Robinson 1

The Republic of Plato, Plato, Translated by Alan Bloom, BasicBooks, New

York, 1991 (first
written ca 380 BC), 473, free
The Republic is one of the most significant books in the history of
philosophy (Mcpherran, 2010, 1). The ultimate goal of this text is to
determine the nature of justice at the individual and political scale. The
issues that are raised by this text during said inquiry can analyzed in a wide
variety of ways be they political, social, moral or otherwise (Mcpherran,
2010, 1). In this review I will be analyzing this book from a metaphysical
perspective. Platos thesis for the book from this perspective is that
metaphysics is an essential part of private and public life, the realm of the
forms is the basis of all reality and the only those who have the right
disposition and harmonized souls have access can have access to it. In this
review I will be arguing that Platos thesis is flawed as although the need
for metaphysics and the harmony of the soul are valid beliefs the concept of
the realm of forms and dispositions is irrational. I will first summarize the
book chapter by chapter, demonstrate why I believe Platos thesis is as I
believe to be, then I will analyze its themes to prove my thesis statement.
Book one begins with Socrates going to Athens from a religious
celebration accompanied by his friend Glaucon, son of Ariston (p.3). The
two men are diverted from this path by Polymarchus who instead invites
them to stay at his home instead (p.3). It is upon reaching Polymarchuss

Robinson 2

home that they meet his other guests: Thrasymachus, Charmantides and
Cleitophon (p.4). Present also were Polymarchuss brothers Lysian and
Euthymedus along with his father Cephalus(p.4). During the discussion
Socratese asks Cephalus about the difficulties of growing old (p.4).
Cephalus responds by stating that is the weakness of character not aging
itself that making old age difficult (p.5).
When asked by Socrates Cephalus states that the greatest advantage
of being wealth that it lessens the temptation to engage in evil (p.7).
Cephalus then goes on to define evil as being honest and giving back that
which is owed (p.7). Socratese disagrees stating that if this definition was
true then it would be just to return a weapon to a man who lacks the mental
stability to be entrusted with a weapon (p.7). It is at this point that Cephalus
excuses himself from the room and passes the conversation on to
Polymarchus (p.7). Polymarchus argues that justice is when one is good to
his or her friends and hostile to or her enemies (p.8). Socrates countered
that people often make mistakes with regard to those who they deem to be
friends and enemies thus rendering that concept invalid (p.11).
Thrasymachus angrily intervenes and demands that Socrates give his own
solution (p.13).
Socratese responds by stating that he does not know (p.15).
Thrasymachus argues that justice is defined as the advantage of the
stronger (p.15). What Trasymachus means by this is that the state decides

Robinson 3

what justice is (p.16). Socrates deals with this point in a number of ways.
First he uses logic to force Trasymachus to admit that his view of justice is
the promotion of injustice. He does so by arguing that since rulers make
mistakes that may not be in the interest of these rulers then it would be
unjust to take the position that people being ruled over should obey
anyways just because the rulers are stronger (p.16-17). He then argues that
a political leader should be like the leader of any other craft should rule in
favor of those who are being ruled (p.20).
He then makes the point that a just person will only work to out do an
unjust person and not a just one (p.27). He then makes the point that those
with knowledge only seek to outdo those who lack knowledge as opposed to
ignorant people who will try to outdo the both the ignorant and
knowledgable (p.28). He then states that wisdom is good and ignorance is
bad (p.28). This means that since the just mans reflect wisdom and the
unjust mans actions reflect ignorance thus rendering injustice as the worse
option (p.28). Socratess next argument is that some degree of justice is
necessary even when committing acts of injustice (p.31). Furthermore he
argues that since the Gods are just then unjust people are the enemies of
God (p.13). Finally Socrates argues that injustice is bad because it is bad for
ones quality of life. He does this with the use of two premises. His first the
soul plays a leadership function in life (p.33). The next step is that a bad
soul does not function as well as a good soul as a bad soul manages badly
(p.33).

Robinson 4

Book two starts with Glaucon stating that that there are three types of
good things in the world. The first are things deemed to be good for their
own sake but not out of need like pleasure (p.35). The second category is of
those things that are considered good for their own sake as well as its
consequences like health and sight (p.35). The third category is of those
things that we consider to be good not in and of themselves but rather
because of their outcomes like exercise and medical treatment (p.35-36).
The question presented to Socrates is to which of these categories does
justice belong (p.36)? Socrates answers that Justice belongs to the second
group (p.36). Glaucon disagrees as he believes that most people see as a
necessary evil to prevent chaos and thus belongs to the third group (p.36).
His argument is that that although the benefits of injustice exceed
the benefits of justice people grudgingly accept justice as the way to avoid
the suffering that is associated with injustice (p.36-37). However if
someone could commit injustice without consequence he or she would do so
(p.37). To demonstrate this point he uses the mythical ring of Gyges, a
magical item that grant invisibility to the wearer (p.37). He argues that if
any one were to posses such a ring, just or unjust, said person would
succumb to temptation and use the ring for evil as there would be no
chance of stopping him or her (p.38). Furthermore this mindset is logical as
if one compares the benefits of being just in and of itself with being unjust,
unjust being unjust wins out (p.39).

Robinson 5

Socrates responds first by dividing up justice into two levels: the

individual and the societal (p.45). He states that it is easier to observe
justice at the societal level than the individual level and so it is best to start
there (p.45). He begins by stating that societies originate due of the fact
that no individual is self sufficient, thus requiring individuals to work
together in order to survive (p.46). In order for society to properly function
each individual must be specialized at one task only so as to maximize their
productivity (p.46).
The first basic class of specialists is the producing class who generate
necessary goods like farmers and craftsmen (p.49). A city that is only
composed of these people is referred to as the healthy city by Socrates but
Glaucon disagrees stating that such a city is impossible due to the desire for
luxury goods (p.49). Socrates refers to the city, one that contains luxury
goods to, as the feverish city (p.49). In this city a second non producing
class exists to provide these luxuries like traders and actors (p.50). This city
will need to expand in order to accommodate said luxuries thus creating the
need for war (p.50). The need for war in turn triggers the need for a
specialized warrior class to rule the society known as guardians (p.51).
These guardians will have to be carefully chosen based on if they have
a disposition that lies between gentleness and strength (p.54). The guardian
must also be predisposed toward loving philosophy as this allows him or her
to differentiate between knowledge and ignorance (p.54). The guardians

Robinson 6

must be educated both physically and mentally as well (p.54). Education is

paramount as it shapes the soul like exercise shapes the body (p.54). For
this reason Socrates argues that the education of all of the children should
be state controlled (p.55). His goals with regard to education are two fold
and they concern the gods. The first is that the Gods are purely good and
only responsible for good (p.57). If this is not done the evil will appear to be
good (p.58). The second goal is that the Gods are not to be depicted as
shape-shifters of liars as this will encourage cowardice (p.59).
The most significant theme that comes up in book three is Socratess
continuation of how he feels the guardian class should be guided so as to
work best for the city. The first overarching way in which this would be done
is by censoring any form of art that might lead them to developing
inappropriate attitudes and behavior. First he starts with stating that
guardians should not be led to fear death as this might make them cowardly
so any poems or stories that make this point should be banned (p.63 ). Then
he calls for the censoring of art that portrays the Greek heroes in a negative
light so that the Guardians will only have good role models to look up to
(p.65). In order to teach guardians self restraint all literary works
concerning dishonesty and excess are to be suppressed (p.68). The only
tales and poems of the heroes that will be allowed are those that place them
in a positive light (p.70). When asked by Glaucon about the kind of literary
works concerning everyday people Socrates responds that the literature
writers who praise injustice must be silenced and justice defined properly

Robinson 7

first (p.74 ). Socrates censorship plan extends to other fields of the arts as
well. He has a long list of regulations concerning the kind of music that
needs to be used to enhance the guardians (p.77-79 ). One example of this
is the exclusion of what he refers to as wailing modes (p.77 ). Last of all
are the visual arts like painting, architecture and craftsmanship which
Socrates feels should also only be filtered to ensure that only positive
messages reach the ears of the guardians (p.79-80).
Socrates had other suggestions concerning the lives of the guardians.
The guardians for example should have physical training that is military
rather than athletic in nature as well as dietary restrictions (p.83). More
importantly Socrates believed that the guardians should be cut off from
society in a state funded encampment to live and make rulings
(p.95).Furthermore the guardians were not to have any private wealth lest
it corrupt them (p.95). An extremely important point to note is that Socrates
argues that the guardians should be divided into two classes. The higher
level class is known as the rulers, the core group of older guardians who
would be selected as the best of the guardians (p.91). The lower group, the
auxiliary class, is to play the part of assisting the rulers (p.93). In order to
determine which role a guardian will take on they will be observed from
youth and tested for loyalty, wisdom and resolve (p.91-92).
To make the people accept the legitimacy of this system and be more
patriotic Socrates suggests the use of a lie that states that every citizen is

Robinson 8

born out of the earth (p.94). The earth is their mother and they are all
siblings (p.94). Each persons soul would be composed of a divine metal in
their soul that defines their place in life: gold for the rulers, silver for the
auxiliaries and bronze and iron for everyone else (p.94). Furthermore
children can end up with different divine metals than their parents thus
giving the state the justification required to take those kids and transfer
them to where they are best suited (p.94). To get the guardians on board
with the idea that they should not have any private property the lie will go
further to state that it is unholy for them to interact with gold or silver
because of the gold and silver in them (p.96).
There are a few other points to mention outside of guardians in this
book. Firstly Socrates believed that an important part of education was the
nonsexual love between a man and a boy (p.82). Another is that only people
with curable ailments should be treated (p.87). The chronically ill should be
left to die and the mentally ill should be killed (p88).
Book four starts off with Adeimantus objecting to Socractess idea of
the guardian class on the basis that being a guardian would be an unhappy
way to live due to the lack of private property (p.97). Socrates responds by
arguing that this system is designed to maximize the happiness of the entire
city not just one group in particular (p.97). In any case he argues that
engaging in that king of behavior would undermine the capacity of the
guardians to function (p.98). Socrates goes further to say that in his ideal

Robinson 9

city there would be no wealth or poverty as there will no money (p99). He

argues that wealth leads to sloth and poverty leads to a lack of basic needs
thus undermining both of their abilities to excel in a specialty (p.99).
Adeimantus disagrees on the basis that a moneyless city would not be able
to defend itself from an invasion (p.99). Socrates counters that the guardian
class will be the greatest warriors (p.99). Furthermore any neighboring city
would gladly ally itself to this city in exchange for all of the spoils (p.100).
He believed that once founded the wisdom of successive generations of
guardians will be to guide the city better over time (p.101).
Socrates declares the perfect city complete at this point and declares
that this is the case because it has all of the virtues (p.105). These virtues
are wisdom, courage, moderation and justice (p.105). Wisdom comes from
the rulers (p.106). Their wisdom as opposed to that of other crafts is the
citys wisdom as it concerns the entire city as opposed to that of other crafts
(p.106). The courage of the city is the courage of the auxiliaries as it is their
duty to protect the city (p.109). Moderation is the consensus of the society
on a whole that those who are fit to rule should lead (p.110). Finally justice
according to Socrates is that everyone sticks to their specialty and not to
interfere with the others (p.110). If each person plays their appropriate role
then everyone will get what they are due (p.112).
Having defined justice on the societal level Socrates finally turns
to individual justice (p.113). He defines this is as the parts of the soul in

Robinson 10

each individual being restricted to their proper role in the same sense as
justice at the city level (p.114). The parts of the soul are the: rational,
spirited or honor driven and the appetites for pleasure and sustenance
(p.114-115).These traits are a reflection of the first three traits of the city
(p.114). Socrates argues that allows wisdom to dominate of the other two
with spiritedness in second place (p.121). If one all allows the appetites to
rule then a person will be drawn into greed and desiring to meddle with
other fields in order to satisfy them (p.121). Wisdom is needed bring
restraint over the other two and allow for rational decisions to be made
(p.119). Anyone who posses this balanced arrangement of parts is a just
citizen and a just citizen will not commit crimes (p.122-123). This belief in
the primacy of wisdom is reflected in the class structure of the city with the
wise ruler-guardians at the top, the courageous auxiliary-guardians in the
middle and the money making masses at the bottom (p.121).
In concluding book four Plato argues that a just soul is a healthy soul
as its parts are harmonized in a natural way (p.124). This of course means
that an unjust soul is unhealthy as its parts are harmonized in an unnatural
way (p.124). At this point Glaucon argues that he has proven that justice is
good in and of itself as if justice is required for health and health is good in
and of itself (p.125). Socrates is not ready to do that just yet because feels
there is more ground to cover first (p.125). It should be noted that Socrates
mentions in passing earlier in this book that the women and children within

Robinson 11

the guardian class should be shared in common (p.101). This will become an
important theme in book five.
Book five begins with Socrates being interrupted by Polymarchus and
Adiemantus right as he is about to speak of the four other parts of the city
(p.127). They want him to explain his passing remark about guardians
keeping the women and children in common (p.127). First of all he states
that male and female guardians should be trained as equals (p.129-130). He
argues that whilst there are differences between men and women said
differences are only superficial (p.131). This is because the souls of both
men and women are composed of the same parts (p.131).
Socrates then launches a rather long discussion concerning the string
of regulations procreation of the guardians and the rearing of their children
(p.137-141). The goal of these regulations is guide the guardians to be
stripped of any ties to their nuclear families so as to make them see the
entire city as their family (p.141). This will make the loyalty of the
guardians to the city completely uncompromised (p.141). An example of this
is that the guardians will only be allowed to have sex on select times of the
year in pairs based on their similar natures (p.136-137). Another example is
that the children will then be taken away from their parents and raised
elsewhere together to see each other as siblings (p.140-141)
The next significant part of the book is when Socratese finally answers
the question of why the guardians would accept such a bizarre lifestyle. He

Robinson 12

states that they will provided that they are philosophers (p.155). It is in this
chapter that Socratese argues that Philosopher kings are needed in order
for this system to work as presently politics is divided among different
natures and competing interests (p.153). Socratess idea of what it means
to be a philosopher differs greatly from the standard notion of his day.
Socrates had disdain for the existing philosophers, referring to them as
lovers of sights and sounds (p.156). Socrates argues that true
philosophers are the only ones who have knowledge (p.161).
First he argues divides our conception of the world into three
categories : knowledge, ignorance and opinion (p.157). Then he argues that
opinion and ignorance are the same thing as if it were knowledge it would
not be an opinion it would be fact (p.158-159). Finally he states that true
philosophers understand that all of the particulars in life are extensions of
forms but false ones only see the particulars (p.160). An example of this is
that although there are many beautiful things there is an underlying form of
beauty that transcends them all that is perfect and unchanging (p.160).
Since only philosophers can have knowledge this means that they are the
only ones who have access to the ideal state of justice that transcends all
others thus legitimizing their role as leaders (p.161).There are a few other
points to note. Firstly the younger guardians should be apprenticed by the
elder guardians on the battlefield as a part of their training (p145).
Furthermore if a guardian flees the field of battle he or she will be kicked
out of the guardian class (p 147-145).

Robinson 13

The next major point is that Socrates argues that only true
philosophers have knowledge (p.160). He explains this by dividing the
world into three components: knowledge, ignorance and opinion as a part of
their training (p.157). Ignorance is the same thing as opinion as if an
opinion were true it would be knowledge (p.159). Since only philosopher
has access to the forms then only the have access to knowledge then only
they have knowledge (p.161). This means that only philosophers have a
true understanding of justice as only they have access to the form of justice
(p.161).
Book six begins with Socrates stating that philosophers are the only
ones who are fit to rule as they are the only ones who have knowledge
(p.163). Furthermore he also argues that philosophers are superior in virtue
to everyone else (p.167). This is because of their love of truth (p.167).
Adeimantus disagrees because the only philosophers he has ever known
were viscous or useless (p167). Socrates agrees with him (p.169). He
argues that this is the result of two problems. The first is that people with
philosophical natures tend to drawn away from philosophy (p.175). The
traits of someone who is naturally predisposed to are defined as being
courageous, quick learning and high minded (p.171-172). This is because
they get corrupted by the sophists (p.171-172). They are also corrupted by
friends and family who push them towards acquiring wealth and power
(p.174). The result is that a vacuum is created for those who lack a

Robinson 14

philosophical nature to take on the role of philosopher and it is these people

who Socrates refers to as vicious (p.169).
The next problem is those philosophers who are left are ignored and
maligned by society (p.169). These philosophers he calls useless (p.169). He
likens their fate to that of the only man on a ship who knows how to sail
being seen as a useless stargazer by the captain and the rest of the crew of
ship because of their ignorance of the fact that the stars are used to guide
ships (p.168). This is analogous to Athens as neither the leaders nor the
populace know what to do but malign the philosophers as their wisdom is
incomprehensible to them (p.169). What is needed is one individual who has
the right dispositions and is well versed in the forms (p.179). This is not
impossible (p.179). In order to determine who should run the city Socrates
proposes another test: the ability to learn the form of good (p.184). The
form of good he argues is vital as it grants the highest level of knowledge
(p.185).
He starts to define it as being neither pleasure nor intelligence
(p.185). The form of good is the form that allows the soul to acquire
knowledge by radiating truth in the same way that the sun allows the eyes
to see objects by radiating light (p.189). His next analogy involves a line
that is broken up into four unequal segments (p.190). The truth provided by
the form of good also forms the basis of reality itself in the same way that
the light of the sun provides the basis of growth (p.190). The lower two are

Robinson 15

in the visible realm and the upper two are in the intelligible realm (p.190).
The names of each segment from lowest to highest are imagination, trust,
thought, and intellection (p.192).
Imagination is the belief that illusory images are the basis of ultimate
reality (p.190). Trust is the level of belief in the existing particular elements
that make up reality without any further thought (p.190). Thought is the
level of reason that interacts with the forms but uses images of the
particulars as a crutch (p.190-191). The final level, intellection requires no
images as a crutch and relies entirely on reason (p.190). At this stage all
unproven hypotheses will be rendered unnecessary (p.191). In order to
reach this point one must use work ones way up using images alongside the
dialectic method (p.191).
Book seven starts with a very significant analogy: the allegory of the
cave. In this analogy a group of people are chained to together in a dark
cave and bound in a way to force them to look forward at the wall in front of
them from birth (p.193). Behind and above them is a great fire and a wall in
between the fire and the prisoners (p.193). Statues of various things like
animals, plants and people are placed on the wall, thus creating shadows on
the wall in front of the prisoners (p.193). This means that the prisoners
grew up seeing the shadows as being reality as it is all they ever knew
(p.194). One day a prisoner is unchained and made to turn around to see
the fire and the statues (p.194). This puts the prisoner through the shock of

Robinson 16

adjusting to the light (p.194).Then the prisoner is forced to go up to the

surface and look at surrounding and then the sun objects and thus made to
endure another shock (p.194). At this point the prisoner would no longer
value the wisdom or praise of the other prison mate upon learning of the
outside world (p.195).This prisoner is then put back in the prison with the
others where is observations of the outside world would promote ridicule
and hatred from the other prison mates (p.194-195).
Socrates states that this analogy represents the journey of the soul to
the enlightenment of the form of good (p.196). Once seen the form of good
will show itself to be the source of all truth and knowledge in the same way
as it is plain that sun is the of light and growth (p.196.) The shock and
disorientation upon leaving represents the struggle to accept that ones
original beliefs were false (p.194). Thus Socrates concludes that the
purpose of education is to drag people towards the form of good as opposed
to simply filling minds with knowledge (p.197). With regard to the guardians
the goal is to find those children with the best minds and guide them
towards the path of ultimate knowledge (p.198). Once that has been
achieved they are to go back and lead the city (p.199)
The first significant field these elite guardians must learn is math
(p.201). This is primarily because math allows for abstract reasoning
(p.202). There are five different mathematical fields that these guardians
must learn: arithmetic, plain and solid geometry, astronomy and harmonics

Robinson 17

(p.201-211). All of that is a prelude to the study of dialectics (p.211).

Dialectics is the reliance on reason to the exclusion of sensation (p.211).
Dialectics is essential as it is the route that will to the discovery of the first
principle (p.212). It should be noted that the dialectics should not be taught
to the young (p.215). This is because they will see it as a game and argue
for arguments sake rather than pursuing truth (p.218). This completes his
definition of the perfect city.
Book eight begins with Socrates moving on to describe the other
types of political leadership over the city aside from the just city (p.221).
There are five types of leadership overall and each one corresponds an
equivalent state of the soul (p.222). The just city is referred to as being
Aristocratic (p.223).The other four states are: Timocracy (honour-loving),
Oligarchy (love of necessary appetites), Democracy (love of unnecessary
appetites) and Tyranny (the love of unlawful appetites) (p.223). These four
types mentioned represent the stages of the degradation of the just city
(p223). This degradation is inevitable as everything that comes into
existence must cease to exist at some point (p.223-224). A few terms need
to be introduced before proceeding. The first, necessary desires are those
that one cant live without like eating whilst unecessary desires are the ones
that can be done away with prudence (p.237).
The first city, the Timocratic city is formed when the rationality of the
leaders of the Aristocratic city is corrupted by greed (p.226-227). The

Robinson 18

corruption enters the equation when the guardians eventually slip up in

choosing successors (p.224). Because of the high standard of rationality of
the Aristocratic city the leaders do not become completely consumed by
greed but instead ends up at the halfway point of emphacizing honor as the
main virtue(p.227). This compromise will result from a feud between those
guardians who want private wealth and lands and those who want a return
to the old ways (p.224). Socrates symbolizes this by saying that the
Timocratic man has an aristocratic dad but a greedy mother (p.227). In this
system the guardians will be granted private lands and wealth but not
partake in trade and the producer class will be reduced to serfs (p.225). The
result is that war, against outsiders and serf rebellions, and not wisdom will
be focus of the city (p.225). Fearful of appointing wise leaders, the new
guardians will be spirited men who lack wisdom (p.226).
The oligarchic city comes into existence as a result of the leaders
pursuing wealth over honor over time (p.228).This city is thus in which the
acquisition of most wealth forms the political basis of society (p.228). The
oligarchic man is formed after the collapse of his Timocratic father collapse
from power due to defeat (p.231). fearful of losing his post the oligarchic
man will abandon honor in favor of acquiring wealth (p.231).Thus rationality
and honor become superceded by desire as the main virtue(p.231). These
desires are kept in check to some extent by the desire to preserve wealth
(p.231).The result is that the acquisition of most wealth forms the political
basis of society (p.299).

Robinson 19

Many problems will arise from this situation. The first is that the city
will not able to chose fit leadership (p.229). Secondly the city will be divided
between the rich and the poor and thus lose its unity (p.229). Thirdly they
wont be able to fund any wars because the wealthy would be afraid of
arming the impoverished citizenry who hates them and love money too
much to spend it on wars (p.229). Fourthly there will be no specialization as
the leaders will be engaging in money making trades along with leading
(p.229). The final problem is that it will lead to the rise of drones, classless
people with no role in society (p.230). The dangerous ones are referred to
as stingers (p.230).
The Democratic city embraces freedom as its primary virtue (p.235).
This city arises when the citizenry overthrows the oligarchy and establishes
a new system wherein all men are equals and leaders are chosen by lot
(p.235). This citizen revolt would be motivated by the hatred of the
oligarchy by the citizenry for putting them in severe poverty (p.233-234).
The Oligarchs caused this poverty by mismanaging the city in favor of the
personal acquisition of wealth with high loans and the deliberate neglect of
the needs of the citizens (p.233-234). The uninhibited freedoms of this city
make it the most attractive of the other four cities due to the wide variety of
self expression and political preferences on display (p.235). This beauty is
deceiving however as this lack of rules leads to chaos in that there is no
compulsion on anyone to rule much less regulations designed to put a fit
ruler in power (p.236).

Robinson 20

The democratic man Socrates states, like his oligarchic father, is

tempted by the drones and succumbs to unnecessary desires due to his lack
of education (p.238). However it should be noted that spend thrifty oligarch
father only ever indulged in necessary desires and passed on this trait to
the democratic man (p.236). The result is that whilst the democratic man
does engage in unnecessary pleasures due to the influence of the drones
but the oligarchs rejection of them creates a conflict in him and tempers to
some extent the extravagance of the democratic man (p.238).
The Tyrannical city is the last city to be mentioned and unlike the
other cities Socrates does not bring up the father and son analogy
concerning how this city came to be.This is said in the next book..What is
stated about this city is that tyranny inevitably results from democracy for
the same reason that democracy inevitably arises out of oligarchy: excessive
emphasis of their respective primary virtues (p.240).
The fall of the democratic city will be rooted in the fact that the chaos
that results from the rabid drive for freedom will result in city neglecting
even the most basic needs of the city (p.241). It is during chaos that the
drones will rise to become the leaders of the city, with the stinging drones
at the helm (p.243). In an Oligarchic city these people would have been
driven away from politics due to a lack of qualifications but the lack of
restriction in a democratic city gives them the avenue they need (p.243).
Along with the drones there are two other classes: the wealthy and the

Robinson 21

regular people who stay out of politics (p.243). The drones take the money
from the rich and give to the poor (p.244). The wealthy are then forced to
defend their wealth and thus reluctantly becoming oligarchs (p.244). It is at
this point that the drones rally the people against the rich and the popular
leader of these drones rises to be the tyrant (p.244).
The key feature that typifies the Tyrannical city is the ruthless lengths
to which the tyrant will go to stay in power. These measures can be divided
into violent and deceptive measures. One significant violent measure of
tyrannical rule is that the tyrant will kill all who threaten his or her power,
friend and foe alike (p.246). Another such method is to use war as a
distraction for the masses (p.246). The violent method to mention is that
recruits other drones as bodyguards (p.247). One of his methods of
retaining power is to depict himself as the as a great liberator and
redistribute wealth in order to garner support (p.246). The result of all
these efforts is that society will be enslaved to the tyrants whims (p.250251). Thus it can be said, even though Socrates does not say it explicitly,
that the main virtue of Tyranny is power.
Book nine can best be summarized as being about five arguments to
prove that a just life as he understands it is the happiest way to live. The
first argument is that the life of the just man is better than that of the
tyrant. This argument begins with a continuation of Socrates description of
the tyrannical man. He starts by stating that that the tyrannical man is

Robinson 22

ruled by lawless desires (p.251). Lawless desires are compulsions that drive
men to commit vile act such as murder or incest (p.252). All of us have
them, we see them in our dreams, and most of us resist them except for the
tyrant (p.252).
He then goes on to describe the Tyrant as being the son of the
democratic man who delved into unlawful desires he lacked the sense of
thrift in the Democratic man (p.253). Try as they might the tyrannical mans
family cant stop his descent into lawlessness (p.253). This is because the
drones win him over by seducing him into being driven by lust which in turn
causes him to succumb to lawlessness (p.253). The Tyrannical man spends
so much money on extravagant revelry that he is forced to start borrowing
(p.254). When no one wishes to lend him anymore money he resorts to any
means necessary to get it including murder (p.254-255). The private or non
political tyrannical man is known for only caring about people who can get
him what he wants and thus has no real friends or freedom (p.256).
From there he goes on to state that the just city is the happiest city
and the tyrannical city is the most miserable (p.257). Furthermore since the
Tyrannical city is an enslaved, fearful and poor city (p.258).This is
significant since the soul reflects the city then the tyrannical mans soul is
poor as it is enslaved by the worst parts of his nature, lust and fear (p.258).
For these aforementioned reasons Socrates declares the Tyrannical man to
be the most miserable of men (p.256). By this logic the just man is the

Robinson 23

happiest man as he would be the opposite of the tyrannical man (p.257). For
these aforementioned reasons Socrates declares the Tyrannical man to be
the most miserable of men (p.257). Glaucon then posits that the life of the
private tyrant is the worst but Socrates disagrees stating that it is the
public or political tyrant who is the most miserable (p.259). He argues that
this is the case because the tyrant will always live in fear of being killed by
his own subjects as revenge for making them slaves (p.260).
Having dealt with the argument concerning tyranny Socrates shifts
his focus to proving that the just life is happier than the Timocratic and
Oligarchic life. First he starts by dividing all the people in the world into
three groups: truth loving, honor loving and gain loving (p.261). The
justification of this categorization is that it corresponds to the parts of the
soul (p.261). Therefore, based on the logic used thus far truth lovers have
the just life or the life of the philosopher, honor loving is represented by the
Timocratic life and gain loving represents the Oligarchic, Democratic and
Tyrannical life.
The first argument he used is that the truth loving man is capable of
experiencing the pleasure associated with his gain and honor loving
counterparts but neither of them are able to experience the pleasure
associated with seeking the truth (p.263-264). Furthermore the philosopher
has the intelligence to properly analyze the three forms of pleasure that the
other two groups lack (p.264). The second argument goes further to say

Robinson 24

that the pleasure that is associated with philosophy is the only true pleasure
(p.264). This is because the pleasures associated with those two are
pleasures that can never truly be satisfied but rather temporarily satiated
repeatedly to ease the pain associated with not having them for any
extended period of time (p.266). Philosophy on the other hand feeds the
soul with knowledge in the same sense that food feeds the body but more
filling as it is creates a permanent connection to the eternal realm of the
forms (p.267). His next argument concerns proving that Tyranny is a
greater source of misery by a factor of 729 times using mathematical
calculations (p.270).
The final argument concerns an analogical representation of the just
and unjust man that he had mentioned in chapter two. In this analogy each
person is composed of three animals that live within him: a human, a lion
and a beast (p.270). The human represents reason, the beast represents
spiritedness and the beast represents desire (p.272-273). An unjust man is
described as having fed the beast and the lion at the expense of the man,
thus causing the man to be led by the other two (p.270). Furthermore he
fails to familiarize them with each other thus resulting in a state of war
amoung the three of them (p.272).The result is that the unjust man becomes
consumed by desire (p.272). The just man on the other hand puts the human
in control, allies with the lion and subdues the beast (p.271-272). The result
is that the just man has self control which allows him to enjoy the benefits

Robinson 25

of the other pleasure without suffering from the excesses thereof (p.274).
Thus the purpose of law is to impose reason on people (p.273).
Book ten is split into two separate sections: His arguments for the
banning of dramatic plays and tragic poets and the tale of Er. His case
against the plays and the poets is the point of this book (p.279). There are
two arguments that he makes to support said case. His argument is that
they are not true producers of art as the poets and the play-writes do not
actually crate anything (p.279). The first is that the poets and the plays are
deceptive in that they create the impression of having knowledge in wide
variety of fields when in reality they are nothing more than third hand
imitators who know nothing of any craft (p.281).
He calls them third hand imitators because they are twice removed
from only reality which is the form an example of which would the form of a
couch (p.280). Instead they imitate the particular version of a given form
like the way a painting creates imitates the image of a given couch.
Furthermore distortions that affect our senses the items being imitated
make these imitations even worse (p.285-286).An example of a topic that
the poets imitate in their work is medicine (p.282). Only craftsman produces
a given product has any real knowledge on that particular trade (p.285).
The next argument that Socrates had against the tragedies and the
poets is that they were a negative influence on the masses (p.288). This is
because they provoke extreme irrational emotional states from the audience

Robinson 26

like loud outbursts of crying even from the best of people when mourning
should from his perspective be a somber affair (p.289). The reason for why
this is a bad thing is that it encourages the irrational part of the soul to take
precedence of the irrational parts (p.289). This of course, according to him
will drag the society into a state of wickedness (p.289). He does say that the
poets and play writes can stay if they can prove their usefulness to the city
(p.291).this is on the condition that if they stay they should only be allowed
to make poetry and stories that celebrate the Gods and the heroes (p.290).
The next part of this chapter concerns the tale of Er but before that
Socrates delves into a brief preamble about the soul. Socrates argument is
that the soul is immortal (p.292). He starts by stating that the only thing
that can destroy a given object is its evil like rust to iron (p.292).The body
can die form disease so disease is an evil of the body(p.294). Since the
souls evil is immorality and immorality cant destroy the soul, the soul is
therefore immortal (p.293). The tale of Er is about a soldier named Er who
died in battle and rose from the dead ten days later to tell his tale of the
afterlife (p.297). Er reports that in the afterlife all recently deceased souls
go to a transit zone between Heaven, Earth and Hell (p.298). These
departed souls would then be assigned to go to Heaven or Hell based on
morality of their actions in life (p.298). The good would go to Heaven and
the evil would go to Hell (p.298). There they would stay for a period of time
that was proportionate to the good or evil of they had committed in life
(p.298).

Robinson 27

Another important event that occurs is that those souls who had
finished their time in Heaven or Hell were allowed to leave and were sent to
another area (p.299).It should be noted that some people are too evil to ever
leave hell (p.299). It is at this new location that these souls would meet the
fates and be given the right to choose new lives (p.300). These lives new
can be of either humans or animals (p.301). It is at this point that Socrates
states wisdom is needed to choose the right life (p.302). People tended to
choose lives based on how the way they lived and some chose better than
others (p.302). When all of these decisions were made they instructed to
drink a minimum amount of water that would make them forget their past
lives and the foolish ones drank more than the wise ones (p.303). It is at this
that the souls are sent back to earth (p.303).
Before the analysis of the Platos work can commence some attention
needs to be placed on Platos dualism in order to have a proper
understanding of the book. Dualism is the belief that a given domain can be
reduced to two fundamental categories (Robinson, 2012, 1). The specific
type of dualism that Plato believed in this book is known as substance
dualism. Substance dualism is the belief that mind and matter are two
separate substances (Robinson, 2012, 8 ). The evidence for Platos belief in
this kind of dualism is seen most clearly in chapter ten when he argues that
the soul is immortal but the body is not.

Robinson 28

The significance of this belief with regard to the focus of this review is
that the immortality of the soul allows for the afterlife described by Er,
which promotes the value of wisdom to become credible. Despite the
significance of dualism to the Republic I did not include it in my depiction of
his thesis statement as he placed emphasis primarily on the themes I chose
and treated dualism as a base assumption in the background.
The next step in my analysis of the this book will be too show that
Platos thesis from a metaphysical point of view is that metaphysics is
essential to all of life, the theory of forms make up the basis of reality and
that the harmony of the tripartide soul in conjunction with nature and
nurture is needed to reach the form and thus achieve happiness. I will do
this by dividing the analysis in thematic chapters that cover the length of
the book. Each theme will be a summary of the role each element played in
the Republic based on what has been written so far.
The first theme that needs to be dealt with is that of making a case for
the need for metaphysics in general. This job is taken up by the first three
books. The first book does so by making the case against more traditional
ways of thinking. The arguments with Polemarchus and Cephalus represent
the inferiority of intuitive notions of justice that lack a clear metaphysical
basis like giving back what is owed. The defeat of Thrasymachuss claim
that injustice is right at the state level is designed to show the dangers of

Robinson 29

sophistry as it is both evil and inconsistent due to its roots in greed rather
than sound metaphysical thinking.
The positive case is made by the second and third books by explaining
the need for philosophy as a guide for societies. The second book makes the
case that as society grows ever more advanced society grows more
sophisticated the need arises for wise, specialized leaders who have the
virtue and intelligence needed to maintain a peaceful city by fighting off
enemies and making sure that every citizen plays their proper role. He
clearly states in this chapter that philosophy is something that the guardian
class should know as it is needed to distinguish knowledge form ignorance.
It is for this reason that that education needs to be a state priority,
particularly with regards to the guardians.
Book three picks up from this point and goes further to make the
point that no diversion should be allowed to derail the philosophical
sensibilities of the guardians due to the importance of their work. For this
reason undesirable creative works must be censored. This has the added
benefit of guiding the society at large too. Furthermore the reason why the
older guardians must rule is because their experience will make them wiser
philosophically. Lastly this having this style of governance is so important
that the public must be lied to accept the metaphysical basis thereof.
The next topic to touch on is that of the harmony of the tripartide
soul. This notion is clearly expressed for the first time in book four when

Robinson 30

Socrates states what the three parts of the soul are. It was in this book that
he state that the harmony between them is the basis of justice via the
principle of specialization and that it creates just citizens which in turn form
the basis of the just city. The next book to mention this metaphysical
principle is in book five when it is used to justify gender equality. Another
significant point in which this concept shows up is in book eight where it is
stated that without the harmony of the soul, society will collapse into
dialectical process of self destruction. The last thing to say concerning this
topic is that the harmony of the soul is necessary for the individual to have
to acquire the greatest degree of happiness.
The next topic to deal with is that of the forms. The forms are
introduced to the reader in book and then referred to as being the only
source of true knowledge, knowledge that only philosophers have access to.
This concept comes up again in chapter six with the analogy of the useless
stargazer. The point of that analogy was not only to reinforce that the
philosopher is the only one with knowledge but that as long as society
continues to remain the way it is the true philosopher will be marginalized
in favor of the unqualified. The forms come up again in the analogy of the
sun wherein the form of good is introduced and declared to be source and
illuminator of all knowledge.
The concept of the form comes up again in book seven with allegory of
the cave which is used to justify the point that the purpose of education is to

Robinson 31

enlighten people of the form of good. This is because this analogy shows
that the realm of forms, represented by the outside of the cave, is more real
than the realm of particulars, represented by the cave and the realm of
illusions, represented by the shadows on the wall. The forms come up again
in this book with the analogy of the line. The last time it is mentioned is
chapter 10 when Socrates said that the route to true happiness was to learn
of the form of good.
The last thing to look at is the role of natural dispositions. It is first
mentioned in chapter two as the basis for when it is proposed that the right
disposition should be the basis for recruitment as a guardian. This concept
comes up again in a significant way in book six when Socrates says that the
people who become philosophers but lack the correct disposition will
become vicious. The last time this concept comes up is in book ten with the
tale of Er. This tale seems to imply that the natural predispositions that one
is born with is shaped by the amount of the water of forgetfulness the souls
consumes before reincarnating. This is because Socrates says that the wiser
souls drank less than the foolish ones.
The first counter argument that needs to be dealt with is the one that
attacks the value of metaphysics. This argument, known as the verification
principle states that in order to be meaningful a statement must be proven
to be either true or false (Wittgenstein, 2003, 39). This claim can be refuted

Robinson 32

by arguing that this principle is self contradictory due to the fact that there
it cant be proven to be either true or false ( Boundas, 2007, 52).
The next counter argument that needs to be dealt with is the one
regard the harmony of the soul postulated by Bernard Williams. Bernard
Williams start by saying that Platos conception of justice starts with two
premises. The first is that explanation for how a city becomes just is the
same as the one for how a man becomes just (Tianyue, 2009, 333). The
second is that a city is just iff its human population is just (Tianyue, 2009,
334). Williams then goes on to state that Plato definition of justice is that
the rational, spirited and appetitive aspects of the soul stick to their
particular roles and that the role of the rational element is to be in charge
of the other two(Tianyue, 2009, 334).
This means that a given division of the city will be rational, spirited or
appetitive iff the people in said division are (Tianyue, 2009, 335). That
would mean that the majority of the citizens of the city will be appetitive in
nature (Tianyue, 2009, 335). Since the element of a given aspect of the city
is reducible to the individual level this means that the appetitive majority
will not have any rational restraints over their appetities (Tianyue, 2009,
335). The result is that Plato conception of the just city will not be just
(Tianyue, 2009, 335).
This argument can be refuted by using J.R.F. Ferraris argument that
there is no causal relationship between the individual and city level of

Robinson 33

justice but rather mere causation (Singurwalla,2007, 175). The proof that
he uses to make this point is found in book four which states that only the
wisdom of the rulers is counted as being the wisdom of the city and not the
individuals (Singurwalla,2007, 175). Individuals can be wise but said
wisdom only applies to them (Singurwalla,2007, 175).
The next aspect of Platos thesis to critique is his theory of forms by
using the problem of universals. The problem of universals is the
multifaceted issue of determining whether or not transcendental entities
exist and if so in what form (Klima, 2013,1). The particular variation of this
problem that will be brought up in this review is the whole-part problem.
The whole-part problem is the argument against the existence of forms
based on the pie model of partaking (Rickless, 2012,13). The pie model is
the idea that the form is like a pie from which the particulars partake
(Rickless, 2012,10). If the whole form exists in each particular thing then
this would make no sense as the form would be in multiple places at once as
the particulars exist in separate places (Rickless, 2012,13). If one counters
saying that instead that the particulars only partake in a part of the form
then the form will be divided into multiple parts and that would be
contradictory to theme of the oneness of the forms (Rickless, 2012,13-14).
The final point to discuss is the issue of Platos strict
interpretation of dispositions as being the basis of the differentiation
between the guardian class. The criticism that I would posit against this

Robinson 34

idea is that it is too fatalistic in nature. Fatalism is the view that a given
event is inevitable (Rice, 2002,1). In this case Plato is being fatalistic with
regard to the nature verses nurture debate. The nature verses nurture
debate is that argument over whether the traits one was born with or the
impact of the environment have a stronger role on the shaping of the
characteristics of a given individual (Pinker,2004, 5). He is fatalistic in this
regard as he states that only those who are born with the right
predispositions can become good philosophers and anyone else will be fated
to become viscous if they attempt to do the same.
The problem with this concept of human nature is that Plato fails to
answer any of the questions that come with such a position. One example of
such a question is why cant someone born without the pre-requisite
dispositions acquire these dispositions with practice? Another is why is it
not possible for a person with the right dispositions to not become a viscous
philosopher? Last of all why is it that the regular individual, who can be
wise for his or her own sake according to book four, cant go on to attain
enough wisdom to legitimize him or herself as being deserving of leadership
status? When looked at from this perspective one can see that this notion of
dispositions is an arbitrary justification that serves no other purpose than to
act as the metaphysical basis for the legitimization of an elitist,
authoritarian ruling class. Without this assumption democracy would be the
most logical choice of leadership as everyone would be equally capable of
being wise.

Robinson 35

As one can see Platos Republic the thrust of Plato thesis statement
from a metaphysical perspective states that a metaphysical framework is
essential to life, the forms are the basis of reality and reason and that the
only way to acquire them is for someone with a harmonious soul and the
right predispositions to learn them. This thesis statement has been
undermined by the fact that the concept of the forms was undermined by
the problem of Universals and the concept of dispositions was proven to be
too fatalistic to be rational. The need for metaphysics and the harmony of
the soul however were able to withstand criticism and thus were validated.
Therefore one can see, based on the analysis present, that Platos thesis is
false as although the need for metaphysics and the harmony of the souls are
rational concepts the form and the need for predispositions are invalid.

Robinson 36

Robinson 37