Guardians of the Republic
In Plato’s Republic, the guardians are essential to the successful creation of the city of Kallipolis. The guardians are the class just below the philosopher-king but remain superior to the other classes in society because of their moral righteousness. The guardians are forced to sacrifice all material desires in an attempt to create a happier city for all. Plato’s defense of the guardian’s centers around the overall happiness of the city and while he does create a city that is ultimately happy, he negates some of the natural impulses that make human beings human.
To help create his utopian city, Socrates uses the guardians as the class that will have the city’s most important values engrained in their moral persona. The guardians serve as the ruling class under the philosopher-king but do not own any material possessions in order to make sure that they do not rule for their own personal gain. It is the role of the philosopher-king to lie to the guardians in order to convince them to comply with the rules that have been laid out to them. Socrates believes that by solely having the best intentions of the city as the primary focus of the guardians, they are able to strip away any desire for property, family life, wealth, or anything else their appetitive soul desires. The guardians are forced to live by these principles to the highest degree possible because any action contrary to these rules would cause “their own destruction and that of the rest of the city as well” (417b5). Through their wholly just souls, the guardians are able to spread their goodness to the producing class. Therefore, the primary focus of the guardians is to serve as a human example of the city in which they live in. In order for Plato’s city Kallipolis to thrive, the guardians must fulfill their roles as moral anchors and in this pursuit of moral perfection the guardians ultimately find happiness, which in turn creates happiness for the entire city.
In Book 4, Socrates argues that: “In establishing our city, we are not looking to make any one group in it outstandingly happy, but to make the whole city so far as possible” (420b6) In other words, by sacrificing the entire happiness of one group of society the rest of its members are able to help contribute to the overall happiness of the city. This portrays a utopian ideal of creating a “happier” place even if it’s at the sacrifice of some of its members. Socrates argues that it is essential for each guardian in the city to play his role in order to allow happiness into the city: “We should compel or persuade the auxiliaries and guardians to ensure that they, and all the others as well, are the best possible craftsmen at their own work; and then… leave it to nature to provide each group with its share of happiness” (421c5). Through his defense of the guardians, Socrates says that each person of society will find the happiness that is due to them through the craft that they were born best fit for. This means that even if the guardians are not able to own any material possessions, they will still find enjoyment in their work as moral enforcers of the city. Socrates’ method for persuading the guardians to fulfill their functions is to lie and tell them the story of the metals. By convincing them that their souls are comprised of gold, the guardians have a sense of honor and superiority over the other classes made of silver or bronze. With this sense of superiority the guardians are compelled to act as justly as a person with a gold soul would because of the fear that the city would be ruined if: “ever there was an iron or bronze guardian” (415c6). Overall, Socrates uses the sacrifices of the guardians to show that all members of society must sacrifice some sense of happiness for the greater happiness of the city as a whole.
Both Glaucon and Adeimantus bring up reasonable viewpoints of a person being happier by being an unjust person, contrary to Socrates’ views regarding the city and the guardians. It seems realistic that if someone had the power to commit any kind of injustice without facing any consequences that he would capitalize on the opportunity. Glaucon brings this to Socrates’ attention with the story of the Ring of Gyges in which he states: “That gods and humans provide a better life for the unjust one than for the just one” (362c6). Glaucon believes that an unjust person can wish to have the reputation of a just man and live a better life than a truly just person. An unjust person with a good reputation is able to avoid the scrutiny of being thought to be unjust while also working for his own self-betterment. His brother Adeimantus then further explains the logic behind Glaucon’s statement when he says that one can be unjust and receive no punishment. Adeimantus says that if one is great at being unjust, then they will be able to hide their injustices from the public and the gods. He says that one does not truly know if the gods exist and if they did, an unjust man would be able to convince the gods otherwise. Plato’s idealistic views of sacrificing personal happiness for a greater cause are definitely utopian. In creating his better place, Plato disregards the free will of the guardians or the possibility of any guardian to act for himself rather than for his city.
I find that Plato, Glaucon, and Adeimantus have very compelling arguments because they are all grounded in logic. For one, Plato’s city is complete with its philosopher-king and it is clear the city he has created is better than the current one that he lives in. Therefore, he succeeds in creating a better place where justice is at the forefront of its resident’s actions. However, what Plato fails to see is that while he does in fact create a better place he ends up creating what becomes a “better place that is no place”. The guardians and philosopher king are all created under the pretense that they will all only want to commit just acts no matter the circumstance. The information that the guardians receive is extremely limited and structured. They are only told stories of heroes and goodness but all the while never learn of the misfortunes of the real world. With so much control over what the guardians are allowed to experience, Plato creates a class of moral enforcers that are blind to so many aspects of real aspects of life. Plato disregards the natural human impulse of curiosity by believing that the guardians will all solely wish to hear stories of heroes and goodness, instead of about their opposites. This idea of a lack of free will for the citizens of Kallipolis continues when Socrates says: “The law is not concerned with making any one class in the city do outstandingly well, but is contriving to produce this condition in the city as a whole, harmonizing the citizens together through persuasion or compulsion” (p.213, 519e) Plato’s plan is to harmonize his citizens through persuasion or compulsion regardless of what the residents of Kallipolis desire. Ultimately, Plato creates a city that is in many ways utopian for the way that its citizens work in harmony to compose an entirely just city but stems way from its utopian roots when it ignores the natural human impulses of free will and desire.
Word Count: 1274
Works Cited
Plato, C. D. C. Reeve. 2004. Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.