Republic (Book VI) by Plato
This post is part of my journey through the classic texts of Western civilization.
Whilst the true philosopher is the only one fit to rule the just city, it will not be easy to find such a man. First of all, such a man who possesses the qualities of a true philosopher will have many close to him (both family and friends) attempt to take advantage of him by leading him away from the true philosophical life and towards a life of politics, in which they hope to acquire power, money, etc. through him.
Furthermore, though Socrates and his companions might recognize the value of a true philosopher, who can say the rest of society will as well? Plato gives the analogy of an old sea captain; the sailors fight over who should become the new captain. Rather than wisely selecting a captain based on navigation skills and knowledge, each sailor uses cunning tricks in an attempt to get the old captain to select him as the new one. No care is to be found among them for the true craft of captaining a ship; in fact, the man who actually does possess the craft of navigation would be mocked and called a "stargazer, bibble-babbler, good-for-nothing." Likewise, the true philosopher who seeks after the Forms would be called the very same things by society.
We see here again Plato's pessimistic (and I would say, rightly so) view of the masses and their ability to make right judgments according to the good. This, of course, fuels Plato's attacks against democracy and rule by people. Who today can count this against him? We look around today in these United States of America and see exactly what Plato is describing. The masses spurn true wisdom and righteousness and are instead ruled by their desires, seeking for what is debased. Rather than seeking for a leader who fears God and rules with prudence, they seek a leader who will give them "stuff." John Adams rightly understood that the Constitution "was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
And so, the true philosopher will be a rare breed, seldom to be found. But it is not impossible. Philosopher-kings must first possess the right nature: "Those who love knowledge, and have good memory, the quick-witted and sharp, and all else that goes with these qualities..." These are qualities that are innate, not learned or taught. But Socrates observes that such men who possess these traits are not usually "willing to live modestly in quietude and steadiness," which is necessary for the philosopher-king. The key then, in producing philosopher-kings out of these men, lies in good education.
The important subject for the philosopher-king to study and know is the Form of the good. What is the good? While some may say that knowledge is the good, and some may say that pleasure is the good, Socrates denies both of these things. But while Socrates can say it is neither of those, he has trouble saying what it exactly is. The best he can manage is to speak of what he calls an "offspring of the good" which will give insight into what the good is.
"But bless you, my friends, let us pass by the question what the good is, just for the present; I fear my present impulse is not strong enough to carry me as far as what I think on that subject now. But there is an interesting offspring of the good, as it seems to me, and very like it; I am willing to speak of that, if you care, or not if you don't care."
First, Socrates offers as an analogy the sun. The sun is the great illuminator; it is the source of light. While it is not the sun itself that is what causes us to see (that is our eyes), there is a sense in which we can truly say that the sun does cause us to see. It is only due to the presence of light that our eyes can in turn see, for we have all experienced darkness before. In the same way, the Good is the source of knowledge.
"... when [the soul] settles itself firmly in that region in which truth and real being brightly shine, it understands and knows it and appears to have reason; but when it has nothing to rest on but that which is mingled with darkness—that which becomes and perishes, it opines, it grows dim-sighted, changing opinions up and down, and is like something without reason."
Not only is the Good the source of us knowing things, the Good is the source of knowledge itself. That is, knowledge exists only because of the Good, as Plato states in some sort of proto-transcendental-argument:
"... the good is not only the cause of their becoming known, but the cause that knowledge exists and of the state of knowledge, although the good is not itself a state of knowledge but something transcending far beyond it in dignity and power."
What Plato is calling the good is only sensible if one acknowledges that this is God. What gives man knowledge but God? What is the source of knowledge and truth itself but the infinite, self-existent God?
The next analogy is the analogy of the line, a somewhat confusing analogy. Essentially, Plato outlines four grades of knowledge. The first two are related to our access to the world of sight and of the things seen. The last two are related to the world of mind and of the things thought.
- Conjecture: Images, shadows, reflections, etc.
- Belief: Objects such as animals, trees.
- Understanding: Thought-images, ideas such as ideal squares and cubes.
- Exercise of reason: The Forms. Beauty, Justice, Goodness, etc.
The last grade, reason, is the highest stage of knowledge, which deals with the Forms. According to Plato, in order to reach this stage, one starts with certain baseline assumptions (presuppositions could be an appropriate word here perhaps) and pushes up to the region "free of assumptions" in order to reach "the beginning of all." This beginning is the Form of the good, the unhypothetical first principle.