a dangerous opponent of democracy platos

8/16/2019 A Dangerous Opponent of Democracy Platos

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-dangerous-opponent-of-democracy-platos 1/5

A dangerous opponent of democracy? Plato's views in the Republic.By Catherine OsborneOmnibus 26, September 1993, 8-10

In the Republic Plato compares the nature of the human individual to themembers of a state !e thin"s #e are comple$ individuals, #ith more thanone part in our souls% these parts can either co-operate, leadin& to 'ust andhealth( behaviour, or compete, so as to displa( an un'ust and unhealth(constitution )ust so in the state there are di*erent classes of people #ithstren&ths and interests in di*erent areas +hose classes ma( be in conict,and the state in an unhealth( condition of strife and disunit(, or the( ma(co-operate for the &ood of the #hole, to produce a state #ith 'ust la#s anda stable constitution

Plato is probabl( serious in his su&&estions about the human personalit(o one doubts that #e are li"el( to be happ( and content if #e are not tornb( doubts, or stru&&lin& #ith desires and tendencies that o*end our better 'ud&ement, and Plato also holds that our life is .nest and best #hen ourintellectual capacities are realised to the full +his #ill be possible onl( in a#ell-ordered individual, in #hom reason controls the emotions andappetites and "eeps them securel( in their place

/ut #hat about the correspondin& political re&ime If Plato meant us to

ta"e that seriousl( he seems to be committed to a number of notoriousl(e$tremist positions !e seems to re&ard some classes of human bein&s asnot full( human at all, he denies full political ri&hts and indeed education tothe less intellectual classes, and he believes that the state should forceindividuals to sacri.ce their o#n #ell-bein& in the interests of the statePerhaps Plato #as advocatin& a totalitarian political re&ime, or if not thatthen surel( he inspired subseuent attempts to establish oppressivere&imes, #hether fascist or communist in their ideolo&( +hat #as thecriticism made b( arl Popper in his famous attac" on Plato in The OpenSociety and its Enemies.

/ut #as Plato serious about the politics in the Republic Several reasonstell a&ainst it ne of these is Plato4s #a( of #ritin& in dialo&ue +hissu&&ests that he too" the vie#s of others as #orth( of consideration If he#anted to suppress free speech and to spread lies in the interests of thestate, #h( should he bother to put other people #ith other vie#s into hisdialo&ues !is #a( of doin& philosoph( does not seem to belon& #ith anti-democratic vie#s

In a totalitarian state the authorities do not usuall( ta"e account of the

vie#s of the ordinar( members of the communit(, least of all if the(

sborne 1 185052016 18703



disa&ree #ith #hat the rulers re&ard as ri&ht Indeed if the( do ta"e noticeof them it #ill be to e$terminate them hat is a totalitarian re&ime butone in #hich variet( of opinion is suppressed and conformit( to a particularideolo&( is enforced If Plato is deepl( committed to a one-part( state

philosophers rule, but onl( one sort of philosophers - Platonists: #e shoulde$pect to .nd him committed to one-part( philosoph( !e #ould hardl(consider the vie#s of opponents or critics seriousl( ;east of all #ould hesee" open debate, or ta"e account of the popular response

Plato, ho#ever, chooses to present his philosoph( in dialo&ues !e neverspea"s in his o#n person% he never sa(s this is Plato4s o#n vie#, or eventhat it is reliabl( correct n the contrar( in most dialo&ues he usesSocrates as the principal character, portra(in& him as one searchin& fortruth in the opinions of others he encounters in the streets and public

buildin&s of <thens Socrates is al#a(s prepared to consider an( vie# hisinterlocutor can come up #ith, and press it for an( insi&hts it mi&ht &ive Inthe earl( dialo&ues, includin& the .rst boo" of the Republic, he is notoriousand deepl( irritatin& to those he meets: for havin& no ans#er of his o#n to&ive

Plato4s dialo&ues impl( a theor( about ho# #e .nd out #hat is ri&ht +hattheor( is plainl( out of "eepin& #ith a political campai&n to suppress criticalinuir( and open debate Suppose then that the dialo&ue is merel( afacade Perhaps Plato professes disin&enuousl( to be attendin& to the

ar&uments on both sides in order to inuence the reader in his favour It is,after all, Plato the #riter #ho manipulates the #ords of both Socrates andthe other characters in the dialo&ue Perhaps Plato is &ivin& us an ans#er,even if Socrates is not

+here is a problem #ith this repl( ho#ever If Plato had an ans#er to thepu==les that remain at the end of the Socratic dialo&ues, he does not ma"eit obvious #hat it is In this respect the various dialo&ues di*er, and it iseasier to suppose that the Republic is o*erin& the reader a positive theor(than it is #ith earlier dialo&ues /ut the fact that some of the dialo&ues

seem to en&a&e in &enuine critical enuir( ma"es it impossible to hold in&eneral that Plato uses dialo&ue as a sham claim to credibilit( !e must&enuinel( have believed in open inuir( #hen he introduced the dialo&ueform

Perhaps, then, he #rote the Republic #hen he had &ro#n #ear( of opendebate and its lac" of substantial results In the main boo"s of the Republicthe participants all readil( a&ree #ith Socrates and there is no real conict/ut this need not mean he had abandoned debate alto&ether% in the earlierdialo&ues #e have been brou&ht to reco&nise that debate must be informed

and reasonable, that discussin& #ith people #ho do not reco&nise the force

sborne 2 185052016 18703



of rational ar&uments #ill al#a(s be hopeless /ut to allo# that debatemust appeal to rational ar&uments rather than to force or pre'udice orpersuasion is no threat to democrac( It is democrac( that trusts to thepo#er of &ood ar&ument, and the opponents of democrac( #ho turn to

force or propa&anda to assert their po#er

e ma( then as" #hether, in the Republic, all individuals are consideredcapable of appreciatin& reasoned ar&ument, and hence participatin& indebate >iven the three-parts of the soul ever(one possesses a reasonin&facult(, and Plato insists that in a 'ust individual the lo#er parts of the soul#ill respect and hence reco&nise the force of: the &uidance of reason Itfollo#s that the non-philosopher classes can appreciate the value ofreasoned ar&uments

In the .rst boo" of the Republic Socrates considers t#o #a(s of pursuin&the inuir( +he( could, he sa(s at 3?8 a-b, adopt the procedure of thecourts of la# +his #ould involve a speech from Socrates, follo#ed b( aspeech from +hras(machus, his opponent, then a chance for Socrates torepl( a&ain <t the end of the speeches the( #ould need to assess themerits of each side, for #hich the( #ould reuire a 'ur( +he procedureSocrates envisa&es here is a democratic one% the courts in <thens, on #hichhe models this form of debate, #ere democratic institutions +here #as no 'ud&e and the 'ur( consisted of a lar&e number of ordinar( citi=ensSocrates is as"in& #hether that sort of democratic decision-ma"in& is

appropriate in the debate about ethics that #e have before us

Socrates ans#ers no7 appeal to the decision of a democratic 'ur( isunnecessar( in this debate /ut before #e conclude that Socrates isa&ainst democrac( #e should e$amine #hat point he is ma"in& e$actl( !eis not su&&estin&, as #e mi&ht at .rst suppose, that appeal to a 'ur( #ouldbe misleadin& or positivel( harmful !e merel( claims that it isunnecessar( to brin& in a set of 'urors besides the t#o opponents in thedebate hat is at issue is bet#een t#o individuals, one for and onea&ainst a thesis in this case about #hether in'ustice pa(s: Settlin& that

di*erence reuires that one side be persuaded that the other is correctPossibl( appeal to a 'ur( #ould be one #a( to achieve that result, but the 'ur( in itself #ill not satisf( the need <s lon& as the spea"er secures thea&reement of the opponent at each sta&e of the debate, Socrates sa(s,there #ill never be an( need for a vote% the t#o #ill end up in a&reement,thus servin& as their o#n 'ud&es

/ut perhaps Socrates4 comments here appl( onl( to philosoph( Philosoph(involves ar&uin& out the pros and cons of theories and is best done indialo&ue bet#een people of opposin& vie#s Plato mi&ht then use the

dialo&ue form in his philosophical #or"s, #ithout committin& himself to

sborne 3 185052016 18703



correspondin& political vie#s !o#ever such a division bet#een philosoph(and politics is impossible for Plato% he, if an(one, is identi.ed #ith the vie#that to do politics is to do philosoph( nl( if philosophers become "in&s#ill the place be &overned ari&ht, and that is because .ndin& out #hat is

ri&ht to do is a matter of .ndin& the truth about the &ood, and that is a tas"for philosoph( So the method that bears fruit in philosophical inuir( mustbe the method that #ill bear fruit for political theor(

n the other hand there clearl( is a distinction bet#een the process ofdiscoverin& the truth or #hat is ri&ht, and the process of actin& inaccordance #ith that truth once it is "no#n Plato4s vie# on ho# potentialphilosopher-"in&s should set about acuirin& "no#led&e of the &ood ma(#ell di*er from his vie# on ho# the( should use the "no#led&e, once the(have it, in &overnin& their cit( If (ou do not (et "no# #hat is the ri&ht

thin& to do, the best thin& #ill be to debate it /ut if (ou do "no# the ri&htthin& to do there #ill be no point in en&a&in& in dialectic #ith an opponent#ho disa&rees, e$cept in order to teach her to see #h( she is #ron&

+hus if Plato4s Republic describes a practical political s(stem at all, it mustbelon& onl( in an ideal #orld #here some individuals have achieved #hatSocrates never claimed to have achieved, an understandin& of perfect&oodness In an( conte$t #here the rulers #ere still see"in& to discover#hat is best, a critical method of dialectic #ould be reuired, not anauthoritarian imposition of .$ed rules

Socrates s"etches an outline of #hat a democratic constitution loo"s li"e inRepublic boo" 8. !is attitude is plainl( uns(mpathetic @oes this sho# thathe #as opposed to a s(stem that allo#ed for the e$pression of diversevie#s hat he re'ects is not the diversit( of vie#s, nor the popular vote indecision ma"in&, but rather the freedom to respect no principles at all !eobserves that such cities claim that there is freedom eleutheria: andfreedom of speech parresia:, and these privile&es are pri=ed and valued/ut #hat he describes is not a democratic s(stem in #hich authorit( isascribed to the la#s and 'ud&ements enacted b( popular vote, but a state

of anarch( in #hich the authorit( of democratic decisions is i&nored, andthe ri&hts of individuals are not respected It is not an attac" on democratic&overnment properl( e$ercised and respected, nor on freedom to discuss avariet( of opinions, but on a debased form of 4&overnment4 #heredemocrac( is po#erless to curb the actions of the individual or to nurture&ood conduct

Plato, then, is not opposed to open-minded consideration of opposin& vie#sin the process of philosophical enuir( n the contrar( his o#n methoddepends upon usin& such a techniue in an attempt to scrutinise and re'ect

false theories and pursue a better understandin& of #hat is true /ut the

sborne ? 185052016 18703



cit( ruled b( philosopher-"in&s, if it #ere a political proposal, #ould have tooccur at some later sta&e, #hen inuir( is no lon&er needed because truthis "no#n in full and there is nothin& more to "no# Such a cit( is not "no#nin this #orld% it is an ideal Aould such an ideal ever be accuratel(

reproduced in practice +he ans#er Plato usuall( &ives about an( idealmodel is that #e can onl( ever meet a poor imitation% but the fact that therepublic is not a model that could ever be put into practice #ould not, asSocrates observes ?B2b-e:, detract from its value as a portrait of an ideal

So it is hard to suppose that Plato #as a&ainst democrac( in the Republic Cirstl( he is probabl( not primaril( concerned #ith politics but #ith 'ustice inthe individual human person Secondl( his philosophical method su&&eststhat inuir( depends upon open-minded criticism of varied opinions +hirdl(, if the Republic is ta"en to have implications for politics as perhaps

it should not be: it can serve onl( as an ideal in #hich "no#led&e ofabsolute &oodness has alread( been achieved b( some philosophers Sincethis is never realised in practice in an earthl( cit( and is impossible torealise, &iven that practical politics deals #ith the particular and therelative, not the universal and absolute, the ideal described in the Republic cannot be read as an immediate model for our o#n politicians currentl(en&a&ed in the search for the &ood

sborne 185052016 18703

a dangerous opponent of democracy platos

Documents