Politea (The Republic - Plato)

Name: a-true-ben

Hello doyoo user, You have to be logged in to use these functions... Login or register Close window

Send message to member

Product:	The Republic - Plato
Date:	06.01.03 (884 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: A classic of philosophy and literature

Disadvantages: You might disagree, I'm being examined on this!

Plato's Republic is probably the most widely read book in the history of philosophy. Plato himself was a Greek philosopher, pupil of Socrates and teacher of Aristotle, and so influential the early 20th century philosopher A. N. Whitehead described all subsequent developments in the field of philosophy as 'footnotes to Plato's work'.

I first came across The Republic, Plato's seminal work, while on an open day to Oxford. Knowing I wanted to study philosophy, I picked up several books, one of which was Republic. I read it that summer and to tell the truth was slightly confused - parts of it stuck with me, but it being the first philosophy book I'd read I didn't understand it all. Nor incidentally was it ideal preparation, being quite different from my first year philosophy. Now, however, I own three copies of Republic (different translations) and it's the focus of about one sixth of my whole degree!

Like all Plato's works, Republic is written as a dialogue. The main speaker (as usual) is Socrates, who outlines an extensive theory of justice; while other principal characters (Glaucon, Adeimantus and Thrasymachus) are mainly there to offer their alternative views (occasionally) and question Socrates - so their remarks are frequently along the lines of 'yes, of course you're right' or 'I don't follow, please explain further'! The Republic, read as a work of literature, is still, however, rewarding - for the way it covers many themes shows how (in Plato's thought at least) metaphysics, epistemology, aesthetics and political and moral virtue are inter-connected and cannot be studied in isolation. The discussion weaves through the various topics, with plenty of cross references to be found. For example, a major theme in Books 2, 3 and 10 is an attack on poetry, Socrates claiming poets present only pale imitations and know nothing of true reality; and several times throughout the book when other
s indicate his meaning is unclear he makes remarks such as 'then I must be speaking like a poet'.

The work is divided into ten almost equal books (a division which, incidentally, is almost certainly not original and often breaks the flow). The first of these is rather like one of Plato's earlier dialogues, in which there are more questions than answers - indeed some have speculated it may originally have been an earlier work later incorporated into the rest of Republic, but I think this is unlikely given how effectively it foreshadows many later themes and discussions. Socrates refutes several proposed accounts of justice, without bringing us any closer to the truth.

Most interestingly, Thrasymachus contends justice is in the interest of the stronger, and only a fool would do the virtuous thing if he could get away with doing injustice. This is an objection Glaucon and Adeimantus take up (as Devil's Advocates) in Book Two, and something Socrates spends the rest of the argument refuting. Although his discussion suffers numerous philosophical flaws - and is less persuading when you notice his range of unchallenged assumptions, false dichotomies and neglected alternatives - it is impressive in its scope. He describes justice in both the polis (city) and individual soul as 'each part doing it's own' - whether the classes of the city or the three parts of the soul (reason, spirit and appetite). He then argues that the just man (or city) will be happiest as each part is in balance and performing its proper function. The just man will best know true happiness, and will enjoy a thousand years of pleasure in the afterlife (described in the fantastic 'myth of Er' that concludes Book Ten).

The Republic is filled with inspiring imagery. Perhaps most haunting is Plato's depiction of the Cave. He describes most people as shackled in the darkness of a cave, able to see only shadows on the wall in front of them, cas
t by the fire behind them. Most people take this to be all there is to reality; and strive for 'knowledge' of the shadow world, but they are wrong to do so. A few turn and see the brightness of the fire, but even they are misguided. Only a few leave the cave, and eventually see the brightness of the sun (truth), and these are the people with the necessary knowledge to rule - although their opinions may be ridiculed by those still in the dark.

The political ideal Socrates portrays is of rule by philosopher-kings - only those who know the truth can best divine what is good. A lengthy portion of the book is devoted to their upbringing, to ensure those that rule the city are virtuous and rule well. Of course, much of the politics is controversial - one of my friends dismissed this by saying that Plato was a philosopher so obviously biased in this respect. This is just one misunderstanding of Plato however. Firstly 'philosophy' comes from the Greek for 'love of knowledge' - so Plato was not necessarily advocating rule exclusively by what we would call philosophers, his Guardians were skilled in many pursuits (warfare, politics and philosophy) - his argument should best be interpreted as favouring rule by specialists rather than amateurs. What's more, Plato did not see rule as a privilege - he believed it was for the benefit of the ruled that they be governed by the more enlightened, and numerous safeguards were introduced to prevent the Guardians abusing their position (in particular, they were to have no private property or even family, but live communally). Once one had seen the Sun, Plato believed, one would not wish to go back into the corrupting realm of politics but would rather stay, staring at its beauty - it is only because Guardians are brought up by the city that they owe it to return (to the 'cave') and rule the ordinary people, rather than spend all their time in philosophy.

The full depth of Plato's
ideas cannot be adequately covered in such a short review. Suffice to say that the Republic covers many topics. Some of its ideas are not so controversial now - but Plato's suggestion that women were (almost) equal to men was certainly far ahead of his time. Others, including much of his political recommendations, have been widely attacked - and seen Plato famously branded a 'totalitarian' by Karl Popper. The influence of Plato's work, particularly Republic, can hardly be underestimated - Aristotle devotes a significant portion of his Politics to criticising his former tutor and Freud's superego/ego/id division of the soul parallels Plato's much earlier psychology.

Now over two millennia old, Republic is widely available in many editions. A cheap Penguin/Wordsworth/OUP classic should set you back around £3-4 and will be sufficient the most purposes, although the translation and notes may not be the best. The edition I just read (that pictured) is published by Hackett, based on an original translation by Grube and revised by Reeve. It's £5.95 (paperback) and the set text for our course - although one lecturer said it was a very poor translation.

If you need a useful introduction, two I'd recommend are:
Harry Eyres - Beginner's Guide to Plato's Republic (it may be helpful to read this before the text itself if you don't have a philosophical background, it's a brief summary and exposition of the main ideas - though perhaps ideally you should read Republic, then this, then re-read Republic if you have time?)
And
Julia Annas - An Introduction to Plato's Republic (much more serious and scholarly, not to mention a substantial book in itself).
Obviously such an important work has generated masses of further secondary literature however. It's beyond me to select the best here, but any decent copy of Republic (and the two introductions above) will include a bibliography for further resea
rch.

In summary, Republic is a great classic of both philosophy and literature, which is why I chose to devote a whole paper to it. It may be a bit beyond some people (if you're not academically minded) and not to the taste of others, but if it sounds interesting then it comes highly recommended by me.

Summary: