Plato: Unattainable State Of Perfection

Lopez, Marc
PHL – 101
3/25/13
Paper #2
Unattainable state of Perfection “Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty.” Plato, as we all know, was an apprentice of Socrates, and the pedagogue of Aristotle. He has many works of literature on subjects like justice, beauty, equality, political philosophy, and theology. Plato had similar views to his teacher and students, but also argued against them in subjects like theology and truth. Plato had many arguments against ancient philosophers in various subjects of intellectual thought, but he even argued against himself on the ideal state of society in one of his greatest works: the Republic. He made a clear
perspective on what he believed to be the most productive society. He explained what he thought could produce the most affective individuals for every aspect of society through selecting roles based on proven talent. Plato did not just give his perspective on the ideal society, but he also gave a clear reason on why the society he speaks of is unattainable; thus, being an augment against his own work. We will explore the functions of this perspective from Plato, and why he believed that the ideal society that he suggests is unattainable. Plato made it clear that he thought the construction of a society as a whole was natural.
He explained how man is naturally social and political in nature, and this is a result of our rational thought process. The creation of any society starts to develop because of our natural way of wanting to obtain a good life, and that the good life should be equal for all. Furthermore, Plato did not believe freedom to be a goal that a productive society should want to reach; nor did he believe it is a strategy for a good or strong economy. He ultimately described Justice to be what every society should surround its structure upon. In addition, he even went as far to say that the society is not the one to decide what is just; justice should be dictated from the form of knowledge. He describes this Form as a thought sensation that can give the most genuine knowledge {Theory of Forms; (N.D.)}. To obtain this knowledge it must come from a philosophical mind. A philosophical mind would be able to determine what is actually deeded and who should play the hardest roles when it comes to decision making as a whole. Otherwise this there will be no way to assure
success. Plato thought a minimal state is the best state, because it allows you to start with the basics.
The basics, Plato thought, was the natural needs of the people. Plato suggests that those needs should be the focus on where to start, and the capability of meeting those needs leads individuals to play a part in a well functioning society. Getting the things we need should be done by individuals who know what is needed. The role of teachers would not just be to teach, but to raise the future contributors of society (the children). Through the training of their life they will be examined and selected to perform duties that they have shown talent in. This would be a part of what Plato described as benefits of specialization, and the division of labor equally spread to eliminate particular bias (2008, Ancient Philosophy). Just as the few roles previously mentioned, Plato believed that every role should be carefully selected for the best possible suitor, and selected by those who know best; the critical thinkers like philosophical
thinkers. The start of Plato’s argument against himself begins when he attempts to explain how the implication of such society can go wrong, and what could happen if we did get it wrong if we tried anyway. Justice, even in Plato’s eyes, was something that we should strive for, but it is also something that we just cannot fully grasp in the most significant Form. With putting the great thinkers in charge of finding the best of the best, it leaves the outcome open for disaster. Man can choose to strive for more; more than what is needed similar to more extravagant luxuries, and/or it could also lead to the attraction of other social groups that externally exist. The benefits of Plato’s ideal society could cause the outsiders to act on the motivation of taking what the ideal society have (2008, Ancient Philosophy). If the philosophical thinkers decide to chase the dreams of their own desires for more power or control, or anything that deviates from meeting the basic needs of a society, then the society will crumble. There will be an immoral practice of justice that would ultimately be our downfall; a downfall influenced by attempting to reach an ideal state. This work of Plato has been one of the most influential studies of all time, and through this fine work we can see that Plato thought the risk of character defects can destroy a society. Even though he thought the ideal society should strive to reach a common ground on all that is needed. Through careful selection of proven talent the best possible division of work will be equally distributed, and this will be the product of the roles all the individuals of the society would play. With everyone playing their role to the best of their abilities Plato believed reaching a fair and just society would be evident, but if the roles played are influenced by power or greed the balance of justice fall. The end result of attempting to reach the ideal society would be the end of that society as a hole.

References:

Theory of Forms; (N.D.)/ Plato and the Theory of Forms; philosophical society.com, http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Archives/Plato%20And%20The%20Theory%20Of%20Forms.htm#I. Theory of Forms
Smith, Allhoff, Vaidya; (2008). Ancient Philosophy, Essential Readings with Commentary; Blackwell Readings in the History of Philosophy.