socrates is not satisfied with this simplistic
definition. In the meantime, Cephalus’s s.on, Polemarchus, joins the discussion. He
clarifies that justice consists in giving each person his due, which implies doing good
to friends and evil to enemies. But Socrates rejects the very idea of doing injury
to any one as a part of justice. After each answer, he asks a further question until
Thrasymachus challenges Socrates to answer this question himself. But Socrates is
undeterred, and asks Thrasymachus to try to answer.
Then Thrasymachus, in his typical style of a Sophist, shouts: “I proclaim that
might is right, and justice is the interest of the stronger... He argues that different
forms of government make laws with a view to serving their respective interests.
Whatever serves their interests, is eulogized as ‘justice’; anything that hinders it,
is condemned as ‘injustice’. This typical view of justice may be said to anticipate
the doctrine of Friedrich Nietzche (1844-1900), modern German philosopher, who
challenged the traditional morality and sought to institute a new morality founded on
power and dominance. This view was also articulated by Plato in another dialogue,
Gorgias where Callicles, a Sophist, denounces morality as an invention of the weak to
neutralize the strength of the strong.
Socrates does not accept the stand taken by Thrasymachus. In its response, he
argues that government is an art. Like the art of healing or navigation, its aim is the
well-being of its clients. The true function of a physician is to cure the patient, not to
make money. The object of a shepherd is to tend the sheep, not to slaughter them to
make his food. Similarly, a government does not govern for its own advantage but tor
the well-being of the governed. Further he argues that a just person is happier than
the unjust one, because he observes the principle of limit and performs his appointed
function.
... . Thrasymachus does not retort. But Glaucon and Adeimantus are not fully
rf 1 u 6 \ concec*e tbat justice is good-in-itself as well as for its consequences,
u ow to convince those who do not believe in this principle? So Glaucon attempts
He*rgues that man by nature seeks his own satisfaction; that
doine iniustirp 1 ^ ['gratlfication- In some cases, man may get satisfaction by
accented as a mla°r 1** WCrC possibIe to do this consistently, it could have been
more from m ^ State of nature. the weak who constitute majority suffer
as far as thevmnlH6 tv" ^ gain by If a11 were allowed to suppress others
themselves from nnH 1S S*ateof affalrs woulcl be simply intolerable. In order to save
to do injustice^™'i SUffenng’ theT enter int° a contract among themselves neither
made which c^Sw ‘h hT °therS t0 d° * In this way ,aws come t0 be
view anticipates the mnH i!” 3rd duman cor|duct and the code of justice. This
whereby they relluTsh thTh m ‘ m S°dal COntract: an agreement among me0
to secure ‘self-preservation’ o^to A T • °f nature’ and enter ‘"to civil society
the ‘state of scarcity’ as pin a .W'tb tbe anli"social elements, or to overcome
(1632-1704). »d ^
 Plato 47
NATURE OF JUSTICE
The question oftrue nature ofjustice is still required to be answered. So Glaucon requests
Socrates to explicate the nature ofjustice as an end-in-itself. Socrates proceeds to explain
that justice is a relation among individuals, depending on the type of social organization
in which they live. If we create the image of a just state, we shall be in a better position
to describe a just individual. Using the analogy of^testing a man’s vision, Socrates
argues that we make him first read large type, then smaller; so it is easier to analyse
justice on a large scale, i.e. on the scale of the state, than on the smaller scale of
personal conduct.
In fact, in Plato’s system of thought the issues of a just human conduct and a just
social order are intertwined. He argues that if men were simple, an anarchist
communism would suffice. But in the actual world, because of greed and luxury,
men are not content with a simple life. They are acquisitive, ambitious, competitive
and jealous. So they tend to encroach upon the land or property which belongs to
others. War is one expression of this tendency. Other expressions of this tendency are
trade and finance which bring new class divisions. Plato gives a graphic description
of this situation: “Any ordinary city is in fact two cities, one the city of the poor, the
other of the rich, each at war with the other; and in either division there are smaller
ones — you would make a great mistake if you treated them as single states.” In this
process, the class that comes to acquire large amounts of wealth (e.g. landowners and
merchants, etc.) assumes the position of the ruling class, and one form of government
(e.g. aristocracy) is replaced,by another form (e.g. plutocracy or oligarchy). However,
when rich classes fail to control the state because of their scramble for power or
wealth, the poor organize themselves, stage a revolution against the rich, and establish
democracy — the rule of the poor. But eventually democracy also fails because the
ordinary people are not properly equipped by education to select the best rulers and
the wisest courses.
Plato also gives a graphic description of the mob behaviour which is responsible
for degradation of democracy: “Mob-rule is a rough sea for the ship of state to ride;
every wind of oratory stirs up the waters and deflects the course ... the crowd loves
flattery, it is so ‘hungry for honey’ that at last the wiliest and most unscrupulous
flatterer, calling himself the ‘protector of the people’ rises to supreme power.” So
democracy also gives way to tyranny or autocracy.
In order to prevent the recurrence of a crisis under every existing form of
government, Plato turns to the problem of selecting best rulers for the state. He argues
that statesmanship is a highly specialized function for which duly qualified persons,
with impeccable moral character, must be chosen. Plato laments that people are very
meticulous in searching competent persons for their day-to-day needs, like shoe­
making and treatment of bodily ailments; but in the matter of most important and vital
issue of their life, i.e. selection of rulers, they are misled by demagogues. They must
be made aware that mere oratory is no proof of a person’s competence to hold public
office! But how to determine who would prove to be best rulers? That is the central
problem of political philosophy.
 48 Western Political Thought

Demagogue
The term 'demagogue' refers to a type of political leader who tries to win support of
the people by appealing to their emotions rather than by giving rational arguments.

The first step in this direction consists in understanding the nature of man. becaust
governments are made of men: “Like man, like state”. The state is what it is because
its citizens are what they are. If power is held by wrong persons, any reforms in theii
way of working will prove to be as ineffective as cutting away at the heads of a hydra!
On the other hand, when right persons rule the state, they would tide over every crisis
and secure well-being of the people under all circumstances. If we understand human
nature properly, we can determine proper functions of all human beings and decide
who would be fit to rule.
Plato claims that human behaviour flows from three main sources: Desire (or
Appetite), Emotion (or Spirit), and Knowledge (or Intellect). These qualities are found
in all human beings, but in diverse degrees. Some men seem to be the embodiment
of desire, restless and acquisitive, constantly devoted to material pursuits. They arc
particularly fit for trade and industry. Others are predominantly reservoirs of emotion
and spirit who are always inclined to fight for victory. They are pugnacious rather than
acquisitive; they take pride in power rather than in possession. They are particularly
fit to work as soldiers. Finally, there are the few who find delight in meditation and
understanding, who yearn not for goods, nor for victory, but for knowledge and
learning. They find solace not in possession, nor in power, but in realizing the truth.
1 hese are men of wisdom who are particularly fit to rule the state.
Once we understand
. .. . the standards of fitness of different persons for different
functions, we

o >eY T ore"01 rft 7 fit3ry f0rC6S W0UW Pr°teCt th" State but they wouM
‘ ’ the/orces of knowledge - science and philosophy - would be nourished
and protected, and they would rule. When people are not guided by knowledge they
desires They cante^ 77 ^ m°Vmg haPhazardly to fulfil their conflicting
enlightenment<of knowIeH^T 7 ^ the State if^ are blessed with the
eventhe forces of emo,7 7 of 8uidance by the forces of knowledge,
a state is doomed if wealth h* W°U d Create Undue °PPression. Plato argues that
authori;77e lducer 77hn| K " soldiers to assume absolute
in the battlefield; they are both'L the'1" the econo™c fieldi the warrior is at his best
requires statesmanship which is a sciene^^ ' n PUbl‘C °ffice' Function of governance
devoted his life to philosopher who has
character (because knowledge is inseparable 77 7 ?V° Ved “ lmPeccable moral
 Plato 49
man ... cities will never cease from ill, nor the human race.
This theory ofphilosopher-kings is the mainstay of Plato’s political philosophy. In
short, Plato prescribes different duties for different classes of citizens whose fulfilment
would be instrumental in building up a perfect state that is thoroughly in formed by the
spirit ofjustice. Justice results from each element in society doing its appropriate task,
doing it well and doing it only. In order to achieve perfect harmony of these different
elements, which exemplifies justice, it is imperative that reason must rule within man as
well as within the state. So, in a just or ideal state, the reins of government shall remain
in the hands of a tiny class of philosopher-kings who represent living embodiment of
Reason, whereas material production and military defence shall be entrusted to the
producer and warrior classes (i.e. traders and soldiers) respectively. So in Plato’s perfect
state, “the industrial forces would produce but they would not rule; the military forces
would protect but they would not rule; the forces of knowledge and science and
philosophy would be nourished and protected and they would rule” (Will Durant, The
Story ofPhilosophy; 1954).
In his scheme ofjustice, Plato also identifies the virtues befitting each social class.
Then he defines ‘justice’ as the virtue befitting the state. Accordingly, he enumerates four
Cardinal Virtues which must be attained in a perfect state. These are: (a) Temperance
(befitting the traders’ class whose dominant trait is Appetite or Desire); (b) Courage
(befitting the soldiers’ class whose dominant trait is Emotion); (c) Wisdom (befitting
the philosophers’ class whose dominant trait is Knowledge); and (d) Justice (befitting
the state or whole social order). In Plato’s perfect state, each class will develop its
befitting virtue, and still traders’ and soldiers’ classes will accept the supremacy of the
philosophers’ class in order to achieve harmony in the functioning of all parts of the
state, which is a necessary condition of justice. In Plato’s view, justice is a blessing. It
is not only conducive to happiness, it is the necessary condition of human happiness.

Plprfo'Z % Plato's Theory of Justice

Social Class I J Dominant Trait Befitting Virtue

Traders Desire (Appetite) Temperance

Soldiers Emotion Courage
Philosophers Knowledge Wisdom
Virtue befitting the State Justice
(Harmony in ail parts of society)

Plato’s theory, of justice has been described as Architectonic Theory of Justice. It

draws an analogy between social organization and architecture in order to explicate the
nature of justice. Plato argued that during the construction of a building, fabrication of
different parts thereof (e.g. walls, ceiling, floor, windows and doors, etc.) is assigned to
different artisans, but a competent architect will combine all of them so nicely that each
of them would strengthen the other parts and contribute to grandeur of the building.
Similarly, in the ideal state, the first three cardinal virtues (viz. temperance, courage
and wisdom) would be cultivated by different social classes (viz. traders’, soldiers’
and philosophers’ classes), but the fourth cardinal virtue (viz. justice) would be
 50 Western Political Thought
manifested in a harmonious combination thereof so that all of them would contribut*
to strengthening and perfecting the state.

IV

ivnvi u N i^m
If our state is required to be ruled by philosopher-kings, how shall we proceed to
identify the eligible rulers, and how shall we ensure that our rulers remain indifferent
to worldly temptations and throughout maintain a high standard of statesmanship? Id
order to solve these problems, Plato gives an elaborate description of his educational
system and the proposed style of living of the guardian classes.
PLATO’S EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM
Plato’s educational system is founded on the principle of compulsory education and
full equality of opportunity for all citizens, with no discrimination on ground of birtli
or gender. So all newly bom children, boys and_girls, would be separated from theii
parents and placed in the custody of the state) All would be brought up and educated
under similar conditions. Till ten years of a^e, they would be given predominantly
physical
u. reducation. Each
t school will have gymnasium and a playground. Main
subject of the curriculum will consist of sports. In these ten years, the foundation of
futoeHfe S*W1 bemadeS°Str9n§*hattheySh0Uldneetrnomedicinesinthen

so t *8' *" chiMre” wi" b' i» rnosi

so as to supplement their physical toughness with spiritual softness Durum theii

.ho sixteen,h .ill .he ,ge of ,.e»ty.

exemination fn Thiel'S ivelonemiligw'jl bx'.'s.cd t, h«H'^

twenty first till the age of thirty years. At thf ’ m®"tal Md moral •traini“g fromA
in another grand examination. Those who fai^wiii ®y Would-be squired to appeal
\ ba*1S soldlers in the army and navyf The ver, f 06 Sent to becoiT>e auxiliaries,

Plato observes that the nhilosn u * Wl J(5*n ranks of auxiliaries.

ttissszs* ns:
 Plato 51
degeneration of the state. Best rulers are never covetous after power.
GUARDIANS AND THEIR STYLE OF LIVING
Plato has clubbed the philosophers and soldiers together and described them as the
guardian class. In order to keep theip fully free from corruption, he has prescribed a
typical style of living for them which is known.to be the communism ofproperty and
wives. In the first place, the guardians will keep minimum goods for their day-to-day
use, and whatever goods they keep,/Would be shared by all. They will live together,
eat from a common kitchen and will not keep any private property. In this sense, they
will follow the principle of communism of property.
Then the guardians will not have any private families. All guardians — men and
women — will be isolated from the ordinary population, enter into group marriage,
and become each other’s commorrhusbands and wive$. So all men will have common
wives and children. All newly bora children will be' separated from their parents and
placed in the custody of the state for their education along with other children of the
community. No man or woman would be allowed to know the identity of his or her
child. No child will be allowed to know the identity of his'or her parents. All men and
women of the guardian class will become parents of their common children. When no
man will be attached to any woman or child, no woman will be attached to any man
or child, and no child will be attached to* any particular parents, no member of the
guardian class will have any weakness for anybody. All will be devoted to the service
of the state with a sense of detachment. In this sense, they will follow the principle
of communism of wives. They wTTTnot be tempted to amass gold or silver or other
forms of wealth for anybody, nor for themselves. The twin principles of communism
of property and communism of wives will strengthen the character of the guardian
class so profoundly that they will become impervious to all sorts of temptation and
corruption. ^

DISTINCTION BETWEEN PLATO’S COMMUNISM

AND MODERN COMMUNISM
Modern communism refers to an economic ideology designed to counter the ill effects
of capitalism. It does not trace its origins to Plato’s communism. Modern communism
is largely concerned with common ownership of property although Charles Fourier
(1772-1837), early French socialist, also envisaged a system resembling Plato’s
communism of wives as well as property. On closer analysis, we find some substantial
differences between Plato’s communism and modern communism although they
embody the basic idea of communism in their respective spheres of application.

Capitalism
Capitalism refers to a modern system of industrial production in which the means
of social production (land, buildings, mines, forests, machinery and capital),
distribution and exchange are owned by private entrepreneurs, large numbers of
wage labourers are employed at market rates, and economic activity is primarily
devoted to private profit. Here workers are free to work anywhere according to
their skills, capacities and market demand. _____
 52 Western Political Thought
Broadly speaking, modern communists allege that capitalism results in large scale
exploitation of workers because the owners of capital tend to maximize their profits,
taking advantage of the vulnerable position of the workers. The Communists therefore
want to replace it by a system where all means of social production will be placed
under social ownership, production will be devoted to fulfilment of social needs, and
workers will be required to work under most congenial conditions. Under this system
the disparity between haves and have-nots will disappear, old institutions and religious
beliefs will be replaced by a new social morality, and even ‘the state will wither away’.
Here people will live together, work together and eat together. Everybody would have
equal right to goods and services available to the whole community.

Exploitation
Exploitation refers to a form of social oppression in which one party takes undue
advantage of the vulnerable position of another party. The stronger party uses the
physical and mental capacities—resources, talents and skills, etc.— of its victim
for its own profit or gratification of its own desires.

Karl Marx (1818-83), chief exponent of modern communism, described it as the

advanced stage of socialism where all able-bodied persons will voluntarily work to
their full capacity; there will be no parasites; hence the society will become classless.
Here all social means of production will be placed under common ownership; forces of
production would have been fully developed; hence it would become possible to fulfil
everybody’s material needs.The rights of citizens will be governed by the rule: ‘-Trom
each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. As Marxists regard the
state an instrument of the dominant class, there will be no need of the state in a classless
society. As Friedrich Engels (1820-95) has elucidated, in the communist society p ower
will be replaced by authority and the state will be replaced by administration.

Communism ... is the complete return of

man to himself as a social (i.e.
human) being.

Karl Marx (Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844)

through an communism IS S0Ught to be achieved

established throw* dw > modern communism is sought to be

common I . t -hrs °f—

odern communism laruelv insists on the
Plato’s communism LSeffatisfaSion^the6 °f S°daI production- Then
guardian class that would be accustomed to‘n h i ™1™ matenal needs of the
modern communism envisages the satisfaction tfJS™8.andhl6h' th>nking’, whereas
communism accords primacy to moral values , 3 ‘al needs of PeoPle-PIat0’s
primacy of material satisfaction. Finally in Ph J ro C0I™ism accepts
vested in philosopher-kings whereas WOuld b°
in the working class. 1Sm see^s to vest all authority
 Plato 53

Dinstinction Between Plato's Communism and Modern Communism

The Issue Plato's Communism Modern Communism
Sphere of Application The Guardian Class only The Whole Society
Way to Transition Elaborate Educational Revolution
System
Nature of Communism Sharing of Common Common Ownership
Property and of Property
Common Wives
Goa! Satisfaction of Satisfaction of all
Minimum Needs Material Needs
: Philosophical Primacy of Moral Primacy of Material
Basis Values Satisfaction
Authoriry to Philosopher-Kings The Working Class

j?,y„
V

0
*A CRITICAb APPRAISAL?

Plato’s theory of justice focused on the moral foundations of politics which will
continue to remain relevant for all times. Different generations may discover new
aspects of justice or evolve new criteria of justice according to their changing social
consciousness, butjustice will always remain the prominent goal ofpolitical philosophy.
In our own times, Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948), Indian social philosopher, laid
renewed emphasis on moral foundations of politics, and his philosophy is being widely
invoked to find the way to emancipation of humanity in the face of various types^of
global crises before us. In any case, Plato’s theory of justice has many shortcomings
to which several critics — ancient as well as modern — have drawn our attention.
DILEMMA OF DOMINANCE
Plato believed that different people are characterized by the predominance of anyone
of the components of human nature: Desire, Emotion, and Knowledge. That is why
they are fit to be placed in different social classes: Traders, Soldiers and Philosophers
respectively. Although all citizens start with equality of opportunity from the hour of
- their birth, their placement in different social classes is determined through certain
tests at various stages of their educational career. The tests are so rigorous and people’s
placement in different classes is so rigid that after a particular age, all the doors of
switching over to a higher class are permanently closed. This is not fair because
many persons may become more enlightened with time, but they remain deprived of
opportunities for advancement.
Again, when each social class is advised to develop its befittjng virtue (i.e.
temperance for traders; courage for soldiers; and wisdom for philosophers), would it
not be sufficient for each of them to attain good life? Then why traders’ and soldiers’
classes are advised to accept the control of philosophers’ class over them? Even if it .
 54 Western Political Thought
is thought to be necessary, then how these classes who are endowed with economic
and military powers respectively, will be persuaded to obey the commands of the
philosophers’ class who have no concrete power? It involves the problem of making
material power subordinate of moral power which is by no means an easy task. It
seems, Plato was fully aware of this difficulty.
In order to prevent or suppress any voice of protest, Plato prescribed censorship of
art and literature. He held that these media will be used for the propagation of a ‘noble
lie’, variously described as a ‘myth’ or a ‘royal fable’ to convince people that the
present arrangement is best for them because it is ordained by God. It embodies a ‘lie’,
or a ‘myth’, or a ‘fable’ because it is not based on fact. At the same time, it is ‘noble’
or ‘royal’ because it is intended to serve a noble purpose — to secure the supremacy
ofjustice in society.

Censorship
Censorship refers to a practice under which a state or some other authority like
church undertakes examination of the contents of a publication, a report, a work of
art, artistic expression in any other form (such as a play or a film), any other form of
message (such as a personal letter) or communication (such as broadcast
or telecast) before reaching its target so that its objectionable parts could
be dropped before hand. The reasons of objection thereto could include
such grounds that its content does not conform to social morality, or it is
likely to hurt sentiments of some section of people, or it implies insult to an
honourable person, or it may cause strained relations with a foreign country, or
it may jeopardize security of the nation, etc.

Censorship reflects a society's lack of confidence in itself.

Potter Stewart

:SS^®kswssss
f'™'» *» differently. Some of you ha*

husbandmen and craftc™ u u ° auxi*lanes; others again, who are to be

generally be preserved inchildren °f b'"S’ lr°”; and ““ sP“ics

its °PP0,“"i,y “ pr”e “S “d

__ to achieve
follows: irrespective of its parentage, the myth proceeds as

silver son, or a silver parentTIddeifsonAnd ^d1 WiU sometime have a,

a golden or a silver parent has an admixture of bra°n pr°Caims - that if the son of
(him) to descend in (he scale to become a husbandman oTan anlsanjust'a^lhera
 Plato 55
may be others sprung from the artisan class who are raised to honour, and become
guardians and auxiliaries. For an oracle says that when a man of brass or iron
guards the state, it will be destroyed.
Plato was far ahead of his times when he sought to obliterate all discrimination on
grounds of birth or gender. He may be termed the first feminist philosopher who
recognized equal talents and equal rights of men and women, as in his ideal state women
were treated on par with men to join the ranks of guardian class. He was severely
criticized for this ‘bold5 stand by his conservative disciple, Aristotle, who dubbed it
‘unrealistic’ .
WAS PLATO A TOTALITARIAN?
In recent times, some critics have alleged that Plato was a totalitarian. Of these, Karl
Popper, Bertrand Russell, and R.H.S. Crossman are particularly important. There is
some substance in their criticism, but it will not be fair to accept such a sweeping
statement. We must examine as to in what sense Plato’s thought approximates the
tenets of totalitarianism, and where it is far removed from these tenets. Since Plato
was a strict disciplinarian and he stood for vesting absolute powers in his rulers — the
philosopher-kings, and still he sought to create consent in society by artificial means
(e.g. by propagating the ‘noble lie’), it may be conceded that he had some inclination
toward totalitarianism. And since totalitarianism is opposed to democracy and
freedom, it is also alleged that Plato was anti-democratic and antagonistic to freedom.
Are these charges well-founded?

Totalitarianism
Totalitarianism refers to a political outlook which upholds supreme authority of
the state over ail aspects of the life of its citizens. A totalitarian state tends to
direct all political, economic, social-cultural and intellectual activities of people
towards fulfilling certain aims which are determined by the state itself. Under this
system, nobody has the right or opportunity to oppose or criticize the state, or
to propose any new aim. The state keeps all sources of information, education,
religious or cultural activities — including sports and entertainment — under its
exclusive control. It does not tolerate trade unions or any other organizations
purporting any objective beyond those determined by the state.

It is widely held that totalitarianism is a typically modern phenomenon, made

possible by the development of modern technology, particularly the modern media
of mass communication. This term was first used by Benito Mussolini (1883-1945),
Italian dictator, in 1932 in his contribution to Encyclopedia Italiana. Mussolini
observed that his philosophy of Fascism was totalitarian in the sense that it sought
to interpret, develop and energize the total life of the nation; any human or spiritual
values could not exist beyond its ambit, not to speak of their significance! Later,
communist regimes in Russia and elsewhere were also dubbed totalitarian because
they sought to establish the supremacy of their ideology over total life of their people.
An ideology — whether fascism, communism or any other — is accepted to be true by
its upholders without examining its rational foundations; they are emotionally attached
to it; they are prepared to fight for it and to make supreme sacrifices to defend it. In
 56 Western Political Thought
this sense, it would not be fair to regard Plato a totalitarian because the socio-political
order outlined by him in the Republic is based upon reason and understanding; and
the emotional commitment to that order springs from these rational qualities, not
from a blind faith. In the Laws, Plato particularly attacked those who, like Spartans,
eulogized military values as the core of their value-system.
I Karl Popper (The Open Society and Its Enemies, Vol. I: The Spell ofPlato; 1945)
argued that freedom was possible in an open society — a society that allowed social
mobility and that was always prepared to accept new ideas whereas Plato was a champion
of a closed society — a society that claimed to have found truth, and did not allow
anybody to express any new idea. Plato believed that once the philosopher-kings were
installed, they must be given absolute power to act without any interference or criticism
from the citizens. When we regard any class of persons howsoever learned and tested
for their impeccable character, to be infallible and ban all sorts ofcriticism against them,
we fall in the trap of totalitarianism. In this sense, Plato was a totalitarian. Aristotle
was right that if a virtuous person gets unbridled power, he is bound to degenerate
because ‘power and virtue cannot coexist’.
Similarly, Bertrand Russell (History of Western Philosophy; 1945) dubbed Plato
a totalitarian. His view should also be taken cautiously in the light of the relevant
shades of the term ‘totalitarianism’. Then R.H.S. Crossman (Plato Today; 1959)
alleged that Plato was peculiarly anti-democratic because he was an admirer of the
military discipline prevailing in his contemporary Sparta, and he sought to have a
similar discipline in his ideal state. He also attacked the ways of democracy that
prevailed in his contemporary Athens. In fact, his opposition to democracy was a part
of his project to replace the rule of demagogy by the rule of wisdom. But it should
not be forgotten that he was deeply concerned with welfare of the people which is the
substance of democracy. In today’s context, he would not have favoured procedural
sutoamTved USe °f.ltS, pltfalIs in actual Pfactice- On the contrary, he stood for
waJ certaTnfv" °Wn Way' Plat0’s idea establishing the rule of wisdom
implied siagnatkm and denial XSX SS."* ”h ^

Procedural Democracy

Substantive Democracy
Substantive democracy refers to a mnHoi * j
to the goal of democracy (e.g. social democracy which accords primacy
prepared to accept necessary adjustment in b people's welfare), and which is
franchise, periodic elections, free comDetitirm / procedure (e-9- universal adult
achieving its goal or substance. P *°" for P°wer, etc.) in the interests of