Plato's Paradox?

Guardians and Philosopher-Kings

Author(s): Christopher M. Duncan and Peter J. Steinberger
Source: The American Political Science Review, Vol. 84, No. 4 (Dec., 1990), pp. 1317-1322
Published by: American Political Science Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1963266
Accessed: 13-07-2018 11:26 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Political Science Review

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 PLATO'S PARADOX? GUARDIANS
AND PHILOSOPHER-KINGS

F or centuries scholars have engaged in interpreting the mean

ing of Plato's Republic. In this exchange, Peter Steinberger and Christopher Du
debate the role of guardians and philosopher-kings in the ancient city. This con
is ignited by Steinberger's essay on Platonic rulers in the December 1989 issue
Review.

n his essay well with the foundation as given; but if

on "Ruling: Guardians and Philosopher- the foundation itself is deficient, predic-
Kings" Peter Steinberger attempts to pointtions based on it can only be seen as coin-
out what he considers a serious paradox cidence or contrivance. In other words,
in the structure of Plato's Republic, name- while Ptolemy may have explained rather
ly, the logical inconsistency inherent in well a universe in which the planets
the notion he ascribes to Plato that a ruler revolve around the earth, he failed to ex-
must be both a philosopher and a guard- plain properly the universe, in which the
ian. He argues-quite correctly-that the earth and the other planets revolve
two kinds of rulers are logically inconsis- around the sun. While Steinberger elabo-
tent, with the former concerned with rates quite well the problems with the
"making or constructing" from the "avail- model he describes, it is not, in fact,
able raw materials" (p. 1207), while the Plato's model.
latter is concerned more with techne, or While the Republic is obviously a
"crafting" solutions or means to achieve multifaceted document that can be read
an already structured set of ends (see p. on may different levels, certain parts of its
1213). The incongruency between the two structure cannot go overlooked or unac-
types of rulers leads Steinberger to declare counted for without doing harm to its
that Plato's claim that the "guardians and meaning. The fundamental project of the
philosophers are the same person" (see Republic is to define justice. All the dis-
Republic 502d-503b) is a logical paradox cussions of art, music, geometry, politics,
(p. 1223). In support Steinberger goes to leadership, cities, food, and so on are but
great lengths to show that the philosopher constructs to facilitate this project. On
and the guardian cannot be the same per- this basis I would contend that one can
son, including the differences in their edu- view the whole of the Republic as revolv-
cation, character, and relationships to-the ing around three questions, namely, Can
necessities of the political world, specifi- justice be found or created in the world of
cally the issue of deceit. As a result of this politics? If so, what does it look like and
paradox he concludes that Plato's view of how is it to be achieved? If not, what does
leadership and rule is incoherent and the this tell us about the world of politics (if
addition of the philosopher-king to the what we seek is justice)? Steinberger sim-
kallipolis superfluous. ply asks the wrong questions. Rather than
The argument made by Steinberger is taking Plato at his word and asking about
interesting and well formulated-given its the relationship of philosophers and
foundation. Much in his analysis is agree- guardians to the world of justice, he asks
able in the same way that Ptolemy's about their relationship to the world of
astronomy is agreeable: it comports quite politics. By so doing, he creates a "reality"

AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

VOLUME 84 NO. 4 DECEMBER 1990

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 American Political Science Review Vol. 84

to which his conclusions are applicable The concern for luxury that the majority
but fails properly to address the reality of people share with Glaucon inspires
suggested by Plato himself. Socrates to explore what is called the
Plato's first city (Republic, Book 2) is a
"feverish city." Only then is it necessary
natural city based on the "spontaneous to introduce politics and its manifesta-
ordering of crafts" (p. 1209), which tions. Steinberger correctly notes that "at
becomes the just city when "tasks are per-the core of the Republic, then, is an effort
formed properly" by "those whose talent to purge (in thought) this feverish city of
and training is appropriate" (p. 1209). its excesses, to restructure it to approxi-
This city "is not something made, not themate the health and orderliness of the first
produce of artifice, it simply comes into city" (p. 1210); yet he is wrong to say that
being" (p. 1210). This being the case, this means that "the virtue of the
though the crafts themselves are rational-kallipolis, like that of the first city, lies in
ly ordered, the. ordering itself is not the
how well its parts fit together into an
product of a craft (p. 1210); thus, "it organic whole" (p. 1211). The kallipolis is
not "organic" at all in the way -the first
seems that there is no ruler in this city" (p.
1210). Not only is there no ruler, but therecity was. Rather, the kallipolis needs
is also no "ruling, law, or political author-political (read human) intervention even
ity in the usual sense" (p. 1210). In otherto approximate the. first city. Once Soc-
words, in Plato's first city there are no rates has left the discussion of the first city
manifestations of politics at all-only the behind, he has left behind the possibility
cohabitation of a specific geographic areaof justice in at least the strong sense of
by people engaged in mutual activities ofthat which is natural, spontaneous, and
production and exchange of their own self-ordering (read self-sufficient). In-
crafted goods. Politics, with its rulers, stead, what we have once the shift to the
laws, and authority, does not exist in luxurious city is made is an attempt to
Plato's first city; it is a community but nothave our proverbial cake and eat it too. In
a political community. Socrates insists other words, Socrates offers his readers a
that this first city is the "true city" or the glimpse of the type of city where justice
"healthy city" (p. 1210). Steinberger might flourish, namely, a simple world of
craft and exchange where each person has
makes his critical mistake when he claims
enough to sustain life but not much more.
that "this city is in some sense a model for
all cities" because it offers a model of In this world Socrates or any other philos-
order and harmony and "provides its citi-opher could be happy and lead the philo-
zen with a life of peace, prosperity, and sophic life unencumbered by either polit-
happiness" (p. 1210). Rather, I would ical restrictions on what he might think
argue, it is a modeL for cities without and say or worldly or political duties such
politics. The kallipolis-the chief model as ruling. But this isn't enough for Glaucon
elaborated in the Republic-is a model for or most other people. They want all this
quite a different type of city. and luxury too. The task of Socrates for
When Glaucon calls the city Socrates the rest of the dialogue then becomes to
has described at first as a "city of pigs" create a community where luxuries and
and induces him to speak on a more lux- the politics that restrain the abuses of such
urious city, the reader must be careful tothings do not prevent the practice. of phi-
note that doing so was not Socrates' idea. losophy or the discovery of justice. The
Steinberger correctly notes that humans question that then haunts the Republic is
multiplyy their.desires far beyond what is whether this state of affairs is possible
natural and necessary" (p. 1210). But not hence the question of ruling.
so Socrates or the philosopher in general. In the first city there are no rulers.-Each

1318

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Plato's Paradox?

person rules himself or herself because wanting by Socrates. The guardians can
politics and its manifestations (rulers, rule over the political approximation of
laws, and authority) are nonexistent. the just city but they cannot make it just.
Only when luxury and its excesses come The role of the philosopher-king, as we
to mark the city does politics in the form see in Book 7, is to destroy the kallipolis
of restructuring for health and order by getting the people to "to despise the
become necessary. The artificial city, current honors" and by killing off all
which lacks the spontaneous order and those over the age of ten who desire (as
harmony of the first city, is the one that Glaucon desires) the self-contradiction of
needs politics, or ruling. Ruling, or what a community that is both luxurious and
Steinberger calls "managerial roles," is just. Justice, the original goal, cannot be
"necessitated by the fact-or persistent found in the political world (though many
threat-of disease or fever" (p. 1211). would like to believe it can.) Plato does
These roles can be filled by the guardians not "fail to revise the institutional struc-
ruling in a "craftlike sense," who mightture of the kallipolis" (p. 1222). He never
benefit by also being philosophers but do authorized its erection in the first place.
not necessarily need to be (p. 1212). Stein- He merely demonstrated why Glaucon's
berger argues that the model with the request was unreasonable, given the ob-
guardians is complete even before the in- ject of their search.
troduction of the philosopher-king (p. The best the political world can offer is
1215), but here his failure to keep the fun- order and harmony, but order and har-
damental project of the Republic in mind mony are not. justice. Though still unde-
betrays his analysis. The political model is fined at the- conclusion of the dialogue
in fact complete without the philosopher- justice must clearly be something "natural
king, for the guardians are able through and spontaneous," the product not of
techne to maintain order in the city. But human artifice but of human contempla-
Socrates and his companions set out to tion and discovery. Justice is not .to be
find not a political model but the nature found in the political city, which becomes
of justice; and for this the rule of the necessary only when human desires in the
guardians is not sufficient. physical world exceed what is necessary
Steinberger admits a role for the philos-for their existence. The city of Glaucon,
opher-king in reforming existing cities but or the kallipolis, represents people's wish
aside from this argues that their introduc- to have all-their desires met and still have
tion into the kallipolis adds "little to thejustice. Socrates elaborates all of the fea-
integrity of the model" (p. 1216). True, tures that such a city will need to survive;
the philosopher-king adds very little to and if most of those rather harsh and op-
the political model, or the kallipolis, pressive solutions seem undesirable, it is
because the guardians are able to main- to make us see that the journey from the
tain order or contain the fever by them-city of "necessity" to the city of "luxury"
selves. But the just city and the kallipolisisn't worth the trip. Only in the political
are not fundamental equivalents but world do men and women need guardians
rather two different kinds of communi-to protect them from each other and from
ties-one artificial and one natural. The themselves; the rule of the philosopher-
justification for bringing the philosopher- kings makes the apolitical city possible
king back into the kallipolis is to reintro-again. When they rule, there are no more
duce the original task of the dialogue, "guardians" in the political sense, for the
namely, finding justice. The political two have become one.
world, or the world of luxury suggested CHRISTOPHER M. DUNCAN
by Glaucon, has been explored and foundWayne State University

1319

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 American Political Science Review Vol. 84

corollary with equanimity, since doing so

I am grateful to Christopher M. Dun- would have no serious consequences for
can for his effort to consider and assess the central argument of my essay.
my views on Plato. It is a pleasure to have Unfortunately, Duncan's formation
one's work taken seriously. Unfortunate- does not work even against the corollary
ly, I do not see that his comments have because it attributes views to Plato that he
any force against my argument. cannot possibly have held. Duncan's
Indeed, it is not entirely clear in what argument rests entirely on his distinction
sense his criticisms are criticisms at all, between justice models (the city of pigs
since he explicitly accepts my distinction and the city of philosopher-kings) and
between guardians and philosopher- political models (the kallipolis). But there
kings, my characterization of the featuresis, in fact, no textual, conceptual, or theo-
retical basis for such a distinction; hence,
of the city of pigs, my account of this city
as the true or healthy city, my interpreta-the argument derived from it cannot be
tion of Socrates' claims concerning luxurycorrect.
and unnatural desire, my description of First of all, the notion of the political is
the central aims of the Republic, my inter-used by Duncan in a highly non-Platonic
pretation of the necessity and purpose of manner, since for Plato the political
ruling in the kallipolis and the craftlikewould presumably refer to all things per-
quality of the guardians' rule, and my taining to the polis. Thus, for example,
contentions that Plato's "political model" the phrase apolitical city, which Duncan
is completed prior to the introduction of predicates of his justice models, makes no
the concept of the philosopher-king and Platonic sense.
that philosopher-kings are not part of the Second, one might attribute this error
kallipolis. He thus concedes nearly all ofsimply to an imprecise use of language
the important claims that my essay and say that by apolitical Duncan is really
makes. referring to the absence of an explicit ruler
His main argument seems to be that or group of rulers. There certainly are no
rulers in the city of pigs. But Duncan
whereas the first city (the city of pigs) and
the third city (the city of philosopher-claims that this is also the case with the
kings) are fundamentally similar in being city of philosopher-kings, a most implaus-
nonpolitical embodiments of justice, the ible claim. Whereas the city of pigs arises
and functions "naturally and spontane-
second city (the kallipolis), characterized
by the presence of rulers, is political andously" (i.e., without human artifice or
not at all just. My error apparently is inrulers), this can hardly be true of the third
city.
failing to see this, hence failing to under- Philosopher-kings are kings. They
stand that the kallipolis is a political do not gravitate spontaneously to the
model but not a-justice model. This argu- cave but are compelled to return there;
ment in no way confutes, but is fully con- once there, they presumably propagate
sistent with, the central contention of my laws and policies explicitly and intention-
essay that there is a deep difference be- ally designed to ensure that empirical
tween guardians and philosopher-kings. cities function as harmoniously as possi-
As far as I can tell, then, Duncan is criti- ble. There is no unseen hand here. The
cizing only one relatively minor corollary city of philosopher-kings is not a spon-
of this contention-namely, that there-istaneous, unplanned organism like the city
an internal contradiction in the Republic. of pigs; it is indeed the product of human
One can understand why such a claim artifice and rule, albeit guided quite strict-
would attract attention. But in fact, I ly by the dictates of right reason.
would be perfectly willing to reject this Third, Duncan's claim that the kallipo-

1320

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Plato's Paradox?

lis is in no sense a matter of justice despite fact Plato wants only to exile them to the
the fact that it is well ordered and har- countryside. The latter may be a fate
monious is equally implausible. He argues worse than death, but it's hardly the same
that justice remains "undefined at the con- thing.
clusion of the dialogue." I do not know For all these reasons, I do not find that
how to reconcile this with the famous pas- Duncan makes a plausible case even
sages in Book 4 (e.g., 427b-435a) where against the relatively minor corollary that
Plato certainly seems to provide an ex- his comment tacitly addresses. This some-
plicit and powerful definition of justice. what surprises me, for I had expected his
Justice is, indeed, a matter of correct criticism, along with comments from var-
order and harmony, whether of the city ious other interlocutors, to be far more
or of the soul. To the extent that such telling. My purpose in writing the essay
order and harmony is characteristic of the was to provide an account of the Republic
kallipolis, it must be like the city of pigs that was both original and accurate.
and the city of philosopher-kings in being Given the enormous amount of extraordi-
a representation of justice. The distinction nary philosophical talent that has been
between political city and just city thus devoted to interpreting Plato over many
has no textual basis. centuries, I assumed at the outset that
It may be that Duncan's misinterpreta- achieving such a goal would be highly un-
tion is rooted in a series of erroneous likely. As a purely probabilistic matter,
readings, both of Plato and of my essay. any original account would almost cer-
He begins by citing a distinction between tainly be wrong and any correct account
ruling as "making or constructing" on the would almost certainly be unoriginal.
one hand and "crafting solutions" on the This is still my view. I presume that my
other. In fact, there is no such distinction. essay must be either old hat or in error,
The distinction I drew was between ruling and I am thus waiting only to learn in
as techne (which includes making and exactly what ways this is so. Duncan has
constructing, as well as crafting) and rul- not been helpful in this regard, and this
ing as philosophy. He discusses the happy leaves me slightly-though only slightly
and unencumbered life of philosophy in -less confident that my argument is
the city of pigs, whereas Plato's account somehow defective.
of that city in fact makes no mention of
philosophy. He accuses Plato of advocat-
PETER J. STEINBERGER
ing genocide-of wanting to murder most
individuals over the age of ten-when in Reed College

1321

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 American Political Science Review Vol. 84

Forthcoming in March B. Honig. "Declarations of Indepen-

dence: Arendt and Derrida on the Prob-
The following articles, research notes, lem of Founding a Republic."
and controversies, have been tentatively Timothy Mitchell. "The Limits of the
scheduled for publication in the March State: Beyond Statist Approaches and
1991 issue: Their Critics."
Paul R. Abramson and Charles W. Ronald B. Rapoport and Alan I.
Ostrom. "Macropartisanship: An Empir- Abramowitz. "Do Endorsements Matter?
ical Reassessment." A research note. Group Influence in the 1984 Democratic
David P. Baron. "A Spatial Bargaining Congress." A research note.
Theory of Government Formation in Par- John T. Scholz. "Cooperative Regula-
liamentary Systems." tory Enforcement and the Politics of Ad-
James W. Booth. "The New Household ministrative Effectiveness."
Economy." Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey. "The Best of
Jeffrey Cohen, Michael A. Frassa, and Both Worlds: Industry Concentration,
John Hammond. "The Impact of Presi- Export Sector Deconcentration, and the
dential Campaigning on Midterm Senate Emergence of Britain's Nineteenth-Cen-
Elections." A research note. tury Free Trade Lobby."
Lee Epstein and C. K. Rowland, "De- Judith Shklar. "Redeeming American
bunking the Myth of Interest Group In- Political Theory."
vincibility in the Courts." A research Richard C. Sinopoli and Nancy J.
note. Hirschmann. "Feminist and Liberal The-
Joshua Goldstein and John R. Freeman.ory." A controversy.
"U.S.-Soviet-Chinese Relations: Routine,
Reciprocity, or Relational Expectations?"

1322

This content downloaded from 146.95.253.17 on Fri, 13 Jul 2018 11:26:52 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms