Running Head: THE FEMALE SOUL

The Female Soul

Fernanda Cherini

York University
 THE FEMALE SOUL 2

In the Book V of the Republic, Plato makes a lot of claims which can be considered

quite strange in the context in which he was living. One of these claims is his affirmation

that women could be “philosopher queens” and part of the administration of the state. This

has raised many questions: why would he make such a claim? What was his goal? What

exactly was he claiming? This paper will try to first determine what was his claim, and then

answer the question of what led him to affirm that women could be “philosopher queens”.

Plato discusses the “case of the philosopher queens” in the context of creating an

ideal city or state, which would reflect the ideal soul. His ideal state involves three

‘shocking’ concepts, which he explains in different “waves”, the first one being about the

“philosopher queens”. He argues that women could have the same duties as men, including

the administration of the state, and for that, they must also be educated in the same way as

men (p. 125 451e). Plato acknowledges that it could seem contradicting, since he first said

that each person should pursue its specific role in society according to their nature, but then

affirms that women could have the same pursuits as men (p. 127 453e). He again confirms

that “different natures must follow different ways of life and the natures of men and women

are different” (p. 127 453e); however, in the matters of the city, men and women are by

nature the same (p. 130 456). Therefore, they are capable of being “philosopher queens”

too and could participate in the administering the state, guarding the city or having other

roles.

At first, this might seem like Plato believed that the difference in nature is simply

because they are two different sexes with their particularities, but that overall men and

women can be equal and perform the same tasks. To say that women could be rulers is
 THE FEMALE SOUL 3

already quite an unusual notion, as women were not even allowed to participate in politics

in Athens. If Plato was affirming that women are equal to men, this would be something

revolutionary for his time, as mentioned in many lectures. As deceiving as this might be,

Plato is certainly not defending and does not believe in the equality of sexes. Therefore, to

fully answer the question of why he would make the case for “philosopher queens”, we

need to understand first what exactly he was defending.

We cannot make the mistake of romanticizing Plato’s claim. As mentioned, Plato

affirms that for women to have the same duties as men, their education should be the same.

However, his interest is very pragmatic, as he is mostly concerned with what is best for the

state, not for women. “Is there anything better for a city than having the best possible men

and women as its citizens?” (p. 131 456e). We can infer from this phrase that for the state

to be ideal, everyone should be as good as possible. Not only men, but women should

contribute to the state as well by perfecting themselves and performing their duties: “shall

we assign all of them [tasks of administering the city] to men and none to women?” (p. 129

455e). Therefore, for that to happen, women should be educated in the same way as men.

Nonetheless, Plato could still be pragmatic and, at the same time, say that a woman should

perfect herself in her specific duties, which are different than those of a man, and not related

to philosophy. Thus, pragmatism alone is not enough to explain his case for “philosopher

queens”, but it is important to keep it in mind. To answer the essay’s question, it is

necessary to look at Plato’s view and understanding of the human soul, which will be done

in the next paragraph.

 THE FEMALE SOUL 4

For Plato, the soul and the body are very distinctly separated, with the soul not

being dependent on the body. In this duality, the soul or mind is much more important, and

the body should be subordinated to it. Following this reasoning, the difference between the

bodies of men and women have no impact in the nature that their soul can have. The

example presented is that a bald man, although having the body different than that of a

long-haired man, can still have the same nature (p. 128 454c). In the case of women, Plato

affirms that if men and women differ only in one bearing children and the other begetting

them, but have the same pursuits, they should have the same way of life” (p. 128 454e).

Plato further clarifies that “the various natures are distributed in the same way in both

creatures. Women share by nature in every way of life just as men do, but in all of them

women are weaker than men” (p. 129 455e). Therefore, the body differences between men

and women are not enough to affect the aspirations of their nature, both can have souls that

are guided by wisdom, spirit, or appetite. In this case, if women can be guided by their

wisdom, they should perform the duties associated with this nature, which is being a

philosopher ruler. Nonetheless, although their nature may be able to have the same pursuits

and qualities, a women’s nature is still weaker, since he explicitly says that “one sex is

much superior to the other in pretty well everything” (p. 129 455d). Plato further affirms

that “men and women are by nature the same with respect to guarding the city, except to

the extent that one is weaker and the other stronger” (p. 130 456).

We have cleared that Plato makes the case for “philosopher queens” because he

wants what is best for the state, and because he believes that the soul of women can have

the nature and aspirations as men. However, that raises more questions that are much more

difficult to answer. Like all other philosophers of his time, Plato could have said that the
 THE FEMALE SOUL 5

female soul is, actually, different than a man’s soul in their natures and pursuits. He could

have affirmed that a woman can only be guided by her appetite, and maybe by their spirit,

but that wisdom is unachievable for them. It is not the intention of this paper to answer

what drove Plato to say that a woman can have the same natures as men, however, it is

important to acknowledge that this discussion about Plato and the female soul is deeper

and more complex.

Plato claims that a woman could be a “philosopher queen” and perform the same

duties as men. To say that women can perform political roles in the ideal state,

consequently being “philosopher queens”, has an explanation based on a mixture of factors.

Pragmatism does play an important role, but it cannot be the ultimate reason for Plato’s

claim. The major reason would be that the characteristics of the human body have no

interference in the nature their soul can have. Women should be able to perform the same

activities as men if educated the same, because their souls do not oppose in nature. Still,

this claim cannot be misunderstood, as he still sees women as weaker and inferior.
 THE FEMALE SOUL 6

References

Plato. (1992). Republic (2nd ed.) (G. M. A. Grube, Trans.; C. D. C. Reeve, Ed.).

Indianapolis: Hackett Pub Co.