Archetypes of Wisdom
Douglas J. Soccio
Chapter 5
The Philosopher-King: Plato
Learning Objectives
On completion of this chapter, you should be able to
answer the following questions:
What was the Academy? Where did it get its name? What
was its chief purpose?
How did Plato distinguish between knowledge and opinion?
What are the Platonic Forms?
Are Forms the same as Ideas?
What is the Allegory of the Cave?
What are the three basic levels of reality according to Plato?
What are the cardinal virtues?
What are the parts of the soul?
Plato’s Life
Plato (c.427-348 B.C.E.) is actually the nickname of
Aristocles, which came from Platon, meaning wide or
broad (one story has it that he had wide shoulders, and
another that he had a wide forehead). Aristocles meant
“best, or most renowned,” and he did well in practically
everything.
Plato was the son of one of the oldest and most elite
families in Athens.Through his mother’s family he was
related to the celebrated lawgiver, Solon. His father’s
family traced its lineage back to the ancient kings of
Athens.
Plato’s Philosopher Mother
Plato’s mother is believed to have been Perictione (c. 450350 B.C.E.) and may have had more influence on Plato’s
thought than has been recognized.
In her On the Harmony of Women, Perictione calls women
to philosophy in terms reminiscent of Socrates – in
particular, a disdain for vanity, the ideal of self-control, and
the superiority of inner beauty.
Like Plato in the Republic, she argues that wisdom and
individual self-control generate other virtues, which lead to
harmony and happiness for the entire community.
Plato’s Work
Our chief source of information on Plato comes from Plato
himself. We still have all the works attributed to him by
ancient scholars, the most important of which are the
philosophical dialogues.
These include the Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Theaetetus,
Timaeus, Gorgias, Protagoras, Meno, and the Republic.
We probably have more biographical information about
Plato than on any other ancient philosopher – much of it
from Diogenes Laertius’s Life of Plato.
And it’s likely that no single work of Western philosophy
has been read by as many people as Plato’s Republic.
Plato’s Disillusionment
Plato became discouraged by the “mob” – represented by
the jury at Socrates’ trial – whom he thought were
irrational and dangerous.
He also became discouraged by the “elite” – represented
by the nobles who formed the Thirty – whom he thought
were cruel, greedy, and self-centered.
As a result, he felt that justice, and the avenging of
Socrates’ death, would have to come through philosophy
rather than political action.
To this end, he sought to develop an ideal form of
government which avoided both extremes.
The Academy
After the revolt of the Thirty and execution of Socrates,
Plato left Athens and wandered for nearly twelve years.
He studied with Euclid.
He traveled to Egypt where he studied mathematics and
mysticism, both of which influenced his later philosophy.
At about age forty, after finishing most of his writings, he
founded his Academy (c.388 B.C.E.), named after the
Greek hero, Academos. It was a philosophical retreat,
isolated from the turmoil of Athenian politics.
His chief function was probably as teacher and
administrator. Here Plato spent the next forty years,
lecturing “without notes” until he died.
Plato’s Epistemology
Plato was determined to show that skepticism and
relativism of the Sophists was mistaken.
He also aimed to reconcile the claims of Heraclitus
(“change alone is unchanging”) and Parmenides (“change
is an illusion”).
He did both by dividing knowledge from belief. Beliefs
are gotten through the senses and are about physical
change (becoming).
Knowledge is gotten through reason and is about what is
always the same (being). Beliefs are about appearances,
while Knowledge is about reality, about how things really
are.
The Theory of Forms
In Plato’s metaphysics, the level of being consists of
timeless essences or entities called Forms.
Such a metaphysics is sometimes called transcendental,
because it asserts that there is a plane of existence that
transcends, or goes beyond, our ordinary perception of
things.
The Greek root for form (eidos) is sometimes translated as
idea or concept. A form, then. is a purely mental entity, but
one that is independent of all minds (in other words, its
reality does not depend on the minds that think it). And
although the forms actually exist, they are not physical
objects. Their reality is purely ideal or conceptual.
Why Plato Needed the Forms
Plato wanted the theory of Forms to provide a rational
explanation of how knowledge is possible. Since we do
have knowledge (e.g., mathematics and geometry), how
does it happen, and what is its object?
He also wanted a way of identifying those who are wise
and those who are not – in other words, a means of
determining when something was actual knowledge versus
when something was simply a matter of opinion.
As he says in the Timaeus, “That which is apprehended by
reason is always in the same state, but that which is
conceived by opinion is always in a process of becoming
and never really is.”
The Divided Line
Plato used the concept of the divided line to illustrate the
relationship of knowledge to opinion, of appearance to
reality.
He claimed there are levels of awareness – from
imagination to perception to reasoning to understanding –
and that one can move from the lowest to the highest by
thinking in terms of a hierarchy of Forms.
Plato’s Divided Line
The divided line expresses Plato’s hierarchical view of reality and wisdom.
The Form of the Good
At the top of this divided line is “the Form of Forms,” the
Form of the Good. This Form cannot be observed with the
senses, but known only by pure thought.
Comprehension of the Good is unlike other forms of
knowing, in that it is holistic, rather than partial.
Plato compares the Good to the Sun in order to give an
idea to those at a lower level of awareness: just as the Sun
enables vision, so the Good enables understanding and
intelligibility.
This “Simile of the Sun” occurs in a passage from the
Republic in which Plato (as Socrates) contemplates their
likeness as sources of seeing and “seeing.”
The Allegory of the Cave
In Book VII of the Republic, Plato tells a tale to illustrate
the idea of the divided line.
At the beginning, prisoners are shackled to images and
mythical accounts, and then one breaks free to find that the
images are being produced by perceptible objects.
The shift from perception to reason is then illustrated by
someone leaving the cave entirely (Plato, thanks to
Socrates).
That person then realizes that they have been in a “cave”
all along, and that what they had taken to be most real is
simply the limitations of their senses. If they use their
minds, they are able to “see” that there is much more to the
world than meets the eye.
The Rule of the Wise
The person who makes the ascent out of the cave, from
illusion to enlightenment, is wise. They can return to the
cave – to inform the others of their predicament – but they
should not expect to be understood when they return.
Plato believes that these people – who have escaped the
cave of opinion, who think in terms of the Forms – should
be the rulers of the state, for they better than anyone are
able to rule for the sake of the whole community.
Hence, Plato’s fundamental vision is deliberately
hierarchical and aristocratic rather than egalitarian and
democratic.
The Search for Justice
This “rule of the wise” is the idea behind Plato’s ideal
state, the Republic.
Plato argued that a reciprocal relationship exists between
the individual and the kind of society he or she lives in.
He claimed there was a dynamic relation, so that a good
society makes it easier to produce good people, and good
people make it easier to produce a good society.
And if the wise are in charge of ordering things, that
reciprocal relationship is more likely to occur.
Function and Happiness
The Republic contrasts two views of morality: the
instrumental and the functionalist.
In the instrumental theory of morality, right and wrong
are treated as means to, or instruments for, getting
something else (in other words, being good for some
ulterior motive).
In the functionalist theory of morality, happiness is the
result of living a fully functional life (in other words, being
good is part of functioning well).
The Parts of the Soul
Plato felt that there were three parts of the human soul:
appetite, spirit, and reason.
Our appetites cause us to move in order to get things we
want, such as food and mates.
Our spirit drives us to achieve things, to do better (than
others) in school, at work, etc.
Our reason guides our appetites and spirit, like a
charioteer does the horses that pull the chariot, so that
things don’t get out of control. Reason is the only part of
the soul capable of fulfilling this function, because it is the
only part that is capable of “knowing.”
The Cardinal Virtues
Plato identifies four “cardinal virtues” that are necessary
for a happy individual. They are:
Temperance – self-control or moderation.
Courage – necessary for one’s protection.
Wisdom – necessary for training and guiding.
Justice – balanced functioning of the whole.
All of these virtues are also necessary for a good society,
so Plato decides that the ideal state should be comprised of
people who exhibit such virtues.
The Republic
Just as there are three parts to the human soul, so there
should be three parts to the ideal state.
There should be workers who provide for our basic needs
for food and shelter.
There should be warriors who protect us – as the military
does from foreigners and the police do from neighbors.
And there should be guardians who watch over us and
order things for our collective welfare. This job would go
to the wise and able leaders, to those Plato called
“philosopher-kings.”
Societies and Individuals
In Plato’s ideal state, justice results from individuals acting
well in relation to each other, just as a happy individual
results from the parts of its soul functioning well together.
Plato believes that it is in each individual’s own best
interest to act well – even when it might seem better to do
whatever they can get away with.
Here Plato is thinking of long-term happiness, of the state
we have to live in after we have done whatever we could
get away with (think back to his dialogue between Socrates
and Thrasymachus).
The Tyranny of Excess
Just as individuals can let their appetites and spirit get the
best of them, “tyrannizing” their lives, so states can be
controlled by individuals who rule for their own sake –
tyrants.
For this reason, Plato thought tyranny the worst form of
government.
Overindulging wouldn’t be beneficial for an individual’s
overall well-being. Likewise, Plato thought that letting the
unwise, the “masses,” run things was hardly any better for
society as a whole.
Utopia
The utopia that Plato envisioned would avoid such
problems (by ensuring that people performed duties
dictated by their natural abilities, just as the parts of the
soul were controlled to perform their proper functions).
The Republic, then, is the form of government best suited
to human happiness.
Discussion Question
We hear a great deal these days about the virtues of
democracy. What might Plato think of our “democratic
culture”?
As you think about this, consider political, social, and
cultural trends that Plato could cite as supporting evidence
for this characterization of democracy and the democratic
soul.
Chapter Review:
Key Concepts and Thinkers
Platonic Forms
Instrumental Theory of Morality
Functionalist Theory of Morality
Virtue
Justice
Utopias
Tyranny
Perictione (c. 450-350 B.C.E.)
Plato(c. 427-348 B.C.E.)