Republic (Plato)

Lore & Background

Plato’s Republic is a Socratic dialogue written around 375 BC. It explores justice, the nature of a just city-state, and the character of a just person. It is Plato’s most famous work and one of the most influential texts in philosophy and political theory.

In the dialogue, Socrates talks with several Athenians and foreigners about what justice means and whether a just person is happier than an unjust one. He examines different kinds of existing governments and then imagines a series of hypothetical cities, ending with Kallipolis, a utopian city ruled by philosopher-kings. The conversation also touches on aging, love, the theory of forms, the immortality of the soul, and the roles of philosophers and poets in society. The setting appears to be during the Peloponnesian War.

Place in Plato's corpus

Scholars generally place the Republic in the middle period of Plato’s dialogues, though the line between early and middle dialogues is less clear than that between late and all others. Still, Ritter, Arnim, and Baron—using different methods—all agree that the Republic belongs to a distinct group along with the Parmenides, Phaedrus, and Theaetetus. The first book of the Republic shares many features with Plato’s earlier dialogues and is thought to have originally been a separate work. The remaining books were likely added later, possibly with some changes to the original first book.

Outline

Book I: Aging, Love, and the Definitions of Justice (327a–354c)

Book I: Aging, Love, and Definitions of Justice (327a–354c) Socrates and Glaucon go to the port of Piraeus, where Polemarchus stops them and insists they join him for dinner and a festival. He notes that his men outnumber them, so Socrates and Glaucon must comply. Socrates asks if he could be persuaded otherwise, but Polemarchus says he will not listen. Socrates agrees to go. At Polemarchus’s house, Socrates meets his father, Cephalus.

Cephalus (328e–331d) Socrates asks the elderly Cephalus whether old age is painful. Cephalus replies that many are unhappy because they miss their youth, but he finds that old age brings freedom from strong appetites, like being released from many furious masters. This peace lets him focus on sacrifices and justice, preparing for the afterlife.

The conversation turns to justice. Cephalus says justice means honesty and returning what is owed. Socrates refutes this: it would not be just to return a borrowed knife to a man who has gone mad and might harm himself.

Polemarchus (331d–336b) Polemarchus argues that justice is giving what is appropriate—helping friends and harming enemies. Socrates refutes this in four steps, concluding that harming anyone, even an enemy, creates injustice and so cannot be just.

Thrasymachus (336b–354c) Thrasymachus claims justice is whatever benefits the stronger. Socrates points out that the strong can make mistakes that do not benefit them. Thrasymachus then says a person is truly strong when they make no mistakes about their own advantage.

Socrates argues that crafts aim at the good of their object, so ruling benefits the ruled, not the ruler. Thrasymachus counters that a shepherd herds sheep for his own benefit, not theirs, and that undetected injustice makes a person better off than justice. Socrates replies that a shepherd’s concern for his sheep is separate from his desire to make money, which is not part of the art of shepherding.

No art provides what benefits itself. The best rulers rule reluctantly, out of necessity, to avoid being ruled by inferiors. Socrates then gives three arguments for why the just life is better than the unjust life, focusing on wisdom, harmony, and the soul.

Book II: Ring of Gyges (357a–383c)

Book II: Ring of Gyges (357a–383c) Glaucon and Adeimantus are not satisfied with Socrates’s defense of justice. They ask him to show that justice is good in itself, not just for its results. To illustrate the problem, Glaucon tells the story of Gyges, who uses a ring of invisibility to commit injustices and gain great advantages. He challenges Socrates to prove that the just life is better than the unjust one.

Socrates suggests using a city as a model to see how justice arises in an individual’s soul. He begins by describing a “healthy state” of producers meeting basic needs, but Glaucon calls it “a city of pigs.” Socrates then adjusts his plan to include luxuries, creating a “fevered state” with endless variety. Acquiring and defending these luxuries requires a guardian class to wage wars. Socrates then asks how to prevent the guardians from becoming tyrants over the people they protect, concluding that it is necessary for the...

Reader's Guide

In the dialogue, Socrates discusses with various Athenians and foreigners the meaning of justice and whether the just man is happier than the unjust man. He considers the natures of existing regimes and then proposes a series of hypothetical cities in comparison, culminating in Kallipolis (Καλλίπολις), a utopian city-state ruled by a class of philosopher-kings.

They also discuss ageing, love, theory of forms, the immortality of the soul, and the role of the philosopher and of poetry in society. The dialogue's setting seems to be the time of the Peloponnesian War. The work has been intellectually and historically influential, shaping subsequent philosophy and political theory.