



Plato’s Craft Analogy – Competing

Conceptions of Knowledge















Charlotte Dab
Shi Chen
2
Charlotte Dab
Charlotte Dab
Shi Chen
Political Views
December 5th 2012
Plato’s Craft Analogy – Transcending Knowledge
After more than 200 years, Plato is still regarded as a major figure in the
development of political theory. One of his most lasting political ideas is the
argument against democracy in The Republic. He rejects the rule of the rabble and
advocates a concept of government run by philosopher kings. In order to defend
that notion, he resorts to one of his most famous analogies, that of the craft. There
are valuable insights to be gained by looking at the craft analogy, examining counter
arguments, and finding a sound defense of Plato’s position.
Plato’s rejection of democracy is based in part on the trial of Socrates and its
manifestation of mob rule. Against it, he proposes the alternative of a perfect
republic: “which is his detailed blue print for a harmonious and thus perfect society ruled
over by wise philosopher-rulers” (Robinson, 21). Plato defends his ideal state and
undermines the foundation of democracy by using the famous craft analogy. The
craft represents a concrete notion of expertise. To have good government only a
trained expert can run the state in the same way that only a trained captain can
navigate a ship and not the untrained sailors. Plato affirms that the inexperienced
sailors all would want the captain’s position, and may even go as far as killing him.
In so doing, the sailors would disregard the fact that there are a great many skills
required for the craft of being a captain. Once the captain is gone, the sailors will
praise and worship he who is the more popular and charismatic of the seamen
Charlotte Dab
3
without paying much attention to his degree of knowledge of the craft. The sailors,
as a crowd, give much more value to the superficial qualities of their leader than to
his level of competency. It is the same in politics. Citizens left to their own device
will vote in the same way as the sailors; casting their votes based mainly on
candidates’ popularity, charisma and social aspects. The general public will always
disregard the better-qualified candidate. By “letting the people vote was like letting the
passengers steer a ship – far better to let people who knew what they were doing take
charge” (Warburton, 6). Plato believes that choosing leaders on such premises can
only create disaster to society. His ideal of an effective ruler is the so-called
philosopher-king. They are chosen by experts and follow a rigorous training for the
purpose of being fair and effective leaders working for the greater good. The
specialized education that they will receive provides the philosopher king with a
great knowledge of the craft of government. Plato assumes that the philosopherkings will better serve the interest of the general public.
Even though the craft analogy appears convincing and logical, it’s application
to politics raises certain questions. The analogy rests on the concept of expert
knowledge. Obviously, such knowledge has to be passed on from generation to
generation. Since philosopher-kings will be the ones overseeing the training of their
successors, it would appear that standardized values are passed on. If this is the
case how will governance of The Republic come to reflect the changing
circumstances of history? How would progress be integrated in good government?
Also, knowledge and experience don’t always develop at an early stage in life. The
determination of the future philosopher-kings could be impeded by wrongful pre-mature
Charlotte Dab
4
selections. Not everyone develops at the same rate. Some of the greatest minds were late
bloomers. In the end, knowledge is relative, “Nietzche thought that what counted, as
knowledge was simply that which the strongest imposed on everyone else.” (Robinson,
157) In the light of what precedes, it is obvious that however imperfect, democracy has
just a good of chance to choose a good philosopher king as the method of selection of
Plato
The counter argument about the craft analogy is in part a critique of the
acquisition of knowledge in the development of the philosopher kings. It is based on a
conception of the need to have leaders who have had the opportunity to acquire
knowledge through life experience before being appointed/elected. This is limitative in
that it does not take into account that the early selection of candidates to become
philosopher king must be seen in a psychological context. It must be assumed that they
are selected even at a young age on criteria of personality and temperament where it is
apparent they be the type of person who will seek better knowledge later in their career
from experience. We learn from Shakespeare that character is destiny. In Philosophy for
Dummies, “there is a fear that sharing knowledge is like sharing a piece of pie” (Morris,
103). Information is not like a piece of pie. Knowledge multiplies as it is shared and
added to people’s experience. If the best are selected from the beginning and taught what
their professors were taught, they will understand and integrate the lessons of experience
and history including new innovations.
The elite are chosen for their innate quality of soul and character, which
guarantees a certain aptitude to acquire true knowledge and use it for the greater good.
According to Plato, there are three types of souls: the guardian, the auxiliary and the
Charlotte Dab
5
merchant. The guardian, also known as the philosopher-king, is the most rational one and
should be the leader. Plato believes that in his an ideal society, all three souls should play
a role. However, only the guardians should make decisions because only they carry the
capacity to gain and spread knowledge. Plato’s understanding of human beings is that
they are innate with certain skills; therefore, philosopher kings are chosen by their souls
and not by any other means of test. If we believe the concept of innatism, which is that
“we are all born programmed with certain kinds of knowledge” (Robinson, 22)
Essentially, not everybody is the same and not everybody has the same capacity to
acquire knowledge. When the right to vote becomes a freedom for every citizen, disasters
will arise. If the German population had had the requisite knowledge and awareness, as
would a trained philosopher-kings, then Hitler would perhaps not have come into power.
Another point about knowledge is that sometimes it brings about great deception. Plato
explains this theory in great detail with his famous cave analogy. The shapes and forms
that were being displayed amused the prisoners who remained in the cave. One of the
prisoners was freed and saw that the shapes and forms were just shadows. He had the
knowledge and shared it with his friends who were in the cave. His friends chose to not
believe him, as it would ruin their entertainment. This proves that not everyone is ready
to accept real knowledge as it can sometimes be damaging.
If those who aren’t mature enough to welcome absolute knowledge, then should
they be in the position to vote? In other words, if you don’t have all the facts, you simply
can't make a sound decision. Banning art from the general population is perhaps a strong
stance; nonetheless, it does have valid reasoning. Plato believes that art creates
disillusionment. It should be disapproved as it leads to lies.
Charlotte Dab
6
The evolution of Western democracy in our time would please Plato. Yes we do
elect representatives bodies to our governments and they represent the interest of those
who elect them. Their influence is limited to make laws, not to apply it and they usually
serve for a limited term. The reality of power rest in the civil servants who run the
country with great-acquired skill and fairness to all. They are an elite that has been highly
trained and mentored in the best elite schools to exercise power, they are lifers and they
have no major wealth, almost the major traits of Plato's ideal ruler.
7
Charlotte Dab
Works Cited
Morris, Tom. Philosophy for Dummies. New York: Wiley Publishing Inc. 1999. Print.
Robinson, Dave and Groves, Judy. Introducing Philosophy A Graphic Guide to the
History of Thinking. Cambridge: Icon Book Ltd., 2007. Print.
Warburton, Nigel. A Little History of Philosophy. U.S.A., Yale University Press, 2011.
Print.