ADVERTISEMENTS:
Plato: Life, Works and His Place in History!
There is a controversy about the date of birth and the majority opinion is he was born in 427 B.C. and died in 347 B.C. in Athens which was involved in the Peloponnesian war (430-404). The war was between Athens and Sparta.
Pericles was a great apostle of Athenian democracy which flourished between 500 B.C. and 321 B.C. From history we come to know that Athenian democracy was direct democracy and Pericles supported and worked for its development.
Plato had good connection with the family which was intimately associated with both democracy and aristocracy. This connection put a clear imprint about these two political forms in his mind. Because of this connection Plato had a natural inquisitiveness about politics and political career which finally made him interested about politics.
After the death of Pericles Athenian democracy fell in disgrace because there was severe infighting among various political parties which ultimately put a very bad name on the body of democracy.
Again, Plato had the misfortune to witness the squabbles among democracy, oligarchy and other forms of government. This we may call struggle among the classes which was between oligarchy and democracy.
Moreover, there were several groups in oligarchy which were involved in infighting among themselves. It was the misfortune that Plato had to gather bad experience about the contemporary political condition.
The noted interpreters of Western political thought are of opinion that his contemporary incidents encouraged him to form opinion about politics. J. S. Mcclelland rightly says “political experience of the Athens of his youth and early manhood appears to have sickened Plato”.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Plato thought that the political turmoil was generally responsible for the general degradation of justice, morality and other universal values. But Plato’s mind was imbued with these universally accepted values (justice, morality, virtue etc.) and he wanted to find out a way which could ensure the revival of all these universal values.
The contemporary politics was practically shorn of all accepted values and moral concepts and this miserable situation pained Plato in a considerable way. He was largely convinced that politics, in order to be worthy, ought to be associated with the good qualities such as virtue, morality, justice etc.
Diagnosing the degrading political condition of his time Plato arrived at the conclusion that politics must be associated with virtue, morality and its supreme goal shall be to establish justice in society.
Plato believed that politics must aim at establishing virtue and justice and in this regard it must not make any compromise. We have earlier noted that Plato’s chief concern was how to make politics the chief way of establishing morality, justice and -virtue in society.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
We are of opinion that keeping this noble objective in mind he planned to set up an ideal state whose main concern shall be to ensure justice and virtue.
At the age of forty Plato bought a grove of trees in a green suburb just outside the city walls and founded there his famous academy called after Athenian hero Academous. He began to teach various subjects in his Academy and we may say the intellectual life of Plato started with the setting up of the Academy.
It is said that he had a definite philosophy and clear conception about politics and other related subjects. Though Plato was not the master of all subjects he guided the teaching of subjects. Plato spent the rest forty years of his life in teaching various subjects. Though various subjects were taught in the Academy special emphasis was given to moral teaching.
The teachers of the Academy were directed by Plato to streamline their method of teaching which would be able to change the mind of people. Plato had no intention to impart formal or business-like education.
His conviction was that moral teaching could make a man suitable for an ideal or moral or good polis. He thought that for a good and ideal state or society the citizens must be made good, moral and virtuous.
The entire education system should be made or formed in that perspective. In other words Plato’s objective was to set up an education-system for the sole purpose of establishing an ideal state.
The scholars of Western political thought have arrived at the conclusion that the influence of Plato’s Academy was quite widespread and its good name reached various parts of East and touched Alexander.
Plato authored several books such as The Statesman, The Laws and Republic. Of all these books the most important is the Republic. We read Plato for his good ideas and the Republic contains the best part of his philosophical ideas. Besides the Republic the Laws is regarded by many as his second best book. In the Republic Plato has given us an elaborate plan of an ideal state. But he had considerable doubt about the setting up of an ideal state. The concept of ideal state was so much favourite to him that he could not jettison the entire scheme of the ideal state.
In The Laws he gave an alternative plan about a state or polis which would bring about the revival of universal values. He believed that if an ideal state was not feasible a mixed form of government could well be set up.
He wrote another book The Symposium, which deals with homosexuality. Some people think that, this book unearths the bad aspect of Plato’s life and character.
Plato‘s Method:
It is generally observed that Plato is indebted to his teacher and mentor Socrates for many of his ideas and primarily for the method he adopted in his analysis. Socrates, we know, was the originator of dialectic which means the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions. It also implies enquiry into metaphysical contradictions and their solutions. Socrates wrote nothing.
He had several companions or disciples with whom he discussed contemporary social political and other issues and also philosophical problems and after a thorough discussion a final opinion was formed.
If we go through his .The Republic we shall find that Plato, along with his disciples, raised issues of great importance in the form of questions—and answers were collected from them.
The Republic also shows that Plato gave answers to questions his disciples raised. In many cases Plato was the final “arbitrator” of many controversial issues or problems. The persons who participated in the discussion enjoyed complete academic freedom and this quite enriched the analysis.
The academic freedom and the dialectics both constituted the body of Plato’s analysis and the entire thought system. Writing about Plato’s method and related matters Prof. Barker, a renowned authority on Greek Political Thought, writes: “Socrates desired to awaken thought. He was the gadfly who stung men into a sense of truth, he gave the shock of the torpedo fish, and he practiced the art of midwifery and brought through to birth. He appealed to what was in man’s mind….he called to the intelligence of man and so it was with Plato.”
Plato was a teacher and, in fact, he was a great teacher. He had an idea and a philosophy which he imparted to the students of the Academy. The other teachers of the Academy had the freedom of teaching but no freedom to depart from Plato’s method and technique. Plato set up the norm of teaching which was to inculcate the feeling to know more and more. In other words, Plato and all other teachers endeavoured sincerely to stimulate the urge to know more and more. Both Plato and other teachers were averse to spoon-feeding method of teaching.
This intention led him to adopt the method of dialectics. The dialectics was used to proceed step by step and after a good deal of debate a final stage was arrived at. Plato also used analogy. In order to make the point clear Plato liberally used analogy.
This method he borrowed from Socrates. The analogies used by Plato were generally collected from nature—particularly from the animal world.
The administration of the state, according to Plato, is run by the politician and the quality of the administration depends upon the ability of the politician. But a politician or administrator runs the administration with the help of law.
It is, therefore, obvious that administration, politician, and law all are closely connected. One cannot expect good administration from a bad politician. While making such observations, Plato compared a politician with a physician.
The physicians need not take any help of law, whereas a politician must follow law while running the administration. To him administration was an art and naturally a politician must possess administrative ability.
If a polis is not properly administered the state will never be able to reach its goal. So the politician must possess all the good qualities of an administrator.
Plato formed such opinion in the background of experience he gathered from the activities of his contemporary states. Also, to Plato, politics was the supreme art and all politicians cannot have such an art.
Plato thought that only philosopher kings can have such art and for that reason he wanted to make a philosopher the supreme administrator of state. Needless to say that, even today, learned people believe that the management of state administration is no doubt a good art.
Socrates and Plato:
Before entering into the details about the relationship between Plato and Socrates I like to refer the most cogent remark of Maxey. He says, “In Plato Socrates lived again”. The implication of this short remark is that many of the meaningful ideas of Socrates found their reverberation and elaboration in Plato. Of course, this does not mean that Plato was the “unvarying facsimile” of his master.
He, in many ways, followed his master. But, like his master, Plato was a great genius. The fact is that the mind and soul of Plato completely absorbed the thought and spirit of Socrates.
We can say the method and ideas of Socrates found their resuscitation in Plato. Both Socrates and Plato were influenced by the contemporary political incidents.
Both had great belief in democracy but the functioning of contemporary democratic governments created a lot of frustration in their mind and, ultimately, they lost faith in democracy. Many of the good ideas that we call Platonic had their origin in Socrates.
Maxey further observes:
It is certain that the genius of Plato deserves no less credit than the influence of Socrates. Plato borrowed the basic concept of dialectics from Socrates and he adopted it in the analysis of various ideas.
In his early years Plato came under the great influence of Socrates and their relation was not only teacher and student but also a relation between two friends. Socrates was compelled to the maximum price to open his mind and thought in academic matters and it was not possible for Plato to tolerate the inhuman treatment which Socrates was forced to swallow.
Like Socrates, Plato believed that everyone must enjoy the freedom of speech and thought and in The Republic he—times without number— emphasized this. In the Academy Plato taught and advised his students to adopt freedom of thought and speech—this he inherited from Socrates.
Place of Plato in History of Political Thought:
The place of Plato in the history of political thought is really inestimable. His intellectual heritage, observes one critic, has been exercising the minds of philosophers, political thinkers, jurists and sociologists for about twenty-four centuries.
The unique longevity and topicality, continues the same critic, of his conceptions are mainly traceable to a remarkable combination of creative genius and imagination of Plato the poet with the profound insight into the most fundamental and ever new problems of human existence; of Plato the philosopher and investigator.
The combination of this creative genius and imagination dominated all Western thought and not simply its political thought. The thinkers and philosophers of all sorts received tremendous impetus from Plato. Berki says that Plato may not be everybody’s saint, but undoubtedly he is everybody’s teacher.
The reasons of the greatness of Plato, according to Berki, may be the following. His intellectual greatness, his almost incredible richness and refinement of thought have been highly acclaimed by all sections of people.
In the most precise way and in the form of dialogue he had entered into the depth of every subject. This implies his vast experience and knowledge.
Plato’s political philosophy is explosive and revolutionary. His concept of philosopher-king, his ideas of the classification of governments and the origin of different types of government are regarded as original and, to some extent, explosive. Community of property and wives is his most revolutionary thought. So far as his communism is concerned many people call him the precursor of Marxian socialism. Maxey’s comment in this connection may be remembered. He says: “virtually all socialistic and communistic thought has its roots in Plato.
Were he alive today Plato would be the reddest of Reds and would no doubt hasten to Russia with the same expectant enthusiasm he displayed in answering the call of the ancient tyrant of Syracuse.
” Another commentator has said ‘the ideal state of Plato and that of the Russian Communists have many elements in common; both regard private property as the sole source of all evil; both would eliminate wealth and poverty; both favour a collective education of the children exempted from paternal care; both regard art and literature only as a means of state education; both would control all science and ideology in the interest of the state; both have a rigid central dogma; a kind of state religion to which all individual and social activity must be subordinated.”
In the light of the above observation it has further been observed that there is very little incompatibility between Plato on the one hand and Marx and Lenin on the other hand. Marx’s historical materialism is not very much different from Plato’s idealism.
There was nothing abstruse and otherworldly about Plato’s idealism; it rested on truly materialistic foundations. Plato announced his ideal by listing it with reason and experience. Plato was very much a materialist. He had clear conception and sound knowledge about the material world.
The dismal functioning of several Greek city states created a lot of frustration in his mind and, in the background of it, he desired to set up a state which would be the guiding star of all practical states. He had a close relationship with the real world. So he cannot be regarded as an impractical man and dream-walker.
Plato’s influence upon other thinkers and philosophers must be taken into account. German philosopher Hegel borrowed his dialectics and then Marx applied it to the analysis of historical materialism.
Foundation of Rousseau’s body-politic is Plato’s idealism. Social idealism of Locke, Milton and Goethe has drawn inspiration from Plato. St. Augustine was also indebted to Plato. He transformed the secular conception of Platonic justice into a religious one.
There is a striking similarity between Plato’s doctrine of ideal state and the Utopia enunciated by Thomas More and Companella. One Marxist thinker has said “founders of Utopian socialism borrowed from Plato not only the conception of perfect state, but also the faith in its practicability and a number of theoretical propositions.”
This Marxist thinker has further observed: “This influence is traceable even in the Utopian projects of social restructuring put forward by Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Robert Owen who owe to Plato some of their schemes and propositions (e.g., social stratification due to the division of labour, the harmony of passions and harmonious society, the place of education, the position of women etc.).”
Plato has praised the legitimate monarchy which is another name of limited monarchy. His curse of tyrannical rule and advocacy of mixed government had influenced many thinkers of the 16th century. They were dissatisfied with the functioning of the absolute monarchy.
The supporters of the limited monarchy were called monarchomachs. They raised their arms against the authoritarian activities of the absolute monarchy. Scholars are of opinion that this general discontent had its root in Plato’s thought. Plato was not an apostle of democracy, nor was he an advocate of absolutism.
We know that Spinoza and Hobbes applied geometrical method in their analysis of politics and society. But this method can be traced to Plato. Plato treated politics as royal whose purpose was to weave together the different virtues. Hobbes applied it to his analysis of state.
His state was a complex mechanism knocked together by different human passions. Plato advocated one civic religion for his ideal state. Spinoza, Rousseau and Pufendorf also recommended a compulsory state religion. Upon the political ideas of Voltaire, Diderot, Holbach and Helvetius we find the influence of Plato’s philosopher-king and wise-laws.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Hegel has said that Plato’s ideal state is not an empty and abstract ideal; it is the epitome of Greek morality. Kant’s notions of state and politics resemble those of Plato. The structure of German bourgeois society is based on Platonic model of ideal state. This structure was sketched by Fichte. Kant has said that it is not possible that the philosophers will be kings. But the ideals and philosophy of philosophers must guide the administrators.
Several writers such as Bertrand Russell, Karl Popper and Ernst Topitsch have severally criticized Plato. In their opinion, Plato is the father of authoritarian state and modern totalitarianism. To Plato the state was absolute and the individual had no special or separate identity.
He had to sacrifice his interests at the altar of the state. In order to arrest the discord among the classes and individuals Plato denied the freedom of the individual. Even he went to the extent of recommending community of property and wives for his citizens.
His great disciple Aristotle did not approve his doctrine of communism. Popper says that modern communist totalitarianism has been derived from Platonic communism. Bertrand Russell, has said that Plato introduced authoritarianism in politics.
Plato was suspicious about the practicability of the ideal state. “In heaven there is laid up a pattern of it”—says Plato. In real world the ideal state will never come into existence. On the basis of Plato’s suspicion Berki has said that although the Platonic ideal has earned an overwhelming appeal, in reality no state has ever been set up in Platonic model. Even no state of the real world resembles Plato’s ideal state. Here lies the failure of Plato.