The Political Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle Learning is ForEver: Spring 2016 Series

THE POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF PLATO

AND ARISTOTLE
Brendan Shea, PhD (brendanpshea@gmail.com)
Figure 1 Athens, Sparta, Macedonia, and Persia.
Plato and Aristotle are among the most important and influential philosophers
ever to write. They laid the foundations not only for traditionally “philosophical”
debates concerning ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics, but for academic
inquiry much more generally. Their interests ranged from physics to biology to
political science to logic to theology. Even when they were wrong about the details
(as they often were), their work played a crucial role in “setting the agenda” for
future researchers, and deciding which questions were worth answering, and how
they might be answered. This influence reverberated through the Greek and
Roman world, through medieval Christian and Islamic theology, and finally into
the modern and contemporary eras, where scholars continue to wrestle with
arguments and ideas that are now almost 2,500 years old. In this class, we’ll be
looking at some of Plato’s and Aristotle’s ideas regarding political philosophy, with
a special emphasis on Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics.

THE WORLD OF PLATO AND ARISTOTLE

A great deal has been written about the history of ancient Greece, and it is difficult to determine the extent to which Plato’s
and Aristotle’s claims about political philosophy represent a reaction to the tumultuous world in which they lived. Some of the
major events are as follows:

Dates (BCE) Events

600-430 Important foundations for both philosophy and science are laid by the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, including Thales,
Pythagoras, Parmenides, Zeno, Empedocles, and Anaxagoras (who brought philosophy to Athens)
510 Athens becomes democratic. All male, landowning native Athenians (around 20% of the population) are allowed to
vote
500 to 450 The Greek city-states fight and win the Persian Wars. Athens plays a major role, and becomes a major center of trade
and culture (especially theater).
431 to 404 Athens and Sparta lead rival coalitions in the Peloponnesian Wars. Socrates’ student Alcibiades switches sides several
times (Athens, Sparta, Persia, Athens) during the conflict, before leading Athens to defeat. Athens suffers the brief
reign of the Thirty Tyrants.
428-348 Plato is born to a rich family, and befriends Socrates as a young man. After Socrates’ death, he travels for a number of
years before returning and founding the Academy. Most of his work is from this period. He makes several trips to
Syracuse to serve as a political advisor, but this ends badly.
399 Shortly after Athenian democracy is restored, Plato’s teacher Socrates is condemned to death for corrupting the youth,
and denying the gods of the state.
384-322 Aristotle is born in Macedonia, and comes to study at the Academy as a young man. After Plato’s death, legend says
that he becomes a tutor to Alexander the Great, who subdues Athens in 336. Aristotle then returns to Athens to
found the Lyceum. He flees Athens after Alexander’s death, and dies soon after.
322 to 529 CE Athens remains an important center of Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy throughout the Hellenistic and Roman
eras. Even after the Academy is closed in 529 as a center of “pagan” thought, Plato and Aristotle exert powerful
influences on Jewish, Christian, and Islamic theology and political philosophy.
BUILDING THE KALLIPOLIS: PLATO’S REPUBLIC
The Problem of the Republic: Answering Thrasymachus. The central question of The Republic is “What is Justice?”.
Plato’s Socrates is interested in figuring both what it means to be a “good person” and how this relates to building a “good
society.” In book 1, a disagreeable figure named Thrasymachus provides an initial answer: “Justice is the advantage of the
1
The Political Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle Learning is ForEver: Spring 2016 Series
stronger.” According to this view, the laws/policies/customs/morals of every society are simply tools by which those in power
pursue their self-interest. So, for example, the laws of a monarchy serve the monarch, while the laws of a democracy serve
those of the majority. In book 2, the character of Glaucon restates this challenge, and notes that, if it is correct, then the
groups and individuals who are NOT in charge have no reason to value “justice” in and of itself (though they might follow the
law to avoid punishment).
Socrates’s Answer: Good States Makes Good People. Socrates rejects the arguments of Thrasymachus and Glaucon, and
sets out to describe an idealized state that really would benefit its citizens, and whose rulers would have moral justification for
the sorts of choices they make. Even if this state weren’t entirely realistic (at least for now), it would at least show that Justice
is something more than “doing what the people in charge say” and that the (right sort of) government would be worth
listening to. A few highlights of the argument:
Step 1: From the “City of Pigs” to the Kallipolis. Socrates’ first describes the “true city” as a sort of small, anarchist
community, where individual citizens (recognizing that no person is self-sufficient) come together to make sure everyone’s
basic needs for food, shelter, friendship, and meaningful employment are met. Decisions are (presumably) made by mutual
consensus, and the people are described as generally happy. Glaucon, however, rejects this as a “city of pigs,” on the grounds
that it excludes the sorts of luxuries that we humans value, especially those with aesthetic value (fine meals, theater, poetry,
music, and so on). Socrates quickly moves on to the creation of the (much larger and more complex) kallipolis that can meet
these new goals.
Step 2: Education, Media, and The “Noble Lie.” In order to convince people to make the “right” decisions, and to go
along with Socrates’s plan (which may disagree with their desire to pursue unnecessary luxuries), Socrates recommends tricking
them. Among other things, this involves fabricating a religious tale about people being born with a certain sort of “soul” (gold,
silver, or iron/bronze) that determines their social standing and occupation. It also involves revising existing religion,
literature, and music to remove inconsistencies or bad behavior by gods/heroes.
Step 3: The City and the Soul. Socrates argues that there a close analogy between the city and the soul, and understanding
this analogy is essential to understanding both personal and social justice. He breaks the soul into three parts: the appetitive soul
which strives to meet various desires, the spirited soul which seeks honor/recognition, and the rational soul which seeks
wisdom. The perfect city will, in turn, divide people according to the part of the soul that is predominant: the ordinary people
are ruled by the appetites, the guardians by their desire for honor/recognition, and the rulers by the rational part of the soul.
Step 4: Getting the Incentives Right: Money, Sex, and Children. Socrates notes that the guardians will susceptible to at
least two different corrupting influence: the greedy desire for money, and the nepotistic desire to look out for their “own”
family. To combat these influences, the guardians of the kallipolis will adopt a communist system of common property, and
the government will take over all reproductive choices (by arranging matches, and by raising the children communally, and
keeping their parentage a secret from everyone). Socrates’ general idea is that things like private property and the nuclear
family, while widespread, are simply one way of arranging things, and that nothing in human nature requires that we do things
this way.
Step 5: The Philosopher Kings. The idealized kallipolis will be ruled by hyper-educated, incorruptible (though fully human)
philosopher kings whose only motivation is to pursue wisdom, and to enable the citizens of the kallipolis to lead the best lives
they can. In such a state, Socrates argues that written laws would be unnecessary. While Plato’s later dialogues provide a
defense of laws, the example of kallipolis suggests that laws are not required for a state. That is, one could (at least in principle)
have a good government even if there were no laws. Plato runs into some problems in explaining why the philosopher kings
would want to rule.

ARISTOTLE’S POLITICS: RULING IN THE REAL WORLD?

Step 1: The Purpose of Everything. Aristotle argues that humans, like all other living beings, have an essential function or
essences. Just as hammers’ function is to “pound nails,” a human’s function is to achieve eudaimonia (“true happiness”).
Humans are, according are to Aristotle, essentially “rational” animals or the “social” animals, and a big part of what it means
to be a good human (and to achieve eudaimonia) is to develop virtues related to these abilities: generosity, justice, courage,
wisdom, humor, and so on. With this background established, Aristotle goes on to argue that the state is necessary to achieve
2
The Political Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle Learning is ForEver: Spring 2016 Series
eudaimonia, since these sorts of individual virtues simply couldn’t exist without education, security, property, leisure time,
culture and so on..
Step 2: Some Problems With Human Nature. Aristotle leans on claims about what is “natural” to defend the nuclear family
against Plato’s proposal to break it up (something many modern readers might agree with), but goes on to deploy these same
arguments to defend both slavery and the subjection of women (which most modern readers resist). From Aristotle’s point of
view, this move has another advantage: it explains how society can continue to function even when the citizens are spending
their pursuing eudaimonia (and avoiding labor at all costs). This points to a more general feature of Aristotle’s empiricist
methods, and to his reliance on the way things “really worked”: while his proposals are often more “realistic” than Plato’s, it
can also prevent him from seeing the possible benefits of radical change. Aristotle’s arguments regarding these issues have
proved remarkably tenacious, and influenced anti-feminist and pro-slavery writers for thousands of years.
Step 3: What to Do About Wealth? Aristotle argues that the communism of the Republic is highly likely to backfire, since
there is little reason to think that the (human) guardians will take care of the common property with anything like the care
people show to their own property. Second, he notes that The Republic essentially ignores the question of how the common
people are to be governed. If they are allowed to have private property, what’s to stop them from overthrowing the guardians
(or the communist guardians from quitting to join them)? If they can’t have private property, by contrast, this will cause even
bigger problems regarding incentives.
Step 4: Ruling from the Middle. In contrast to Plato, Aristotle claims that leaders gain their legitimacy not from their perfect
wisdom, but from their willingness to impartially pursue the wellbeing of all groups within a society, importantly including
both the rich and the poor. Moreover, unlike the kallipolis, Aristotle’s ideal government includes both well-designed laws and a
strong predisposition of the leaders to obey the laws. In the end, he thinks that the governments must have both democratic
and oligarchic elements, where all citizens are able to participate politically, but the rich receive enough benefit to “buy in” to
the government. Aristotle argues that the long-term stability of these governments rest crucially on the existence of large
“middle class” who actually has an interest in seeing the laws impartially followed.
Step 5: The Role of Education. Like Plato, Aristotle argues that education is a central part of the state’s responsibility, and
strongly opposes the idea that it should be left to individual families. Unlike Plato, he argues that the purpose of education is
not simply to teach people the means for achieving state ends (or, for that matter, the ends of the market). Instead, education
should teach citizens how to actually get something out of life, and in particular, how to get something out of one’s leisure time.
Aristotle attacks education system that focus exclusively on making good warriors (such as Sparta), or those that teach children
to make money (which has always been common).

PLATO’S REPUBLIC AND ARISTOTLE’S POLITICS: A COMPARISON

Plato
Methodology Primarily rationalist—the structure of the
perfect city (the kallipolis) follows as
natural consequence of the three-part
soul.
What Counts as The state arises as a result of division of
a State? labor among citizens, and the “City of
Pigs” contains little structure.
The Rulers and The philosopher-kings rule because of
Their their wisdom. The people will obey
Legitimacy because of the “Noble Lie.”
Human Nature While most humans are irrational (and
need to be ruled like slaves), there doesn’t
appear to be any sort of in-principle
distinction between men, women, or even
non-Greek slaves.
Property and The ruling class (and perhaps everyone)
Family shouldn’t have property or families, to
Aristotle
More empiricist—Aristotle’s proposals are based both on
substantive claims about human nature, on observations of
real cities, and on criticisms of existing argument.
Since the state is aimed at pursuing the good life, even the
minimal state must have laws, taxes, justice, warriors, slaves,
and so on.
The government is a limited democracy. The rulers stick
closely to the law because this is what the middle class (the
strongest part of society) desire.
Greek men are, by nature, superior in reason to women,
men, and non-Greeks, and are entitled to rule them.
However, these citizens are granted more autonomy than on
Plato’s view.
The middle class, who own some property but not an
obscene amount, ought to be actively supported by the state,
3
The Political Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle Learning is ForEver: Spring 2016 Series
eliminate potential conflicts with the since they are a class with the most interest in seeing the laws
public good. applied impartially. The patriarchal family (including slaves)
is left alone.
Education The primary goal of education is to allow The goal of state is to provide citizens a good life, which
the citizens to function as part of the includes participating in politics. The state should train the
state, so education depends heavily on young how to be good citizens who can lead, happy fulfilled
your role/job. lives.
Censorship The state exerts direct control over The state protects the “young” from harmful media, but
theater, music, religion, and music. adults are left more-or-less alone.
LESSONS FOR THE MODERN WORLD
What Makes Political Authority Legitimate? Many of us take for granted the liberal ideas that (1) the authority of the
government derives (somehow or other) from the consent of those who are governed and (2) the state’s main function is to
allow citizens the opportunity to pursue their own conception of the “good life.” Depending on one’s political orientation, a
liberal state might prioritize protecting citizens’ property rights (right-leaning libertarianism) and/or providing adequate
resources (left-leaning liberalism). Plato and Aristotle propose something different: The authority of the government is
dependent upon its ability to give citizens a genuinely good life, regardless of what their current desires are.
Questions to Consider: In an era of increasing ideological and cultural diversity, and of large economic inequalities, how can we
convince citizens to “buy into” governmental institutions? What sort of constraints should there be on democratically elected
majorities in passing laws? How can we convince politicians to plan for the long term when this isn’t what their voters desire
(on issues such as climate change, pensions, infrastructure, and so on)? To what extent can the state control harmful or
deceptive advertising?
How Can We Fix The Problem of Bad Incentives? Both Plato and Aristotle are deeply concerned with what is now called
the problem of “institutional capture,” which occurs when the government is “captured” by some interest group or other:
the rich, the poor, particular families, etc. This concern is, in fact, one of their main reasons for rejecting standard forms of
oligarchy (where the rich minority rule), democracy (where the poor majority rule), and monarchy (where leadership is
inherited). In these sorts of governments, the authority is too responsive to the wishes of a certain portion of the populace,
when it ought to be more removed and impartial.
Questions to Consider: Money continues to play a large role in elections, and recent studies have found that governmental policies
are heavily influenced by the wishes of the wealthy “elite,” and that the preferences of other portions of the population play
little or no independent role. What can be done about this? Similarly, social and cultural groups have a vested interest in their
own survival, and the policies they favor (regarding everything from immigration to housing policies to state support of
religion/culture) may not always be good for the political community as a whole. Is there a way from preventing the loudest,
angriest voices from exerting a disproportionate interest on policy?
Why Do States Fail? The experience of the ancient Greeks emphasized the essentially fragile nature of the state. Once-
healthy states were all too easily destroyed by rebellion, war, or by the slow creep of corruption, often with terrible
consequences for their citizens. Plato and Aristotle proposed specific remedies for this. First, they argued that states cannot
and should not allow the parents to determine the scope and content of their children’s education. Second, state-sponsored
education must go beyond learning a skill, and must aim to impart the shared values that will allow the state to continue.
Finally, they argue that merely having laws (and police to enforce them) is not enough. Instead, both citizens and leaders need
to care about the laws, and see the value in obeying them simply because they are the laws.
Questions to Consider: Modern approaches to education, especially in the U.S., have focused on increasing school “choice,” with
private, charter, home-school options creating a sort of “market” in education where parents can select what they think is
“best” for their child. Does this movement risk undermining the political community, in the ways that Plato and Aristotle
worry about? If not, why not? In regards to a culture of respect for laws, do the increasing divisions between the political left
and right risk creating an environment where the law is regarded merely as a tool for partisan ends? What might be the
consequences of this? How might this issue be addressed?