The Problem of Democracy

Gustavo Batista
Professor: Chris Young
PHIL 422: Capstone
October 1, 2014

Batista 2

Plato often gets a bad reputation when it comes to democracyespecially if one is

familiar with the Republic only.1 It seems that Plato places democracy as the second worst form
of government, being better than only dictatorship, in his assessment given in Book VIII.
However, there is a current debate among Plato scholars about his real thoughts towards
democracy. For example, Mason Marshal and Shane A. Bilsborough, authors of The Republics
Ambiguous Democracy argue that it is unclear how bad democracy is supposed to be in the
Republic.2 On the other hand, Stella Lange, author of Plato and Democracy reminds readers
that viewing Plato as hostile towards democracy is not necessarily incorrect due to the fact that
during his time, democracy had leaders who were ignorant, self-seeking, and uncaring towards
the good of the people.3 The question of whether Plato was a fervent critic of democracy or
somewhat favored it thus arises. Also, while the Republic does seem anti-democratic, Plato hints
that its qualities of liberty and equality are among the finest ones a government can possess.4
However, after intensive research I have concluded that Plato displayed more antagonism than
favoritism towards democracy. Before diving into the problems of democracy, I provide a simple
account of Platos aim in writing the Republic. Then, I briefly explain Platos Theory of Forms,
his idea of the Good, and his reasons why philosophers should be the ones who rule. I conclude
the paper by speculating that if the Greek philosopher were alive today, his feelings towards
modern democracy would hardly have changed due to the perverse political apathy that is
present today.
1 Steven Michels, "Democracy in Plato's Laws," Journal of Social Philosophy35, no. 4 (Winter 2004): 517,
accessed November 23, 2014, http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=656aa50f-b733-43feaa42-9eaabd6ecdee%40sessionmgr4001&vid=4&hid=4209.
2 Mason Marshall and Shane A. Bilsborough, "The Republic's Ambiguous Democracy," History of Philosophy
Quarterly 27, no. 4 (October 2010): 301, accessed November 23, 2014, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25762144.
3 Stella Lange, "Plato and Democracy," The Classical Journal 34, no. 8 (May 1939): 482, accessed November 23,
2014, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3291135.

4 Plato, The Republic, trans. Benjamim Jowett (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1946), 302.

Batista 3
The Republic is undoubtedly one of Platos most famous and studied books in the field of
philosophy. Not only that, the Republic is also widely analyzed in studies with respect to politics
and ethics. In other words, the Republic tackles all sorts of the political and socio-economic
realms of human existence. In reality, at least in my view, the Republic is an ontological and
epistemological study of the human race constructed in the form of a dialogue between its main
character, Socrates, and his counterparts. In his search for justice, and whether to be just is more
beneficial than to be unjust, Socrates tries to create a perfect city, and in it, find and evaluate
justice. Although the entire book revolves around this issue, I draw mainly from Book VIII of the
Republic because of its intriguing arguments against democracy and I attempt to identify their
relevancy, if any, to modern democracy today. I also draw important points from Books VI and
VII for its explanations of the Good and what makes a suitable ruler for a government.
In an attempt to differentiate and demonstrate the superiority of his ideal republic, Socrates
describes four types of governments and from what nature of man these governments emerge.
Socrates describes only three types of government in Book VIII due to the fact that the just and
good aristocracy, which would be the form of government of his perfect republic, was already
explained in the previous chapters.5 The three types of governments Socrates explains in Book
VIII are: oligarchy, democracy, and tyranny. It is also important to note that, for Socrates,
describing these different types of governments is sufficient to understand the nature of those
who make up such governments. As Socrates himself says: governments vary as the
dispositions of men varyfor we cannot suppose that States are made of oak and rock, and not
out of human nature, which are in them [states]6 It is clear that Socrates description of a
political system is also a description of a mans soul. Socrates aim here is to find out whether it
5 Plato, The Republic, trans. Benjamim Jowett (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1946), 287.
6 Plato, The Republic, 286.

Batista 4
is more beneficial for a human being to be just or unjust. Moreover, implied in Socrates
assessment of whether justice is more beneficial than injustice is the belief that the amount of
happiness a particular type of man is, or is not, sufficiently measures whether or not justice is
more beneficial. For he says, let us place the most just by the side of the most unjust, and when
we see them we shall be able to compare the relative happiness or unhappiness of him who leads
a life of pure justice or pure injustice.7 Socrates concludes Book VIII by stating that dictatorship
is the most unjust form of government thus also suggesting that a dictator lives an unhappy life.
He then compares the nature of the tyrannical man to that of the aristocratic man in the
subsequent chapters in order to prove justice is more beneficial than injustice. This is an
extremely simplistic account of what Plato is trying to accomplish in the Republic but should be
sufficient for the purpose of this paper. However, it is important to provide a more in depth
account of Platos Theory of Forms in order to better understand his distaste for democracy.

Platos Theory of Forms

First and foremost, it is important to note that for Plato Forms are essential in the lives of
humans for they enable us to categorize and discern between what is right and wrong, good and
evil, truthfulness and falsehood. According to Arlene W. Saxonhouse, author of Democracy,
Equality, and Eid: A Radical View From Book 8 of Platos Republic, the Theory of Forms
enable us to recognize similarities and differences so that we can distinguish one person or
object from another and recognize as well what unites them.8 In general terms, Platos Theory
of Forms is the notion that every particular object or concept that exists in the world is nothing

7 Plato, The Republic, 287.

8 Arlene W. Saxenhouse, "Democracy, Equality, and Eid: A Radical View From Book 8 of Plato's Republic," The
American Political Science Review 92, no. 2 (June 1998): 273, accessed November 23, 2014,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2585663

Batista 5
but a mere representation of an ideal, or perfect, Form of such object and/or concept.9 Take the
idea of justice, for example, which is the central theme in the Republic. According to Platos
Theory of Forms, many elements can be equated with justice. For example, in Book I, after being
asked by Socrates, Polemarchus answers that justice can be seen in the act of paying ones debt
and in the act of always telling the truth.10 It is crucial here to be able to make the distinction that
justice can be seen in those acts, which does not mean that those two particular acts make up the
entire concept of justice. In other words, we can see elements of justice in paying a debt and in
always telling the truth, but we are unable to really grasp justice in its entirety through those two
elements alone.11 The obvious problem with these particularsas the representations of Forms
are often referred asis their incapability to represent a Form in its entirety. This leads Plato to
conclude that because many particulars share a common concept, then there must be an ideal
form of such concept, hence, there must exist the Form of Justice, which captures the notion in
its entirety.
The way in which Plato concludes that Forms exist is by explaining that they exist independently
of the particulars.12 He reasons through this by showing how Forms are perfect, permanent, and
unitary. The Form of Justice represents the most perfect sense of what justice is. It is also
everlasting and unchanging, and the only thing it can ever represent is justice. That is, the Form
of Justice cannot represent more than what it is in its totality, which is justice and only justice.
On the other hand, particulars can often change and elements of justice and injustice, for
instance, can be seen in a same particular. The best example of this I can think of is the Noble
9 Raphael Demos, "Plato's Idea of the Good," The Philosophical Review 4, no. 3 (May 1937): 245-75, accessed
November 23, 2014, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2181085.
10 Plato, The Republic, 20.
11 Demos, "Plato's Idea of the Good," 245-75.
12 Ibid.,

Batista 6
Lie in the Republic. The Noble Lie is the belief that it is sometimes advantageous for a society
in which the rulers have created a myth in order to maintain harmony within the society.
Speaking of this in Book III, Socrates says: the fostering of such a belief will make them care
more for the city and for one another.13 This leads to the conclusion that the act of always telling
the truth is not always ideal, and a lie can, at times, can be even more just and beneficial than
telling the truth. As Nicholas P. White, author of A Companions to Platos Republic states,
Forms are thought of as bearing their corresponding predicates unqualifiedly or absolutely, and
without the accompaniment of their contraries.14 This exposes the problem with particulars.
Particulars change, and can take on different properties or qualities. This leads Plato to conclude
that Forms exist separately and independently of particulars and are superior to particulars as
well.15 Furthermore, as White explains, understanding the Forms is said to be necessary for the
rulers to know the Good and to perform their task of ruling properly.16
According to Socrates, the idea of the good is the highest knowledge, and that all other things
become useful and advantageous only by their use of this.17 In other words, the Good
encompasses all the particulars that represent their specific forms. It is the Forms of all forms.
Thus, whoever understands the forms better will also have a better understanding of the Good.
Whether one can comprehend the Good in its entirety is not something Plato believes humans
can achieve.18 However, Socrates attributes the understanding of the Good as a necessary
condition for rulers to properly rule. On top of that, Socrates claims that philosophers are the

13 Plato, The Republic, 127.

14 Nicholas P. White, A Companion to Plato's Republic (Indianapolis: Hacket Publishing Company, 1979), 33.
15 Demos, "Plato's Idea of the Good," 245-75.
16 White, A Companion to Plato's, 30.
17 Plato, The Republic, 236.
18 Plato, The Republic, 197.

Batista 7
most suitable to rule due to their ability to properly access and understand the Good. This claim
has important implications for democracy that is covered later.
After spending the majority of Books II, III, and IV explaining all the elements of his
ideal city, Socrates begins to suggest who the rulers of his republic should be. Perhaps
unsurprisingly to some (Socrates was a philosopher after all), Socrates ascribes this most
important task to philosophers. This is what he has to say with regards to philosophers as ideal
rulers: Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and
power of philosophy, and political greatness and wisdom meet in one, and those commoner
natures who pursue either to the exclusion of the other are compelled to stand aside, cities will
never rest from their evilsno, nor the human race, as I believeand then only will this our
State have a possibility of life and behold the light of day.19 What a statement! There is so much
in this statement that to completely pick it apart would require years of careful studying.
Nevertheless, there is an idea that deserves a closer look due to its affect on democracy: equality.
Implied in this statement is the idea that we are not all inherently equal. Although Socrates
expresses this view throughout the Republic with his Principal of the Natural Division of
Labor20, the statement above clearly declares that philosophers are of a special breed. In other
words, not every one has the nature to philosophize hence not everyone is capable of becoming a
philosopher. In addition, social disorder and disharmony will cease only insofar as philosophers
rule. Consequently, given the fact that equality, together with freedom, is democracys greatest
attribute, it becomes difficult to imagine how Plato would support this kind of political system.
19 Plato, The Republic, 198.
20 The Principle of the Natural Division of Labor is the belief that each person should perform whatever task
he/she is naturally suited for. Plato believed each person had a specific role, according to his/her nature, to fulfill
in the ideal city. Moreover, adhering to this principle was a way to ensure that harmony was always present in the
city. For example, the shoemaker is a shoemaker because he is most inclined to it by his nature. Therefore, the
shoemaker should always have the role of making shoe and should never venture into other realms. White, A
Companion to Plato's,17-20.

Batista 8
Still, philosophers love for wisdom is what makes them qualified to rule in the eyes of Socrates.
For Socrates, philosophers love for wisdom is unquenchable. The search for knowledge is a
continuous and everlasting endeavor only true philosophers pursue. In addition, the philosopher
does not love only a part of wisdom, but wisdom as a whole.21 As a result, a philosopher will
never stop striving to acquire more wisdom. A philosophers love of knowledge will drive
him/her to the deepest parts of the unknowns of this world until an understanding, even if in the
smallest degree, is acquired. This unmatched desire for knowledge, in turn, will not only enable
philosophers to have access to the Good but will also cause them to understand itperhaps not
in its entirety but the little philosophers understand of the Good will be much more than anyone
else ever could. This, and the fact that philosophers actually do not desire to be in power, are two
of the main reasons Socrates thinks they are the ones who should rule. Philosophers become even
more prominent to such positions if we accept that wisdom implies truth. From this perspective,
the ongoing pursuit to knowledge will also lead to truth, hence, philosophers will be able to
discern between facts and myths, good and evil, right and wrong. Still, to prove whether
philosophers should or should not rule is not relevant in this paper. However, the obscurity of
Platos account of democracy in the Republic raises the question of Platos real thoughts towards
democracy.

The Republics Democracy

When one begins reading Book VIII of the Republic, one may find a Socrates extremely
sympathetic towards democracyboth because of how a democracy comes into existence and
also for its qualities of freedom and equality. Take this passage, for example, that explains how a
democracy emerges: democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their
21 Plato, The Republic, 200.

Batista 9
opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal
share of freedom and power; and this is the form of government in which the magistrates are
commonly elected.22 According to this passage, there is nothing unsatisfactory about the
emergence of a democracy. In other words, the emergence of a democratic government not only
signifies the victory of the underdog but also provides freedom and equality to the poorest of the
classes. The emergence of a democratic government becomes even better once it is remembered
that the opponents of the poor were the money-lovers oligarchs who deprived the poor of both
power and property.23 In addition, instead of depriving others of power, the revolutionaries who
fought to establish a democracy gave an equal share of freedom and power to all those who
will partake in the new government. This can truly be seen as the emergence of the fairest,
perhaps even the best, form of government in the Republicespecially if one takes into account
how the act of philosophizing might take place in a democracy.
As I have mentioned in the beginning, the Republics ambiguity in defining how bad
democracy is supposed to be leaves this task open to speculation. As a result, scholars like
Mason Marshall and Shane E. Bilsborough, authors of The Republics Ambiguous Democracy,
have done a great job in providing good reasons to think that Socrates was not as antagonistic
towards democracy as one might think. For example, an argument can be made that because of
the freedom that comes with democracy, citizens will no longer be required to adhere to the
Principle of the Natural Division of Labor. As a result, the act of philosophizing can increase in
frequency due to the fact that higher number of citizens will now be able to philosophize.24 This
can lead to an increase in the number of philosophers, thus increasing the number of qualified
22 Plato, The Republic, 302.
23 Ibid., 293-95.
24 Mason Marshall and Shane A. Bilsborough, "The Republic's Ambiguous Democracy," History of Philosophy
Quarterly 27, no. 4 (October 2010): 304, accessed November 23, 2014, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25762144.

Batista 10
rulers in a democracy. Democracy, then, can eventually become the best form of government.
There are a couple of issues with this argument, however, both in terms of Platos own
democratic era and for our present one.
Perhaps the biggest issue Socrates attributes to a democratic government is its lack of
adherence to the Forms. As Arlene W. Saxonhouse, author of Democracy, Equality, and Eid: A
Radical View From Book 8 of Platos Republic explains, Book VIII of the Republic shows that
a democratic government in its insistence on freedom and equality is a regime of formlessness,
one that lacks eid [forms].25 As a result, citizens of a democratic government no longer have
the capacity to discern between right and wrong, good and bad, truths and lies. This is even more
problematic once this lack of adherence to the Forms is translated into the rulers of a democratic
government. Because of its formlessness, rulers are not chosen on the basis of their qualifications
per se, but are rather elected by the majority. Well, although this is not necessarily a bad thing,
the fact that citizens are not able to differentiate between a just and an unjust ruler makes
democracy susceptible to dangers that can ultimately destroy the nation. Thus, democracy
directly contradicts the central theme of the Republic: the Principle of the Natural Division of
Labor. Rejecting this principle is extremely problematic for Socrates because it leads to a life
without order, filled with contradictions.26 On the other hand, an argument can be made that
citizens of democratic governments enjoy much greater social mobility than any other types of
governments. Indeed, social fluidity, at least in terms of being able to choose what kind of
profession one would like to undertake, is something citizens of democratic governments enjoy.
Moreover, social fluidity is vital for the betterment of the human race. It gives hope and
motivation for citizens, who reward nations with new ideas and technological advancements that
25 Saxenhouse, "Democracy, Equality, and Eid," 273.
26 Saxenhouse, "Democracy, Equality, and Eid," 280.

Batista 11
improve the overall quality of life. Therefore, Socrates should have good reasons to believe that
philosophers, and with them, the act of philosophizing, would increase in a democracy. However,
this has hardly been the case.
It is extremely doubtful to believe that Socrates would give democracy this much credit.
As I illustrated in the section above, Socrates did not believe that everyone had the required
inherent characteristics of a philosopher. As he himself claims, it is impossible for the
multitude to be philosophic.27 This, to him, was a gift only few possessed. Moreover, only a
few, and by a few I mean only philosophers, could have access to the Forms. Just as a reminder,
having access to the forms was for Socrates a necessary condition to rule.28 Therefore, although it
is quite possible that because of the freedom that comes with democracy the act of
philosophizing can increase, it does not seem that Socrates would agree. One can even question
whether Socrates would think the act of philosophizing would even increase in a democracy at
all. In other words, even if Socrates believed that all men were born with equal capabilities of
becoming a philosopher, chances are he would not agree with the claim that the act of
philosophizing increases in a democracy. In fact, philosophizing is not something that is widely
done when one compares it to todays democracy.
From this perspective, one begins to see that Plato showed more antagonism than favoritism
towards democracy. In Philosophy in the Age of Neoliberalism, authors Robert Frodeman,
Adam Briggle and J. Britt Holbrook express their concern in the manner in which philosophy is
done todayespecially in the United States. From their perspective, philosophy has not only lost
relevancy in todays society but it has also lost its most vital element of inquiry that used to

27 Saxenhouse, "Democracy, Equality, and Eid," 273.

28 White, A Companion to Plato's, 30.

Batista 12
tackle the issue of knowledge as a whole.29 The claim that philosophy cannot be applied in the
real world is exacerbated by the fact that fields like engineering, computer and natural sciences,
and mathematics are widely recognized as the main engines for societal progress.30 More
alarming, however, is the suggestion that society as whole is unconcerned about fundamental
questions that were once central for the advancement of the human race. According to the
authors, the question of what constitutes the good life has become quaint. The question of
whether we should want X has been banished from the conversationor become the sole
province of evangelicals.31 In other words, the only question we ask today is: how can we have
as much of X as fast and cheaply as possible? As a result, todays philosophy has become an
exclusively academic endeavorone that exists only for the sake of itselfpurely
contemplative.32 The amount of times I have been asked what I plan to do with my bachelors of
arts in philosophy indicates how philosophy is perceived today. The satirical tone in which this
question is often asked reinforces the idea that few take philosophy seriously in todays
democracy.
In addition, it becomes difficult to argue against the claims presented above when one
thinks of the things Americans prioritize today. Today, the majority of us are overly contented
with cheap prices of gas and food, clothes, electronics as well as useless commodities that are
degrading for both our health and the environment.33 As a matter of fact, the majority of
Americans are unconcerned with the way things are produced today as long as they are produced

29 Robert Frodeman, Adam Briggle, and J. Britt Holbrook, "Philosophy in the Age of Neoliberalism," Social
Epistemology, 2012,1-4, accessed November 23, 2014,
http://csid.unt.edu/files/PPN_frodbrigholneolib_Atlanta2013.pdf.
30 Ibid., 3
31 Ibid., 5.
32 Ibid., 5.
33 Stella Lange, "Plato and Democracy," The Classical Journal 34, no. 8 (May 1939): 484, accessed November 23,
2014, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3291135

Batista 13
cheaply and efficiently.34 This has unfortunately become the rationale of a democracy that is
fueled by capitalism. Paying cheap prices for things have been enough to satisfy our desires due
to the fact that knowledge is not something widely desired today. Plato expresses this concern in
Book VIII when he says that in a democracy man becomes the slave of the unnecessary
desires35 Consequently, the once brave and active revolutionaries who established the
democratic government have become dormant due to their overindulgence in unnecessary things.
This, in turn, has caused a level of apathy that is perverse, even a bit paradoxical, in democracy
today as well as in Platos era.
Whether political apathy is measured by the lack of either political involvement or
knowledge, to associate it with democracy is paradoxical, to say the least. That is, think about the
manner in which a democratic government emerges. Think about the level of civic engagement
that must occur in order for a nation to adopt democracy. For political apathy to be related even
in the slightest degree with democracy just does not make much sense. Still, not only was Plato
concerned with political apathy being present in a democracy, he also attributed it as a unique
democratic characteristic.36 For Plato, however, this apathy displayed by the democratic man was
due to the lack of order present in his life. According to Plato, theres neither order nor necessity
in his life, but he calls it pleasant, free, blessedly happy, and he follows it for as long as he
lives.37 As a result, the democratic individual is easily swayed one way or the other thus
incapacitating him/her to engage in a meaningful manner both politically and socially.38 Still,
what does this all mean to democracy? Some scholars such as Jeffrey E. Green, author of
34 Frodeman, Briggle, and Holbrook, "Philosophy in the Age of Neoliberalism," 5.
35 Plato, The Republic, 305.
36 Jeffrey E. Green, "Apathy: The Democratic Disease," Philosophy Social Criticism 30 (December 6, 2004): 745,
accessed November 23, 2014, doi:10.1177/0191453704045763.
37 Green, "Apathy: The Democratic Disease," 755.
38 Ibid., 755.

Batista 14
Apathy: The Democratic Disease argue that political apathy is a doubled-edge sword. That is,
while some level of apathy signifies a stable society, too much of it causes philosophical
sterility.39 This is precisely why Socrates was so skeptical of democracies. Moreover, to argue
that political apathy signifies stability is too simplistic. It assumes that political involvement
happens only when citizens are dissatisfied with the government. It fails to include that political
involvement also means being accurately informed and having the capacity to take a stand for
what you believe regardless of the situation.
Whether citizens today display the level of political apathy similar to that of Socrates
democratic man is out of the scope of this paper. With that said, however, I can think of many
examples when large part of Americans were either disinterested or misinformed towards the
countrys political situation. A study done by Pew Research Center shows that only half of
registered voters in America usually vote.40 This number drops even lower when elections do not
involve selecting a president. Another recent example of political apathy in America has been
seen in the number of people that were interested, or even knew, about President Obamas speech
on immigration reform. Despite being one of the hottest political topics at the moment, many of
the major television broadcasters chose not to air Obamas speech on immigration reform.
According to an article from the Christian Science Monitor, Obama was competing against hit
shows Scandal, How To Get Away With Murder, and the fall finale for Grays Anatomy on
ABC; the Big Bang Theory on CBS and The Biggest Loser on NBC, while the intensely

39 Green, "Apathy: The Democratic Disease," 747.

40 Drew Desilver, "Voter turnout always drops off for midterm elections, but why?," Pew Research Center, last
modified July 24, 2014, accessed November 23, 2014, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/24/voterturnout-always-drops-off-for-midterm-elections-but-why/

Batista 15
popular Latin Grammys are also scheduled to air on Univision.41 This shows that many
Americans today display levels of political apathy that would make Plato scream in his grave.

Conclusion
Therefore, while Plato may be unclear about the extent in which democratic governments are
inferior to other political systems in the Republic, it is evident that the Greek philosopher showed
more antagonism than favoritism towards this form of government. Also, if Plato was alive
today, chances are his feeling towards a democratic government would hardly have changed.
Democracys social mobility, while vital for societal progress, directly opposes Platos Principle
of the Natural Division of Labor. In addition, democracys lack of adherence to Platos Theory of
Forms causes its citizens to live lives of chaos and contradictions. Without this much-needed
social order, citizens of democratic governments are not equipped to select well-qualified
leaders. Furthermore, philosophers, and the act of philosophizing lose relevancy and applicability
in democratic societies. Consequently, a level of political apathy that is detrimental to a nation
emerges precisely out of such democratic characteristics. Whether Plato was right or not has yet
to be confirmed. Nevertheless, after more than 2,500 years there is still much we can learn from
the Greek philosopher in matters of socio-political issues around the globe.

Bibliography
Demos, Raphael. "Plato's Idea of the Good." The Philosophical Review 4, no. 3 (May 1937):
245-75. Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2181085.

41 Husna Haq, "Obama to give major immigration speech tonight. Why won't the major networks broadcast it?,"
The Christian Science Monitor, last modified November 20, 2014, accessed November 23, 2014,
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Buzz/2014/1120/Obama-to-give-major-immigration-speechtonight.-Why-won-t-the-major-networks-broadcast-it.

Batista 16
Desilver, Drew. "Voter turnout always drops off for midterm elections, but why?" Pew Research
Center. Last modified July 24, 2014. Accessed November 23, 2014.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/24/voter-turnout-always-drops-off-formidterm-elections-but-why/.
Frodeman, Robert, Adam Briggle, and J. Britt Holbrook. "Philosophy in the Age of
Neoliberalism." Social Epistemology, 2012, 1-18. Accessed November 23, 2014.
http://csid.unt.edu/files/PPN_frodbrigholneolib_Atlanta2013.pdf.
Gans, Herbert L. "Political Participation and Apathy." Phylon 49, no. 4 (Fall/Winter 2001): 27782. Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3132633.
Green, Jeffrey E. "Apathy: The Democratic Disease." Philosophy Social Criticism 30 (December
6, 2004): 745-68. Accessed November 23, 2014. doi:10.1177/0191453704045763.
Haq, Husna. "Obama to give major immigration speech tonight. Why won't the major networks
broadcast it?" The Christian Science Monitor. Last modified November 20, 2014.
Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/DecoderBuzz/2014/1120/Obama-to-give-major-immigration-speech-tonight.-Why-won-t-themajor-networks-broadcast-it.
Lange, Stella. "Plato and Democracy." The Classical Journal 34, no. 8 (May 1939): 480-86.
Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3291135.
Marshall, Mason, and Shane A. Bilsborough. "The Republic's Ambiguous Democracy." History
of Philosophy Quarterly 27, no. 4 (October 2010): 301-16. Accessed November 23, 2014.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25762144.
Michels, Steven. "Democracy in Plato's Laws." Journal of Social Philosophy 35, no. 4 (Winter
2004): 517-28. Accessed November 23, 2014.
http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=656aa50f-b733-43fe-aa429eaabd6ecdee%40sessionmgr4001&vid=4&hid=4209.
Plato. The Republic. Translated by Benjamim Jowett. Cleveland: The World Publishing
Company, 1946.
Rosenberg, Morris. "Some Determinants of Political Apathy." The Public Opinion Quarterly 18,
no. 4 (Winter 1955): 349-66. Accessed November 23, 2014.
http://jstor.org/stable/2745968.
Saxenhouse, Arlene W. "Democracy, Equality, and Eid: A Radical View From Book 8 of Plato's
Republic." The American Political Science Review 92, no. 2 (June 1998): 273-83.
Accessed November 23, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2585663.
White, Nicholas P. A Companion to Plato's Republic. Indianapolis: Hacket Publishing Company,
1979.

Batista 17