The Republic
The Republic is perhaps Plato's best-known dialogue and one of his most influential. In it, he explains, through the character of Socrates, the fundamentals of his political philosophy (presented, stylistically, via the concept of a Utopia), his ethics, and his theory of universals (the 'forms')—among other things. The work is also famous for its literary style: the text is presented as a discussion between Socrates and several other students at a dinner.
The nominal goal of the Republic is to define justice. Given the difficulty of this task, Socrates and his students are lead into a discussion of the best possible State. Thereafter they convene on which of the qualities of the best State is to be labelled justice.
The title "Republic" is derived from the Latin title given to the work by Cicero. Plato's Greek language title, Politeia, described the government of a Polis or city-state. The character Socrates and his friends discuss the nature of an ideal city rather than the nature of the Athenian democracy.
The Republic bears little resemblance to the modern political institution that we, in modern times, know as the republic. Plato despised democracy and uses "The Republic" to point out some of its weaker points: susceptibility to demagogues, rule by unfit "barbarians" etc. The concept of democracy and of Utopia as depicted in the Republic are tied to the City-state of ancient Greece and their relevance as concerns modern empires and states is questionable.
Justice is defined as a state where everyone is to do their own socially appointed work while not interfering with those of others. This conception of justice, striking to the modern reader, is closely linked to the Greek conception of fate or necessity, such as that embodied later in Aristotle's final cause. This definition of justice leads to a social structure radically different from most previous and subsequent states.
The ideal city as depicted in The Republic should be governed by philosopher-kings; disinterested persons who are to rule not for their personal enjoyment but for the good of the City-State. Socrates points out the human tendency to corruption by power and thus tyranny; therefore ruling should only be left to a ceratin class of people whose only purpose is to govern in what is deemed a just manner. At this point, it clear that the Platonic society is to be highly hierarchical. In addition to the ruling class of philosopher-kings, there is also to be a military class and the common people.
For the latter, there should be no individual possessions. There are a number of provisions to avoid making the people weak: among those, censorship of certain kinds of music, poetry and theatre, a rigid education system, and the abolishment of riches. Being both an educator as a parent and a worker is incompatible with the definition of justice. This leads to the abandonment of the typical family, and as such no child may know its parents and parents may not know their own children. The rulers assemble couples for reproduction, based on breeding criteria. Education is thereafter relegated to specialized caregivers. Thus, stable population is achieved through eugenism and social cohesion is high because familiar links are extended towards everyone in the City. Social classes are largely static although marginal permeability is allowed.
The city of the Republic has struck many modern critics as unduly harsh, rigid, and unfree; indeed, as a kind of prequel to modern totalitarianism. Karl Popper is perhaps today's best-known protagonist of that view, which is the view generally represented in modern introductory college textbooks on political philosophy.
At the time Karl Popper wrote his critique, 1945, and certainly among many political philosophers today, Plato was and is usually seen in a much more favorable light, for example by Hans-Georg Gadamer in his 1934 classic, Plato und die Dichter (and several other works), where the city of the Politeia is seen as a heuristic utopia that should not be pursued or even be used as an orientation-point for political development. Rather, its purpose is said to be to show how things would have to be connected, and how one thing would lead to another—often with highly problematic results—if one would opt for certain principles and carry them through rigorously. This interpretation argues that large passages in Plato's writing are ironic (which, of course, an unusually high level of proficiency in ancient Greek is required to detect). Hence, Plato's entire oeuvre would be much less totalitarian.
One of the most convincing arguments against this interpretation is that Plato's academy has produced a number of tyrants, despite being well-versed in Greek and having direct contect with Plato himself. Among his direct students where Klearchos, tyrant of Heraklia, Chairon, tyrant of Pellene, Eurostatos and Choriskos, tyrants of Skepsis, Hermias, tyrant of Atarneos and Assos, and Kallipos, tyrant of Syracuse. Against this, however, it can be argued, first, that the question is whether these men became "tyrants" through studying in the Academy, and, second, that it is by no means obvious that they were tyrants in the modern, or any totalitarian, sense.
The Republic of Plato introduces his metaphysics in addition to politics and ethics. His theory of forms or ideals concerning the nature of reality is set forth, including the famous allegory of the cave, where the world around us is likened to the shadows cast onto the wall of a cave.
