The theory of forms is a representation of Plato's ideology that the nonphysical and significant ideas are a representation of the most accurate realities. Plato argues out the reality aspect of the theory through dialogues among his characters. The characters are on the idea that these Forms are the representation of the only objects that can be studied to provide knowledge. From my point of view, Theory Form is the most distinctive aspect of Pluto's philosophical system that seeks to provide answers to the issues of justice in a republic. It also aids in showing that justice is a desirable feature on its own. The Principle of Specialization plays a crucial role in ensuring a good city.
Plato's Republic is written in dialogue form. The dialogue does not have the main argument but looks at different aspects and outcome of a question. The various approach to a question and the many answers from different kinds of people define a republic. The dialogue explores the real meaning of justice. It then addresses the definition of justice from both the political and individual view. He then goes ahead to determine if a just person proves happier than an unjust individual. He tries to build a relationship between justice and happiness. Concerning the two ideas, Socrates constructed a hypothetical just city and uses it to explain and illustrate justice. A variety of aspects such as competing views of human happiness, education, and nature are used as a basis to describe justice in a republic (Donigan). I also believe these are the common challenges in any republic.
Socrates state and justify opinions for a just life. The just individual is perceived as being wise and good. His deeds are also good. On the other hand, the unjust individual is given an image of being ignorant and bad. The injustices in a republic are likely to lead to disharmony which has an impact on preventing the delivery of effective deeds. As a result of being just, an individual is likely to have some virtues of excellence and lives a happier life. The composition of both the just and unjust individuals make up a republic (Rabbås, Eyjólfur, Fossheim, and Miira). Despite the argument, I still have a perception that Socrates do not exhibit enough explanation in the discussion due to lack of enough justice to determine if a just life is better than the unjust.
Polemarchus is firm on the idea that justice in a republic implies helping friends and harming enemies. Socrates opposes the definition of justice by this scholar. He reasons out that at some point in life a just person will act unjustly. The argument lacks the proper basis to justify the context under which such definition of justice may be substantial. Socrates also argues that there are circumstances under which individuals may not really differentiate between their enemies and friends. In such scenarios, people may treat those that they think are friends well and vice versa (Donigan). This does not indicate justice at all because even treating an enemy badly cannot be quantified as justice.
Thrasymachus defines justice as the advantage that the stronger in the society has. Justice is simply what benefits the stronger people in the society. These benefits are accorded to them due to the general view that they are stronger. The stronger from this aspect is a representation of the ruling class. During the reign of different political leaders, justice is described as taking different meaning and actions. When different leaders are in office, they make different laws that are of benefit to them and those in their classes. Socrates challenges the thought by the stronger as the beneficiaries of justice. He still points out that the stronger are also human and they do make mistakes in their ruling, they at times make laws that do not serve them in a just way. In trying to explain the problems in a republic, Socrates points out that the rulers are expected to make laws that are acceptable by their subjects and also do what is good to them. (Rabbås, Eyjólfur, Fossheim, and Miira). The rulers (stronger) are not expected to rule according to the demands of their practitioners.
Plato uses Thrasymachus idea that injustice is at times better served than justice to explain the problems in a republic. Thrasymachus argues that the unjust individual who commits an act of injustice is always happier than a just individual. Socrates uses the example of a shepherd to explain the difference between their concern for their flock and for money (Rabbås, Eyjólfur, Fossheim, and Miira). In the same way, rulers show reluctance in the administering of power out of necessity since they do not want to be ruled by the inferior people in the republic.
Forms theory is helpful in showing that justice is a desirable feature in the society. Socrates describes how rulers are supposed to be chosen in a just city. With the existence of different classes of people in a society, leaders should be selected from the guardian class (rulers). The rulers should possess certain characteristics such as being wise, strong and old enough to be leaders. They should also show an aspect of willingness to rule and do everything that is of advantage to the city. The rulers need to give a myth to the citizens that will ensure every individual is satisfied with their position in the republic. He gives the example of a metal myth that implies every human being has an aspect of a metal in them. The rulers have gold; the guardians/auxiliaries possess silver and the producers possess bronze. With this idea in mind, a society of justice is portrayed.
Socrates discusses different measures to show that justice is a desirable feature in a republic. The leaders should aim at making the whole city happy and not only a particular class of people. In order to prevent social strife, there should be neither too much wealth nor extreme poverty. The size of a city should also be considered. It should neither be too large nor small; the city should be sizeable to enable unification and stability. A just city should possess some religious beliefs. The guardians should also be educated and allowed to have families. Those in power should be firm and prevent changes being made in the various aspects of the republic. These aims at ensuring those in leadership positions do not manipulate the systems for their own benefits (Rabbås, Eyjólfur,Fossheim, and Miira ). If need be, they should allow limited reforms to the education system and the laws.
Socrates claims that the city should be ruled by philosophers. According to Socrates, philosophers have practical knowledge to rule. They are also able to distinguish the truth from myths. The philosophers have natural abilities and virtues which guarantees them a better place in the ruling. Philosophers are described as haters of false information and lovers of what is at hand and not what it becomes. They also possess good leadership qualities such as courage, self-discipline, and good discipline. They are also claimed to be quick learners. Socrates describes them as people with pleasant nature (Rabbås, Eyjólfur, Fossheim, and Miira). With such desirable features, philosophers have the ability to be good leaders which confirms that Forms are essential in proving that morality is desirable on its own.
A good city originates from nothing. He argues out that a good city begins its operations from scratch and not by adjustment of existing conditions. In coming up with a good city, various reasons that would bring a city into being were considered. Focusing on the causes that bring a city into existence has higher reasons for the creation of a just city. Socrates defined a just city as a city without war similar to an economic model. In such a city individuals have the ability to satisfy their appetitive desires. With the principle of specialization in place, everyone undertakes activities in which they can best perform. He does not give a reason for this. Later he claims that no individual can have appetitive aspect unless they are driven by reason (Donigan). This rules out the existence of such a city and explains the existence of just cities characterized by wars.
The principle of Specialization in Plato's theory aims at creating a just city that fits every individual. The idea creates a city where the practice of freedom and creativity is of no importance. According to Plato, allowing freedom and creativity among individuals of a city is likely to lead to the coming up of unjust individuals which will automatically lead to the unjust city. The desires of individuals for personal freedom have negative impacts on the good of a city. This aspect contributes to the good of the city by ensuring that other individuals do not feel superior to the others (Donigan). Everyone should be treated equally in a just city.
The principle of specialization creates a city where individuals are required to undertake activities that suites them naturally, whether they like it or not. The idea avoids arguments and disagreements as every individual has a duty and responsibility which they are expected to fulfill. The society consisted of producers, auxiliaries, and rulers. The classification was based on the ability of a person to rule and carry on normal duties. Being a producer in such a society gave no opportunities to an individual to become a leader or an auxiliary person. The Principle of Specialization does not take into account the idea of natural gifts. Individuals are expected to carry on their duties to ensure the production system of a city keeps moving. Through the creation of classes, the division of labor and specialization, a good life will be achieved (Rabbås, Eyjólfur,Fossheim, and Miira ). Everyone concentrating on their line of work and production creates a republic that develops each day and hence a contribution towards a good city.
The virtues of a city revolve around Plato's Principle of specialization. He argues out that the city they founded was good and virtuous. The city is also wise, courageous and just. Socrates claims that the justice of a city is the remnant of wisdom, courage, and moderation. After all these virtuous have been found in a city, what remains is justice. Wisdom is the type of knowledge that enables rulers administers their ruling wisely; courage lies in the hands of the military and on what the citizens believe should be feared. Moderation is simply the self-discipline that a city has in establishing a just society (Donigan). The justice in a city is an indication that each class of individuals is performing their duties and responsibilities.
The use of the principle of specialization in creating a just city exposes some weakness. The idea of a just city has many different interpretations. The principle of specialization aims at creating a simple but just society; however different levels of individuals within the city each have their own interpretation of justice. The Cephalus defined justice as an individual living to their legal obligations and honest, Polemarchus claimed justices meant giving good to friends and harming enemies. On the other hand, Thrasymachus sees justice as the advantage that the stronger people have over the weak individuals. After the contradicting definitions of justice, Plato still gave no stand on the real meaning of justice (Donigan). This idea criticizes the use of the principle of Specialization in the creation of a just city.
From my own opinion, Plato uses the theory of Forms to find solutions to the various problems in a republic; Forms also supports the idea that Justice is a desirable feature in itself. Despite critics, Plato's Principle of Specialization contributes to the good of a city. The virtues of a city also revolve around the principle. From the opinions and arguments above, I conclude that Plato's argument consists of substantial facts and explanations on a republic built on justice.
Works Cited
Donigan, Jade. Platonic Forms and Unicorns: Plato's Philosophy in Peter S. Beagle's The Last Unicorn. , 2014. Print.
Rabbås, Øyvind, Kjalar E. Eyjólfur, HallvardFossheim,and MiiraTuominen. The Quest for the Good Life: Ancient Philosophers on Happiness. , 2015. Print.
