Plato as an Idealist Thinker. Explained.

---

Plato’s Republic, unlike modern utopias, was perhaps intended to be actually founded. Many of its provisions, including some that seemed quite impracticable, were actually realised at Sparta. The rule of philosophers had also been attempted by Pythagoras. Indeed, the idea of a ruler also being a philosopher and a philosopher king ruling a State providing the best possible governance is very tempting.

However, Plato’s idea that a ruler also being a philosopher proved to be impractical when his own attempt to make Dionysius a philosopher king failed.

First of all, a philosopher becoming a ruler is unattainable. Giving the task of ruling to the philosopher who does not have the knowledge of statecraft would be very inadequate. Simply having the knowledge of abstract sciences like mathematics or dialectics is no preparation for a man of action which a philosopher ruler has to be.

Claude Levi-Strauss argues that the ideal state was unrealistic and unrealisable, for the philosopher was not a natural ruler and governing was thrust upon him in the larger interest of the community.

Besides, Plato’s conception of the rule of philosophy or dubbed as ideocracy is criticised as against the spirit of democracy, equality, liberty and free citizenship. His ideal state is unattainable and unacceptable in today’s democratic societies.

Plato rejected popular participation for the fear that ordinary people cannot comprehend the Absolute Truth and the Idea of Good. In this regard, Karl Popper famously called Plato as one of the enemies of open society. Popper says that Plato is anti-democratic, anti-individual and anti to social change. As a matter of noteworthy, Popper argues that it is unimportant who governs. The key issue is to minimise misrule and prevent misuse and abuse of power. Popper further argues if the claims of absolute truth are falsified.

Aristotle, Plato’s disciple, also argued that it would be better for a ruler to be worldly-wise than to be wise in the world of ideas.

What a ruler needs to know is not what is good in abstract but what is good for different individuals and different conditions of society. A ruler becoming a philosopher having superiority of the rational mind, the knowledge of the Idea of Good, ability to know Absolute Truth and ruling an ideal state with absolute perfection are all very tempting yet they remain too idealistic to realise.

Plato himself realised the impracticability of the rule of philosophy. He later offered his second-best state in the Laws, making a major theoretical shift. In Laws, his conception of the rule of philosophy is replaced by the rule of sovereign law. With Plato’s own admission, we can conclude that the conception of the rule of philosophy is too idealistic to realise and this makes Plato an idealist thinker.