The Republic by Plato Analysis Essay

Athens, often referred to as the birthplace of democracy, but it should also be examined for its creation of an idea that is the complete opposite. Socrates proposed an idea in which philosophy would be the sole control over the governing politics of the city state of Athens. His contribution, the philosopher king, is the focus of Plato’s “The Republic” in which Socrates explains why such a ruler is not just beneficial, but necessary to the city state of Athens. The idea of a single of a few kings that would rule all of Athens was completely unheard of as their country was built on the right of every person to have a fair say in governing themselves. This king was the connection between the endless pursuit of knowledge and the laws of a country. Philosophic ideals are the invisible hands that make a virtuous political system that exists to serve the people.   

First, Socrates establishes what makes philosophers unique in being able to rule a kingdom. He begins by explaining the distinction between philosophers and “the lovers of hearing and the lovers of sight” (Republic 476b). The lovers of the sights and the sounds can only appreciate scenery and music as sublime or wonderful, but they are unable to understand the nature of beauty itself. Socrates explains these pure natures as the Form of Beauty or the Form of Ugliness. They are exactly what they are and nothing else, and are what give meaning to everything that these ideas can be applied to. Fake philosophers are only able to witness that which participates in being beautiful or detestable but only philosophers have access to the pure form of these ideas. They are “rather than lovers of opinion, those who delight in each thing that is itself” (Republic 480a) because their knowledge is of an immutable truth that can only apply to what is completely.  This kind of knowledge, especially of the virtues, necessarily makes the philosophers the most dependable influences of politics. Given that a philosopher strives for only the truth, he will always be honest to the people. Furthermore, his desire to learn begets the pleasure of the soul and away from the pleasures of the body producing a person that does not give into his desires towards avarice or lust. Every characteristic of a philosopher displaces him to be the most adequate to rule the state and thus Socrates argues that philosophy should shape the government. 

Although knowing these ideas allows philosophers to be just and virtuous to a degree other citizens cannot, Adeimantus counters that most philosophers he sees are not fit to be the king for two reasons. He says that they either “become quite queer, not to say completely vicious” (Republic 487d) or they become “useless to the cities” (Republic 487d). Surprisingly, Socrates concedes this notion as being true and goes so far as to picture this situation similar to that of a captain and his crew. He analogizes the captain to the people of Athens and compares the savagery of the crew in their desperate ploy to gain the favor of the captain to the current unfavorable state of Athens. The “sailors are quarreling with one another about the piloting” (Republic 488b) and “they claim it isn’t even teachable and are ready to cut to pieces the man who says it is” (Republic 488b). In this state, society only accepts those that do not have the philosophical ideals, but instead those that are able to realize the greedy ambitions of the people. Any philosopher who tries to become the next leader would be turned down without a second thought. This leads to the vicious philosophers who are corrupted in their rise to fame as they are only wanted because of their intelligence rather than their want of truth. Additionally, “the true pilot will really be called a stargazer” (Republic 288e), analogous to the philosophers who have not been corrupted but regardless are shunned because they did not devote their efforts to be appealing to the uneducated masses. The problem here is not the inability for philosophers to be a part of politics, but rather that politics is not allowing philosophy to join because of the way that society has become. Despite this, Socrates argues that if a philosopher king would exist the potential of philosophy would not go to waste but instead the full potential of the philosophers will be completely utilized in making a system of politics led by the most qualified. They would be able to bring Athens out of its deplorable state and towards an era of real happiness. The citizens would not argue against the takeover by a philosopher king as he would not “prove to be a bad craftsman of moderation, justice, and vulgar virtue as a whole” (Republic 500d). Once they have reached a more ideal state, then philosophers are able to teach their ideas and bring more people to understand the true nature of everything. Socrates proposes teaching children at a younger age about philosophy and making the prospect of becoming a full-time philosopher more accessible and intriguing. Over time more and more people would come to understand what philosophers are trying to achieve and they would become the opposite of the previously mentioned crew and finally see the true pilot as the best fit to sail the seas. Thus, philosophy has found its way into society as not just the foundation of policy making and government, but also the control and rule of it. Socrates has opened the red sea between politics and philosophy through the rule of a philosopher king that is undeniably accepted as being good for the people. Nonetheless, there is one final hurdle to overcome before accepting this version of politics which is the philosopher king himself. 

Once again Socrates concedes another point to his great invention as he accepts that producing such a perfect and all-knowing philosopher will prove to be immensely difficult. A future philosopher king must “be tested in the labors, fears, and pleasures [...] and moreover [...] it must be given gymnastic studies to see whether it will be able to bear the greatest studies” (Republic 503e). The king must go through the most rigorous training and education to have a strong grasp in every subject because he must be able to pursue knowledge in every aspect of life. In addition to having sought each of these studies to the furthest degree, there is one greatest study that must be completely understood. Socrates says, “the idea of the good is the greatest study and that it’s by availing oneself of it along with just things and the rest that they become useful and beneficial” (Republic 505a). The idea of good is exceedingly complex to the point that Socrates explains to Glaucon, “it’s out of the range of our present thrust to attain the opinions I now hold about it. But I’m willing to tell what looks like a child of the good and most similar to it” (Republic 506e). To even begin to try and describe what the good is to Glaucon, Socrates is compelled to start his explanation with a less complete version of it. He compares the offspring to the sun as when the sun shines over the eyes can see, but when a shade covers the sun, everything is dimmed. Similarly, the good illuminates the soul and allows the soul to gain intelligence, but when the soul is shown something dark, it does not gain knowledge but rather opinions. Socrates explains that the good is “what provides the truth to the things known and gives power to the one who knows” (Republic 509a). The idea of the good is an ideal and a truth unlike the other truths because it is universal. The good can give someone who understands it the ability to know the complete truth to everything. Philosopher kings who have reached this level of intelligence are the absolute leaders as they understand something that is inherent in every human being and are able to bring it out of them. Eventually, the country reaches a peak at which philosophers are teaching the rest the nature of which something is, and they too, are able to gain intelligence and understand the truth to living a joyous and meaningful life. It is, however, the fact that a person must reach this unattainable final step, to become a legitimate philosopher king, that Socrates’ improved edition of Athenian democracy, in which philosophy has taken complete control over politics, is not tangible. It is just simply impossible for someone who is of the human race to reach the ultimate understanding of life. Nevertheless, philosophy should play a large role, maybe even the principal role, in politics as the strive to gain the idea of the good is a goal that would fit perfectly into what politics was made for. Politics serves to be the motivation for a citizen to be better and to live an examined life. It is meant to serve the people and just as the ideal philosopher is fit to command the state, pure philosophy is suited to guiding the questions and conclusions in politics. 

Socrates’ philosopher king is the most profound inclusion to the realm of politics and government with one major flaw, an actual such person existing. Philosophy should be in the minds of all who are involved in politics but should not be the sole ruler or king, knowing that no such perfect philosopher exists. While it is agreed that philosophers would make great leaders as they understand the truth to many ideas and forms, the universal standard of what is good has yet to be established by any. Regardless, philosophical ideals should still be the influence and the goals to strive in constructing a political society that is made for the people.