Short Essay #1

Kennedy Blose

Great Philosophers: Plato 

Short Essay #1

The gloomy end to Socrates’ life is well known, since he was publicly executed. The question unknown to many, however, begs to know why this famous philosopher was put to death in the first place. Socrates was tried for corrupting the youth and impiety, both of which were the direct results of him asking philosophical questions. For those who are unaware, Socrates was famous for his philosophical method of Socratic questioning, where he would ask a number of questions leading to a central theme or idea- the line of questioning was seemingly a harmless way of achieving the truth, but interpreted the wrong way looked impious.

Philosophy throughout the ages has persistently been a threat to different groups of people, and this fact lead to many tragedies- including the death of Socrates. It seems crucial that the Republic, written after the death of Socrates, would feature none other than Plato’s teacher as the central interlocutor. Not only is Socrates the focal voice of the Republic, but he advocates justice, wisdom, courage, and moderation as the central- good- virtues that can be found in both the individual and society, and that a just life is worth living. The Republic seems to be a forum in which Plato argues for both the benefits that philosophy has on the individual and those that it has on public and political structures as well. This argument, in theory, would show how philosophers shouldn’t be condemned or executed (this point being made even more clearly by Plato’s use of the wrongfully executed Socrates), but should be revered for their wisdom and the benefits they could bestow on individuals and societies.

The entire city in speech was constructed as an allegory to the individual in order to determine what justice is. Justice turned out to be each part of the city doing its own designated part. The city was divided into classes, each of which encompassed a different virtue. The city, in turn, is a political reimagining of the virtues of the soul. Plato uses the city as an image of how philosophy could be applied to politics. This is highlighted in the rulers of the cities that Socrates discusses. One way in which Plato uses Socrates to show the benefits of philosophy on a political regime is through the guardians.

The guardians were the ruling class to Socrates’ three part city in speech. Each of the citizens in the city in speech were naturally inclined to one type of virtue, with the guardians “in his nature be philosophic, spirited, swift, and strong” (376c). The guardians, in order to be able to wisely rule the city, must be philosophic in their nature- a lover of knowledge. For philosophy (in this sense) is only a person who seeks out the most knowledge possible about whatever they’re naturally inclined to. By creating a ruler who is also a philosopher, that ruler would be able to use knowledge and wisdom in ruling their city, and in turn would provide what is necessary for the city and be a great ruler. Philosophy in this light heavily aids politics and would be beneficial for those who used it in their political ruling.

After having altered the city in speech to include women and children in common (an idea that was incredibly radical for the time period), Socrates claims that the only way this city could be possible was through the implementation of philosopher kings (473 d). After introducing the necessity of philosopher kings, Socrates goes on a Socratic rant about how the love of something is the love of every aspect of it, not just a part. He talks about beauty, how people love beautiful things, but no one appreciates beauty itself (479a). This emphasizes that a true philosopher, who is a lover of wisdom, would love all of wisdom. This implies that they would need to know what is, and “what is entirely, is entirely knowable” (477a). In an ideal world, a true philosopher would explore all knowledge and be incredibly wise. This would make for an ideal ruler because he would be able to use his wisdom to properly rule the people, hence the philosopher kings. Even in the real world, someone who employs their time to gaining knowledge would become wise and in turn would still make a fine ruler, leading to the point Plato could be making through Socrates that philosophy is a potential positive and beneficial aspect to the individual and society.  

It is important to note that in Book 4, justice is found to be “the having and doing of one’s own…for which his nature made him naturally most fit” (433a-434a), and throughout the Republic Socrates’ stresses the importance of doing one’s own work and only one’s own work in order for there to be harmony (moderation) in the city (and in analogy to the soul). This, in extension, seems to apply to philosophy as well- that only those naturally inclined to philosophize should. This can be seen when Socrates mentions the philosophy kings in Book 5, “Thus, when they have come plainly to light, one will be able to defend oneself, showing that it is by nature fitting for them both to engage in philosophy and to lead a city, and for the rest not to engage in philosophy and to follow the leader” (474b-c). While philosophy can be largely beneficial, it too needs to be left to those naturally inclined to the virtue of wisdom.

The Republic has many interpretations to its meanings, but it cannot be denied that it casts philosophy in a favorable light in terms of the self and society. By using Socrates to convey this message, Plato seems to casts some significance on the need to see the innocence of philosophy by using his executed mentor. By showing how a philosopher could be a great ruler, and showing a definition of philosophy that is the innocent search of knowledge, Plato is able to reassure the public of the harmless intentions of philosophy and in turn philosophers.