Platos The Philosopher Ruler - Essay Example

One of the major themes of Plato's "The Philosopher Ruler" in the work The Republic is the belief in ideal characteristics that make up the truest ruler and an idea that there are such persons who are naturally inclined to these qualities deemed indispensable to being a ruler. The idea is one that highlights the belief that leaders are born, though the natural skills can be honed. It therefore contains exclusive elements that identify some as born with superior natures to others. It then presents itself as being essentially the archetype of many of the characteristics of the democracy (and even some of a socialist state) that are discussed in "Pericles' Funeral Oration" as recorded by the work of Thucydides on the Peloponnesian War. In some ways, too, Pericles' account of his democracy can also be seen as ideal. On certain subjects, therefore, concerning the types or descriptions of government and heroic men advocated in these two works, while some amount of concurrence can be seen between them, some differences can also be detected. Close attention to the texts of both works give the idea, of an underlying unity, though they do represent differing (i.e. ethereal vs. corporeal) levels of a similar idea. One of the first ideas presented in "The Philosopher Ruler" is one that describes citizens as courageous warriors who would under no inducement desert their positions in battle. This seems an appropriate beginning when one considers the circumstances for which persons are gathered in "Pericles' Funeral Oration." The deaths being mourned are those of warriors who have seemingly embodied the virtue being lauded here in Plato's description of the ideal citizens. The men have demonstrated the ultimate courage and have died in the service of their country, proving themselves to be true patriots of the order described by Plato. Yet Plato seems to be concerned with more than just these expressions of courage. In fact, as Schofield (1999) writes, "What Plato is interested in is justice and moral excellence and the question of the unity or complexity of the human mind" (p. 4). He describes an excellence that lies far beyond the physical and which expresses an ideal. In Plato's record of the dialectic between Socarates and Glaucon, one finds Glaucon inquiring whether or not ideals can or have ever been fully expressed in the actual. He wonders whether persons have ever truly been what they have been said to be. He says, "Is it not the nature of things that, whatever people think, practice should come less close to truth than theory" (Plato, 1952, p. 262). This question appears particularly pertinent in view of the type of oration being given by Pericles. This speech attempts to show forth (among other things) the works and characters of the men who fought and died for their state. Pericles seems to express a similar idea, yet one that is (paradoxically) opposite to that expressed by Glaucon. While Glaucon argues from the point of the ideal-wondering whether language or even the real occurrences on earth have ever been shown to express it precisely, Pericles worries that language itself might fall short in expressing the actual. He says, "It would be enough, I think, for their goodness to be proclaimed in action" (Thucydides, 1972, p. 144) as he expresses concern at being able to accurately speak on it. Therefore, while Pericles considers the exploits of the heroes as possessing ideal qualities that may not be utterable, Glaucon contends that such exploits (being expressions of the actual) could never attain the heights of the ideal. While Socrates and Glaucon appear to praise the virtues of the intellect as ones that are indispensable to the constitution of a ruler, one finds that they also describe physical attributes and training as desirable qualities for a leader to possess. They mention the grooming of youths who have distinguished themselves in attention to philosophy taught them in their youth, and who have also distinguished themselves in the physical aspects of training as well. Hanson and Heath support this in their assertion about the ideas of Plato's Republic. In Who Killed Homer: The Demise of Classical Education and the Recovery of Greek Wisdom they write, "[the work] assumes that before a man can speculate, contemplate, educate, and argue, he must figure out how to eat and fight" (2001, p. 58). They compare this with modern day society, in which "the soldier and the farmer may be forgotten or even despised" (2001, p. 58). In comparison, Pericles seems to hold a view that includes this physical aspect, but yet that says very little regarding the intellectual side of these men who have done exploits. Yet, it is worthy of note that though these men were war heroes, Pericles has not indicated that they should also be considered rulers. What both works strongly concur on is pointing toward the state as one that provides education to all and takes youths through leveled grades until a place at the top is found for the few who have shown themselves worthy of the estate. This socialist policy has found itself represented in several countries of the modern day world that offer free hierarchical education and who place high value on those who have attained the highest level. It is high achievers like these who were most likely responsible for handing down the state as it existed then (as a free country) to the Periclean occupiers. "Courage" and "virtue" are the precise words used by Pericles to describe the qualities possessed by the ancestors and forefathers whose ranks these newly dead have now joined, and who have formed the state by their noble acts (Thucydides, 1972, p. 144). Though it seems that the valiancy possessed by these dead soldiers were centered on the physical, when their exploits are described as part of the works of those who have handed down the state as a legacy, it might be seen that the intellectual powers that would allow them to conceive and bring about such a state are also being praised in the oration. In accordance with this, Socrates says to Glaucon that "if a man can be properly said to love something, it must be clear that he feels affection for it as a whole, and does not love part of it to the exclusion of the rest" (Plato, 1952, p. 267). Therefore, if Pericles' speech can be seen as expressing a certain regard for virtue, then according to Plato's ideal as described in "The Philosopher Ruler," his description of the men as virtuous can certainly be taken as including all the properties of virtue, physical as well as intellectual. The principal idea of Plato's "The Philosopher Ruler" states that philosophers are most suited to the office of ruling a country or even of drafting its constitution. This seems opposed to one of the major themes of "Pericles' Funeral Oration," advocates the egalitarian treatment of persons in a country, declaring that all may rise to any office he or she pleases. Yet, it seems that the existence of a funeral oration of this type-mandated by lawgivers as a tool to herald the virtues of a people and their state-rests profoundly upon the ideas presented in The Republic's "The Philosopher Ruler." It is worthy of mention here that Pericles, rather than speak of the deeds of his country's heroes, chooses rather to speak of the "spirit" with which the Athenians bore the trials of warfare, and the "constitution and way of life" that led to the greatness of that people. These reflect the spirit of the true philosopher, who would minimize the effects of the physical (though not disregarding them entirely) in order to maximize those of the spiritual and intellectual. It may be considered, therefore, that Pericles himself represents one of the philosopher rulers that Plato describes. One area in which the Periclean model of the state concurs with that described by Socrates in Plato's "The Philosopher Ruler" is in the purposeful adoption of the philosophical ruler by the members of the state, and their agreement to be obedient to these rulers that they have chosen. In The Last Days of Socrates, Socrates describes this in saying "you must either persuade your country or do whatever it orders, and patiently submit to any punishment that it imposes" (Plato, 2003, p. 91). Even in this work one finds persuasion for the philosopher to aspire to the office of one who can influence the rule and laws of his country. "The Philosopher Ruler's" speakers describe the tractability of the minds of the citizens. It explains that with the right kind of education they too would be able to view the philosopher as the ideal ruler and in that case agree to the social democratic state formulated by such a mind. The citizens would also adhere to the regulations put forth by such a state and respect the rulers thereof. The Periclean state as described by the text is similar in that they too are obedient "to those whom [they] put in positions of authority" (Thucydides, 1972, p. 146 ). This idea implies that the persons were chosen upon some identification of their merit and placed in positions based on these virtues. The parable or simile of the persons strapped in a cave before a large fire and allowed only to see the shadows of people rather than people themselves is given by Socrates as a representation of the life lived by persons who are tethered to the world by their corporeal senses. These persons see only the shadow of the real-its effects. Having seen this all their lives though, it represents the ultimate reality to them. The philosopher has been liberated from the chains of the senses and has been privy to the reality that casts its shadow on the universe. This knowledge renders him or her unwilling to have much to do with what has been proven to be unreal. Yet philosophers must lay aside this feeling and take up the matters of the state. This expression is present to some degree in the oration by Pericles, though it demonstrates people being preoccupied with winning honor and glory for the country. The similarity can be extended to include the necessity that warriors feel when they go to war, though their willingness is tempered by knowledge of the death with which they flirt. Their own humanity is apparent to them, though they hope to complete high and valiant acts. Pericles echoes an idea of this kind in his reference to what is lost when a good man turns from his life and toward the act of war. He wrote, "The people who have the most excuse for despising death are not the wretched and the unfortunate, who have no hope of doing well for themselves, but those who run the risk of a complete reversal in their lives, and who would feel the difference most intensely, if things went wrong for them" (Thucydides, 1972, p. 150). In a similar way, those who have the most excuse for despising being a ruler of the state are those philosophers who know the higher way of life that accompanies an elevated mind. These persons would feel most keenly the effects of being necessarily concerned with the worldly matters that accompany the job of the ruler. However, once philosophers get used to "seeing in the dark," they "will see a thousand times better than [others]" (Plato, 1952, p. 324). Like the warrior, this knowledge renders the philosopher ruler the most worthy of the calling and the most able to do well in the position. A look at the ruling class as described in "The Philosopher Ruler" gives the idea (as briefly mentioned before) of there being superiority in the estate of a man who possesses the philosophical qualities to become a ruler. In fact, the text describes philosophy as "impossible among the common people" (Plato, 1952, p. 289). Yet it goes on to declare that all men have a certain innate ability to acquire knowledge. Socrates says to Glaucon that "the capacity for knowledge is innate in each man's mind" (1952, p. 322), and this essentially places all men on an equal footing, and prefigures a democratic state. In this way, the Periclean speech agrees with the ideas of the Platonic text in that Pericles describes his state as one that accepts all and is prejudiced against none. He makes the proud claim that "no one, so long as it is in him to be of service to the state, is kept in political obscurity because of poverty" (Thucydides, 1972, p. 145). This is reminiscent of the declaration that "all men are created equal." It appears that his civilization is inclined to judge men on a basis that is similar to the merits explained in "The Philosopher Ruler" and even this demonstrates some similarity to civilizations of today. The same speech by Socrates described above goes on to place limitations its own liberality, but it still does not redress its own expression of the freedom of all humans to aspire to great philosophical position of or other noble estate. It declares all humans as having that innate capacity for knowledge, provided that they also possess the will to turn from distractions and have their minds affixed to the source of knowledge: "the mind must be turned away from the world of change until its eye can bear to look straight at reality" (Plato, 1952, p. 322). The definition of "common" then seems to be in reference to those who do not turn from the world and toward ideals. Related to this, Socrates describes the love of beauty as an ideal and identifies it as one of the qualities of a philosopher. Yet this love ought not to overpower the thinker to distraction. Rather, he who appreciates the beauty must be more drawn to the one ideal and archetypal beauty than the many slivers of it that exist in the world. This idea is also expressed in the text of "Pericles' Funeral Oration." He states that though the members of his state are lovers of beauty, this love "does not lead to extravagance" (Thucydides, 1972, p. 147). They appreciate the beauties in the world alongside their appreciation of the beauties of the higher order (1972, p. 147). It is in fact described as though it were one of the freedoms of this liberal state, and is used to underscore the liberty that was granted by Athens' constitution and possessed by its citizens. The state created by these laudable philosopher kings (as described by Plato through the discourse of Socrates) is one in which the laws cater to the well-being of all people and not just a selected few. It seeks out the unity of all the persons of the state and encourages each to do the work he or she is suited for in order that it might be of benefit to all. This idea is reminiscent of the communist one that takes "from each according to his ability" and gives "to each according to his need" (Marx, 1875). It sets each person as a link in the chain of societal being, and holds each responsible for the unity of society and the happiness of his fellow man (Plato, 1952, p. 324). This description possesses some similarity to that state described by Pericles, yet it holds some subtle differences as well. The Periclean state allows freedom for all men to aspire to leadership, as the platonic state does. It also depicts a state in which persons are not just concerned with themselves, but are concerned with the government and well-being of the state (Thucydides, 1972, p. 147). However, this concern is not exacting and does not allow encroachment on others' freedoms. Neither does it hold all men responsible for the happiness of others. The extent to which others contribute to the happiness of a person is to allow him the freedom and tolerance to pursue goals and interests that do not inflict harm upon neighbours. Therefore, whereas Socrates describes his ideal state as using "compulsion to unite all citizens" (Plato, 1952, p. 000), Pericles describes his Athenian state as one in which people are "free and tolerant in [their] private lives; but in public affairs [they] keep to the law" (1972, p. 145). Some of the good attributed by Pericles to the state share similarities with the Platonic ideal, in that they too seem to reflect an ideal. Pericles describes the character of the state as though it represented just one man and not the entire country of heterogeneous citizens. Descriptions used are of such virtues as regarding wealth as a tool to be used well and not a thing of which one boasts. Poverty, also, is seen as not something to be ashamed of in itself, but rather as a challenging thing to work hard against and prevent (Thucydides, 1972, p. 147). Yet these are virtues that one wouldn't consider everyone in a randomly selected crowd to possess. It appears that Pericles is here describing an ideal state (a state of his mind) rather than the one that truly existed in Athens. Therefore, though Plato's work represents the formulation of an archetype and Pericles' speech has been considered a description of the actual, it might be argued that Pericles often steps over into Plato's domain by applying to his state qualities that might best be described as idealistic. In Plato's work The Republic Socrates describes a state which in his opinion does not exist. Yet a relatively contemporary description of the state (by Thucydides) in which Socrates lived depicts an Athens that comes close to the ideal description. The philosopher ruler as described by Socrates denotes a person who is at home in the realm of the archetype and can therefore most accurate rule in the temporal institutions modelled after that type. The ideas represented in Pericles' Funeral Oration compares with this in that several of the ideals expressed by Socrates and his protg have been put into place by the Athenians and are heralded by Pericles. As orator, Pericles makes it clear that he does follow the instructions of those who have gone before him-the same ones who conceived the ideal. Therefore, the similarities between the two views may not be so surprising if one considers what Pericles fears: that he exaggerates the qualities of both men and state to fit the Platonic ideal. Both essays also purport that a certain level of virtue and high-mindedness must be possessed by those who would act in favor of the state. However, while "The Philosopher King" contends that a person's elevation above pettiness must extend to the realms pure thought or reason, the oration by Pericles gives the impression of temporal pleasures and pastimes' being acceptable in moderation. Overall, though one work is concerned with the ideal conception of the ruler and his state and the other is concerned with an exaggerated and even idealistic version of such a state, the two demonstrate that only to a certain extent can the substance be a true representation of the ideal. References Hanson, V. and Heath, J. (2001). Who Killed Homer: The Demise of Classical Education and the Recovery of Greek Wisdom. San Francisco: Encounter. Marx, K. (1875). "Critique of the Gotha Program." London: Penguin. Plato. (2003). "Crito." The Last Days of Socrates. London: Penguin (transl.Tredennick and Tarrant). Plato. (1952). "The Philosopher Ruler." The Republic. Chicago: Chicago Uni Press (transl. Jowett). Schofield, M. (1999). Saving the City: Philosopher-Kings and other Classical Paradigms. London: Routledge. Thucydides. (1972). "Pericles' Funeral Oration." The Peloponnesian War. Ringwood: Penguin (transl. Warner). Read More