The Republic by Plato

[polymath]

In his book, "The Republic", Plato described his ideal society... That society was divided to three classes, the "philosopher-kings", the military and the "working class". The philosopher-kings were the elite of most intelligent people and were rulers of the state.

Plato's republic is often said to be the first model of a totalitarian society. The leaders were not chosen democratically, but by putting the most intelligent people in power.

To me, this doesn't really resemble any real world dictatorship... People like Hitler and Stalin weren't usually that much more smart than the average citizen and often made stupid decisions. Plato's society makes me imagine a sci-fi scenario of some future society where the new leaders are chosen very early (like age 4) with IQ tests and other psychological evaluation and then trained in some special school to be competent leaders later in life... You could probably even genetically engineer people to have properties fit for a particular "class".

In real world, the only case where there was an attempt to put the smartest person in power was when Albert Einstein was offered the presidency of Israel(which he declined) in 1952.

Many of you have probably studied Plato's philosophy... Do you think Plato is really totalitarian? Also what do you think are the qualities that make someone a good leader? Obviously, all smart nerdy people don't necessarily have the social skills necessary in politics...

 

[Psyduck]

Plato wrote more about this in The Laws and The Statesman. There he claims (suggests) that in order to find such a person "who 'really' knows what is best for everyone," one must demand such high moral standards, that one will probably never find such a human being. Therefore, in the absence of such a ruler, the Law must replace the ruler. Plato's view is nuanced (as always), so he's not a totalitarian per se (as Karl Poppers claims).

 

[Strongheart]

the problem with all hypothetical strategies for creating a better society is greed, power hunger and religion. Most everyone suffers from it no matter what the IQ level. This isnt a perfect world, everytime someone comes to power and control a nation they almost always fuck it up and abuse the power and become corrupt in one way or another and start to emulate the previous in power.. We as humans are not good at leading large masses in general.

"our problem is this, our pre-frontal lobes are too small and our adrenaline glands are too big and our thumb finger opposition isn't all that it might be. We're afraid of the dark and afraid to die and we believe in the truth of holy books that are so stupid and so fabricated that a child can and all children do as you can tell by their questions actually see right through them. I think religion should be treated with ridicule, hatred, and contempt and I claim that right" --Christopher Hitchens

 

[Nagelfar]

I call Plato's concept of philosopher-kings "a plenipotentiary collegiality", because I only see it working where the specialists of every kind of thinking own over their particular areas of specialty, as a form of corporative-syndicalism. Compare Gabriele d'Annunzio's "Charter of Carnaro"

 

[polymath]

Plato wrote much about the "world of ideas", which contains the basic models of everything in existence... For example, a real-world horse is just a representation or a shadow of the "idea of horse" that resides in the world of ideas.

Similarly any real-world state is probably just a shadow of Plato's ideal republic. Also for example the idea of Communism looks good on first sight, but in real life just results in a state led by some narcissistic tyrant like Kim Jong Il who lives in luxury himself while the ordinary people starves...

However a nation led by experts of various fields would probably have some good sides. Just look what happens when elected politicians who probably know nothing about the pharmacology of intoxicants get to decide the direction of the nations drug policy.

I can just imagine some new radical political movement demanding that the academia should have most of the political power in the nation... That would actually be a very dangerous idea if enough people started supporting it. (I like making up crazy and grandiose ideas :D)

 

[Nagelfar]

I can just imagine some new radical political movement demanding that the academia should have most of the political power in the nation... That would actually be a very dangerous idea if enough people started supporting it. (I like making up crazy and grandiose ideas :D)

The academics may be too abstract in the manner of "knowing" what they're studying to truly represent it though. Just as how career politicians are commonly considered not in touch with the poor demographics to account for them. How then would chemistry professors truly know drug use as how drug users know drugs use, concretely, for example? This is why my ideas of pillar federalism for a form of government I think are more thorough in that capacity for sating societal needs. Where the constituency dictates how it clusters and what constituencies control your own constituency.

 

[LadyLucid]

I don't think Plato was totalitarian but I think eugenics was on the tip of his tongue.
Yeah, the only creative or interesting thought in Republic were his ideas of controlling reproduction, "gold soul" "bronze soul" etc

 

[B9]

You could probably even genetically engineer people to have properties fit for a particular "class".

They used to call it "breeding" in the upper classes apparently, different technology same idea.

Albert Einstein was offered the presidency of Israel(which he declined) in 1952.

You've got admire Einstein for being pretty much right about a lot of things, that decision being one of them.