Abstract
The citizens of a state participate in each other, in the state (polis), and in certain ideas and ideals which determine the character of the state they found. What kind of whole do citizen and state exemplify? Plato provides his answer to this question in the Republic. This dialogue, however, is a famously ambiguous writing. Scarcely a book in the philosophic library is as widely read as Plato’s Republic. Especially now it is often used as an introduction to philosophy, as required reading in courses in politics, ethics, social theory, and in the Great Books circles. New editions and translations continue to appear. Perhaps one would be tempted to say in consequence that the philosophy of Plato must be becoming more widely understood and that this improved understanding ought to be happily reflected in our political and social life. But this inference will not withstand examination. The shadow of the Tower of Babel has fallen on the Republic. It has been said that every great philosopher is followed by a train of academics who tend to reify or materialize his concepts. Perhaps this saying holds true of the Republic. This dialogue, however, is a famously ambiguous writing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
A. Edel, The Theory and Practice of Philosophy, (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1946), p. 391. Doubtless this is an interpretation of such statements as Rep. 397e and 434c, but an interpretation which is unacceptable if the whole context be born in mind.
G.H. Sabine, A History of Political Theory, (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1947), p. 49, emphases the author’s.
Cf. also H.H. Titus & M.S. Smith, Living Issues in Philosophy, (New York: Van Norstrand, 1974) p. 336f
F.M. Cornford, The Republic of Plato, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1945), pp. 63, 102
cf. E.R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, 3rd. ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963) ch. VII.
The most lengthy development of this kind of criticism of the Republic is made by K.R. Popper in The Open Society and its Enemies, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1966), vol.1 and is discussed in my Socratic Ignorance: An Essay on Platonic Self-Knowledge, (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1965), cf. especially p. 58, n. 1.
John Wild offers the most elaborate refutation of these interpretations in Plato’s Modern Enemies and the Theory of Natural Law, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953).
J.H. Randall, Making of the Modern Mind, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1926), p. 610.
Republic 75e; 525b-d; also 442c-e. Also see John Wild, Plato’s Doctrine of Man (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1946) p. 157 on the unity of the virtues.
Rep 509e–510c. Cf. J. Adam, The Republic of Plato, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1902), p. 64.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ballard, E.G. (1989). The Two Republics: A Study in Dialectic. In: Philosophy and the Liberal Arts. Contributions To Phenomenology, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2368-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2368-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7566-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2368-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive