“Socrates had reason indeed to complain of the misrepresentations of Plato; for in truth his dialogues are libels on Socrates.”
I recently finished reading Plato’s “Republic” in the original Greek …
I recently finished reading Plato’s “Republic” in the original Greek. But I’m still not convinced by its arguments. Why? Among other things, because Plato advocated having a philosopher-king with absolute power. (But I’m getting ahead of myself here.) I have given my own response to these ideas in another post, so I will not spend much time giving my ideas here. Rather, I will here focus on some of the responses from our Founding Fathers. Specifically, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both criticized Plato’s “Republic,” and so did one of the authors of the Federalist Papers. But in order to understand why they did so, I must first examine some of the arguments from “The Republic” itself – namely, the parts that the Founding Fathers most objected to. If you’ve already read my main post about Plato’s arguments, please feel free to skip this next paragraph.
Plato
… but I’m still not convinced by its arguments (which I briefly summarize here)
The Greek title of Plato’s “Republic” is ΠΟΛΙΤΕΙΑ (“Politeia”). It has many translations, including “constitution.” Nonetheless, it might be best translated as “political entity.” In English, the work is ironically known as “The Republic” – but by modern standards, this is something of a misnomer. His “political entity” is far different from what we would today consider a “republic.” James Madison defined a “republic” as “a government in which the scheme of representation takes place” (Source: Federalist No. 10). But this does not describe the “ideal” state of Plato. Rather (as mentioned earlier), Plato’s “ideal state” is led by a philosopher-king with absolute power. The philosopher-king is to rule for life. Plato reassures his readers that the philosopher-king will refrain from “abusing” his power, but does not provide any convincing reasons that his scheme will indeed prevent this from happening (something that a good system should be expected to do, in my opinion). The philosopher-king has power to determine the occupations that his individual subjects enter into, and also has power to censor any idea (political or otherwise) that he deems to be “dangerous” or “undesirable.” He also has absolute control over education for both the young and the old, and has power to arrange marriages between his subjects to promote “good breeding” – an idea now known as “eugenics.” These things have a tendency to make “The Republic” into something far less than an ideal state.
Plato
Thomas Jefferson complained of Plato’s “misrepresentations” of Socrates
Some have argued that Plato was an influence on our Founding Fathers. This is at least partially true – he did influence them in some ways. Plato wrote many dialogues besides “The Republic,” and some of them are essentially historical records of debates that Socrates had earlier engaged in. Some of these dialogues really do represent the views of the historical Socrates, but “The Republic” almost certainly does not. Indeed, this may be why Thomas Jefferson later said that “Socrates had reason indeed to complain of the misrepresentations of Plato; for in truth his dialogues are libels on Socrates.” (Source: Letter to John Adams, 5 July 1814) More on that Thomas Jefferson letter in a minute. First, let me focus on the parts of Plato’s “Socratic dialogues” that really did influence the Founding Fathers.
Socrates
Socrates
In fairness, John Adams credited Plato with “revolution-principles” back in 1775 …
In some of these debates (like the one recorded in “Euthyphro”), Socrates had made the powerful men of Athens look rather stupid. This may have been what led to his conviction (as recorded in Plato’s “Apology”) and execution (as recorded in Plato’s “Phaedo”). Although I cannot know this for certain, I suspect that this may be what John Adams was referring to, when he credited Plato with “revolution-principles” in 1775. Specifically, writing under the pen name of “Novanglus,” John Adams said that “These are what are called revolution-principles. They are the principles of Aristotle and Plato, of Livy and Cicero, of Sydney, Harrington and Lock[e].—The principles of nature and eternal reason.—The principles on which the whole government over us, now stands.” (Source: His letter “To the Inhabitants of the Colony of Massachusetts-Bay, 23 January 1775”) Some have examined passages like this, and concluded that Plato’s political philosophy must have “influenced” the Founding Fathers to a fairly significant degree. But this is not quite accurate. The political ideas expressed in dialogues like the “Apology” may have influenced the Founders, but works like “The Republic” almost certainly did not. Nowhere in this passage, for example, is there any endorsement of the “philosopher-king,” or any of the other controversial ideas contained in the pages of “The Republic”
John Adams
… but Thomas Jefferson would later slam Plato’s “Republic” in a letter to Adams in 1814
Many decades after this, Thomas Jefferson actually wrote a letter to John Adams in July 1814 (the one that I quoted from earlier). Both men were former presidents at this point, and were now speaking to each other despite their having been political rivals for the presidency in earlier years. In this particular letter, Thomas Jefferson said that “I am just returned from one of my long absences, having been at my other home for five weeks past. Having more leisure there than here for reading, I amused myself with reading seriously Plato’s republic. I am wrong however in calling it amusement, for it was the heaviest task-work I ever went through. I had occasionally before taken up some of his other works, but scarcely ever had patience to go through a whole dialogue. While wading thro’ the whimsies, the puerilities, & unintelligible jargon of this work, I laid it down often to ask myself how it could have been that the world should have so long consented to give reputation to such nonsense as this?” (Source: Letter to John Adams, 5 July 1814) You might wonder why Jefferson “scarcely ever had patience” to go through a whole dialogue, when most of Plato’s dialogues are so short. But we must remember that Jefferson had a good working knowledge of Ancient Greek, and may well have been reading some of these dialogues in the original (as I have done). He may even have read “The Republic” in the original, which is the second longest of Plato’s dialogues after Plato’s “Laws.” Regardless, Jefferson here referred to “The Republic” as “nonsense,” complete with “whimsies,” “puerilities,” and “unintelligible jargon” (as shown above).
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams replied in that same month, and agreed with Jefferson’s scathing critique of Plato’s “Republic”
Later in that same month, John Adams responded to this letter from Jefferson, agreeing with Jefferson’s scathing critique of Plato’s “Republic.” In his response, Adams said that “I am very glad you have seriously read Plato: and still more rejoiced to find that your reflections upon him, so perfectly harmonize with mine. Some thirty years ago I took upon me the severe task of going through all his works. With the help of two Latin translations, and one English and one French translation[footnote] and comparing some of the most remarkable passages with the Greek, I laboured through the tedious toil. My disappointment was very great, my astonishment was greater and my disgust was shocking.” (Source: Letter to Thomas Jefferson, 16 July 1814) Later in that same letter, John Adams added that “Some parts of some of [Plato’s] dialogues are entertaining, like the writings of Rousseau: but his Laws and his Republick from which I expected most, disappointed me most. I could scarcely exclude the suspicion that he intended the latter as a bitter satire upon all republican government,[footnote] as Xenophon undoubtedly designed by his Essay on Democracy, to ridicule that species of republick … Yet, in what, are the writings of Rousseau and Helvetius wiser than those of Plato?” (Source: Letter to Thomas Jefferson, 16 July 1814)
John Adams
Claude Adrien Helvétius, a French philosopher mentioned above
In that same letter, Adams also slammed the “writings of Rousseau”
Thus, Plato’s “Laws” and “Republick,” from which Adams “expected most, disappointed [him] most.” After reading such statements, it seems quite clear that neither Adams nor Jefferson endorsed the “philosopher-king” described in Plato’s “Republic.” This also casts doubt on the oft-repeated (but poorly-supported) claim that Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an “influence” upon our Founding Fathers. It’s true that Adams here referred to the writings of Rousseau as “entertaining,” but he also asked (at least rhetorically) the following question: “in what, are the writings of Rousseau and Helvetius wiser than those of Plato?” (as cited above) This was right after he had questioned the merits of some of Plato’s core political ideas in “The Republic.” Adams thus seems to be saying that the “writings of Rousseau” are even worse than Plato’s “Republic,” and he was a wise man to say this. Rousseau’s political ideas would reach even greater heights of “nonsense,” topping Plato in their irrationality and sheer disregard of reality. (But that’s a rant for other posts.)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whom Adams slams above
Neither man attacked any other Plato dialogues in these passages (with the exception of Plato’s “Laws”) …
It is noteworthy that in these passages, neither Adams nor Jefferson took aim at any of the other dialogues that Plato had written (with one exception). Rather, their criticisms were both aimed at “The Republic” – and, in the case of the John Adams quote, Plato’s “Laws” (the exception noted above). Thus, I find no contradiction between these criticisms of Plato and Adams’ crediting of Plato with “revolution-principles,” as noted earlier. Some Plato works are indeed deserving of such praise, while others (like “The Republic”) are not. It was “The Republic” that drew the scathing words of both Adams and Jefferson – and, as the footnote to this blog post will show, another Founding Father as well. It was “The Republic” that these men would all (in one way or another) label as “nonsense” – with John Adams’ “disgust [being] shocking,” as he put it.
Plato
… but both men strongly criticized Plato’s “Republic” (as well they should have)
Thus, I cannot understand how people could argue that Plato’s political philosophy “influenced” the Founding Fathers to any significant degree. I should acknowledge that even in “The Republic,” there are some ideas that are all right, such as Plato’s allegory of the cave. But the political ideas of “The Republic” – the ideas for which the work is best known – are wholly incompatible with those of the Founding Fathers, and cannot be reconciled with true freedom and democracy.
“The reason of man, like man himself, is timid and cautious when left alone, and acquires firmness and confidence in proportion to the number with which it is associated. When the examples which fortify opinion are ANCIENT as well as NUMEROUS, they are known to have a double effect. In a nation of philosophers, this consideration ought to be disregarded. A reverence for the laws would be sufficiently inculcated by the voice of an enlightened reason. But a nation of philosophers is as little to be expected as the philosophical race of kings wished for by Plato.”
If you liked this post, you might also like:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment