Philosophical Divergence: Plato and Marx on Society
Plato vs. Marx: Political Conceptions Compared
This comparison highlights key similarities and differences in the political conceptions of Plato and Marx.
Similarities and Differences in Political Thought
Social Change Dynamics
Similarity: Both philosophers argue that civil strife, wars, and class divisions, often grounded in selfishness, are the main dynamic forces for social change.
Difference: For Plato, the historical process follows a linear downward trajectory, leading to a deemed necessary hegemonic class. For Marx, the historical process follows a linear upward trajectory, calling for the abolition of social classes.
Importance of Social Conditioning
Similarity: Both argue for the importance of social conditioning as a means of consolidating a specific social model.
Difference: For Plato, man is free and therefore responsible. Morality and religion must serve the State; for this reason, he critically anthropomorphized the Homeric gods to justify moral reward and punishment, and justified “useful lies” by the rulers of his ideal republic. For Marx, man is determined by the economic conditions of the society to which they belong. He claims that moral values and religion are in the service of the ruling class, arguing that this is an indispensable step to hasten the downfall of bourgeois society and end alienation.
Abolition of Private Property
Similarity: Both philosophers advocate the abolition of private property.
Difference: Plato advocates it only for the ruling class, based on social utility. Marx advocates the total abolition of private property to end alienation.
Utopian Ideals
Similarity: Both thinkers can be considered “utopian.” Plato, for his conviction that perfect leaders can exist, and Marx, by arguing that, after the victory of the proletariat and its provisional dictatorship, a classless society will be established.
Difference: Plato founded his perfect society on the moral education of citizens. Marx, however, condemns all forms of “social engineering” because he holds that society grows in accordance with the laws of history, not according to rational plans.
Plato’s Philosopher-Kings and Design Review
Plato’s conviction that philosopher-kings will eliminate all social ills stems from his principle of functional specialization.
Criticism and Defense of Plato’s Vision
Criticism: Concerns about the possibility of discrepancy or error among philosopher-kings and the potential for a totalitarian society that overrides individual freedom.
Defense: This criticism often misunderstands Plato’s political conception. Discrepancy or error between philosopher-kings is deemed impossible, and the loss of individual freedom is considered necessary and desirable. This is because the political agenda is always applied in the most beneficial way for the community and, ultimately, for each of its components. (Recall that even a strong proponent of participatory democracy, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, deemed it necessary to have a legislator who knows the “common good” to prevent selfish actions.)
Arguments For and Against Plato’s System
- Pro: The need for theoretical and moral leaders. In a democracy, there is a need for political and moral education for citizenship. It is easily seen that these requirements do not exist today.
- Against: Plato’s trust in his education system seems illusory. His attempts to establish a noocratic regime in Syracuse failed, and there is no known education system to ensure the “honesty” of those who have attended.
Resulting Position
Maximum control over the different powers should be exercised by a politically and morally prepared citizenry. This can prevent or minimize the damage that a specific political program might produce for the social community.