Plato's republic would have not have been a very nice place to live according to our standards today.

Plato's republic would have not have been a very nice place to live according to our standards today. — Jamesk

I sincerely hope you realize Plato's Republic is not a book on statecraft.

I sincerely hope you realize Plato's Republic is not a book on statecraft. — Tzeentch

Not at all or not just? I don't know what you mean by statecraft, I was referring to a society built on the republic modal.

My two cents:

Although many other matters are addressed in the Republic, I think its purpose never strays from answering Glaucon when he asks:

But the case for justice, to prove that it is better than injustice, I have never yet heard stated by any as I desire to hear it. What I desire to is an encomium on justice in and by itself. And I think I am most likely to get that from you."
358d

The discussion of the city begins with:

"I will tell you, I said. There is a justice of one man, we say, and I suppose, also of an entire city?
Assuredly, said he.
Is not the not the city larger than the man?
It is larger, he said.
Then, perhaps, there would be more justice in the larger object, and more easy to apprehend. If it please you, then, let us look for the quality in states, and then only examine it also in the individual, looking for the likeness of the greater in the form of the less.
I think that is a good suggestion, he said.
If, then, said I , our argument should observe the origin of the state, we should see also the origin of justice and injustice in it?
It may be, said he."
368e

It is good to keep this framework in mind while considering the "ideal city" as the discussion is also about the other kinds and where they came from. Also observe that while Socrates does stay with his plan to consider the nature of the state before taking up the nature of the individual, he will also proceed to use the comparison the other way to make his argument on the way.

I think what

Although many other matters are addressed in the Republic, I think its purpose never strays from answering Glaucon when he asks:

But the case for justice, to prove that it is better than injustice, I have never yet heard stated by any as I desire to hear it. What I desire to is an encomium on justice in and by itself. And I think I am most likely to get that from you."
358d — Valentinus

Says is generally correct. The Republic is essentially trying to answer the typical Socratic question "what is X?", where "X" is usually a moral virtue. In the case of the Republic, X is Justice. i think any similarities to Smith's project in the Wealth of Nations, which I take to be an early form of social scientific inquiry, are probably going to end up being superficial or coincidental.

However, that said, a comparison of the two works might still be interesting in its own right, even if one accepts the objective of each is significantly different from the other.

As Valentinus pointed out before me:

If it please you, then, let us look for the quality in states, and then only examine it also in the individual, looking for the likeness of the greater in the form of the less. — Valentinus

Plato's Republic is about using the example of a state as a means to better understand the individual. It should be read primarily as an allegory on the individual. This should come as no surprise, considering the nature of his other works.

@Dagny said this in the original post:

I didn't expect the Republic to be so interesting, I am up to the point where Socrates is getting weird and talking about how the rulers of state should censor books and fairy tales (???) but hopefully he has a deeper meaning. — Dagny

I believe they are referring to the part where Socrates says one should not allow oneself to have false ideas about God. If one were to read the Republic as a manual for statecraft, this clearly sounds like religious censorship, however Plato was primarily concerned with the nature of ultimate reality which he called The One or The Good. The Republic can be seen as describing the steps one needs to take to prime themselves for a vision of The Idea of the Good. If we then consider the same passage, what Socrates (through Plato) is saying, is that if one wants to experience a vision of ultimate reality, one should never allow oneself to hold false beliefs about The Good, primarily that it is anything other than Good, since this would be akin to denying the nature of reality.

Plato is not for the faint of heart, and I couldn't possibly do it justice in so few words, but I hope I got the picture across.

I understand your point but I am not sure that I fully agree with you. The connection between the city i.e society and the individual are obvious but not as one way as you put it. Societies are collections of individuals and so the two are completely inter-related.

In The Republic, Plato presents the final versions of all the arguments Socrates has been alluding to and working up to. Justice is a big part of his moral philosophy and does directly deal with statecraft I believe. The tripartite soul is another one that reaches maturity in the Republic and this is more about the individual and morality, which is also an important part of the society. And the opus idea is in the Forms and his metaphysics of the universe and his promoting of dualism.

So I do agree with your post in general but I think that it is an over simplification of the full ramifications of the play.

One of the major interpretive themes of the Republic is the city as a metaphor for the soul, and the struggles for dominance as representing the struggle between reason and the passions. ‘Plato's Republic presents a model for the ideal human soul as a city-state ruled by a truly wise, loving and attentive "philosopher king". The concept of the "philosopher king" has been much quoted as Plato's prescription for good government, but in fact the actual text develops the idea only as a metaphor, and never states whether or not Plato or Socrates believe such a state to be possible or desirable in the real world. The concept of the "Philosopher King" describes Plato's (and Socrates's) prescription for being a good person, not being a good government.’

The key sections in the Republic are first the Analogy of the Divided Line, which outlines in summary form the Platonic epistemology, and the Analogy of the Cave, which is one of the most important passages in the whole of philosophy.

Justice is a big part of his moral philosophy and does directly deal with statecraft I believe. The tripartite soul is another one that reaches maturity in the Republic and this is more about the individual and morality, which is also an important part of the society. — Jamesk

They're both related to the individual. For Plato explains justice to elaborate on his assertion that it is better to be just and spurned than unjust and loved. To describe what justice is, Plato mentions the three parts of the nature of the soul. Reason, spirit and desire. According to Plato, a man is just when his spirit and desire submit to reason and spirit and reason work together to resist desire. He strikes a parallel with the state to illustrate his point.
He finally supports his assertion by saying that an unjust man is ruled by his appetites, which are insatiable and thus the unjust man will never be satisfied. The just man on the other hand is ruled by his reason and by controlling his appetites is much happier, simply enjoying the fruits of his own soul.

Plato is not describing the perfect state. He's describing the perfect man.

And what about the Forms?

An extremely interesting topic, but clearly not about statecraft, no?

Central in Plato's theory on the nature of reality or 'The Good' or 'The One', is how an individual would go about attempting to glimpse ultimate reality and experience 'The Idea of the Good' (since the Good itself is beyond experience). This can be seen as reaching a form of enlightenment.

His theory of Forms he never fully elaborates on, but is indicative of the idea that what man experiences is not reality itself, but merely a reflection of the essential Forms.

However, that said, a comparison of the two works might still be interesting in its own right, even if one accepts the objective of each is significantly different from the other. — Mentalusion

That is an excellent point. They both take the viewpoint of the "city" as a whole. They both see different "arts" and their relationship with each other producing different kinds of life for the citizens.

That makes more sense, thanks!

If he is trying to describe the perfect man, why is he using this really convoluted state metaphor?

I am kinda confused and amused by this passage:

Socrates was telling the story of this Greek character in Homer's book who apparently was sick his whole life and didn't do any work.
He then gives this example:

I mean this: When a carpenter is ill he asks the physician for a rough
and ready cure; an emetic or a purge or a cautery or the knife,--these
are his remedies. And if some one prescribes for him a course of
dietetics, and tells him that he must swathe and swaddle his head, and
all that sort of thing, he replies at once that he has no time to be
ill, and that he sees no good in a life which is spent in nursing his
disease to the neglect of his customary employment; and therefore
bidding good-bye to this sort of physician, he resumes his ordinary
habits, and either gets well and lives and does his business, or, if
his constitution falls, he dies and has no more trouble. — Socrates

He then continues:

Has he not, I said, an occupation; and what profit would there be in
his life if he were deprived of his occupation? — Socrates

Was Socrates meaning to say that you must either work or die, and if you don't work and aren't a sufficiently contributing member of society, then you are as good as dead?

The analogy used in the Republic is that justice in the soul is too small to be perceived clearly... like little letters on a sign in the distance. But when justice is examined at a large scale, such as a city, what is written becomes larger and easier to decipher.

In short, justice is personal morality wrote large.

Gotcha, so that's the reason he used the state metaphor? To make it easier for the reader to comprehend and easier for him to explain?

Was Socrates meaning to say that you must either work or die, and if you don't work and aren't a sufficiently contributing member of society, then you are as good as dead? — Dagny

I read that passage to say that we make our decisions upon information we either regard or do not regard as important. How will we make that judgement? We decide all kinds of things without knowing the answer.

A man, perfect or otherwise, happens with other people. — Valentinus

Could you elaborate?

How is the metaphor convoluted? — Valentinus

Because in the begininng Socrates and his interlocutors speak about justice and whether it is better and more profitable to be just or unjust and then Socrates jumps into creating this "State" which with little mention to justice which I believe leaves the reader confused.

Although I am not finished with the book yet.

It helps me to go through the arguments with Thrasymachus. He is the one proposing that hiding injustice in the body of what the "state" calls justice is what is going on. If you read the rest in that context, the words mean what they otherwise would not mean. Ideas are not just islands of thought. We think some things and lose or gain something through thinking them.

Let me put it this way. When these arguments first appeared, it was life and death. Either a certain way of talking was how to proceed or it would be shut up, forever.

When these arguments first appeared, it was life and death. — Valentinus

Could you elaborate? Do you mean that when they first argued about justice they seemed like they were getting mad at each other (at least to me) but then cooled down?

Off topic, you guys seem really smart and philosophy pros, if that's a word. I have got a lot of study, heh.

In short, justice is personal morality wrote large. — vulcanlogician

Brilliant explanation and quote.

ideal city — Valentinus

Just to nit-pick: Best (ariste) city. The ideal is in the realm of the forms.

n short, justice is personal morality wrote large.
— vulcanlogician

Brilliant explanation and quote. — Jamesk

That depends on how you read it. It can be read as if there is no justice at the personal level and that justice is the aggregate of all personal morality. That would be the wrong way to read it. The city-state is personal morality written large. Justice is but an aspect of the "best polis" and in that respect but an aspect of the best person.

I think that you are too focused on Justice here. Justice is a Form as is beauty, good etc. Understanding the Forms is vital because Plato can only reconcile metaphysics and morality with dualism, everything else starts from this point. Someone needs to exit the cave and draw a map of how things should be and use it to lead us all out of the shadows.

Justice is a Form as is beauty, good etc. — Jamesk

No, these have a Form. Justice, beauty and goodness in you and me and in society will always be shadows.

Justice and beauty partake in the form of the good. The just city will be just to the extent that it partakes in the form of justice. So too with the just man.

The shadows on the wall of the cave are common opinion. One must turn away from the common opinion in order to see the world as it truly is (ie. behold the forms).

So people and cities do partake in the form of the good and the form of justice. It just takes a philosopher to recognize it.

No, these have a Form Justice, beauty and goodness in you and me and in society will always be shadows. — Benkei

I never read Plato from such a purely subjective standpoint. I thought that he is also referring to a separate universe that some how impinges on ours. Where do you get your interpretation from? I have so far read Guthrie and Cooper and I never saw it as a purely internal dualism at all, more of a final answer to Parmenides if anything.

Ah, Plato's Republic. Whatever it was intended to be, I suspect it's given comfort to all manner of totalitarians and fans of benign autocracy over the centuries. If we wish to assess the wisdom of philosophers in matters of politics and governance, however, I think we should bear in mind the results of his tinkering in Syracuse, and of Seneca's efforts to tutor Nero.

Because in the beginning Socrates and his interlocutors speak about justice and whether it is better and more profitable to be just or unjust and then Socrates jumps into creating this "State" which with little mention to justice which I believe leaves the reader confused. — Dagny

Glaucon takes up part of Thrasymachus' argument after the latter was not able to defend himself against the questions Socrates posed. Glaucon observes that it in some sense it was one kind of intimidation being over matched by another kind. The issue of power that underlies the talk about the "strong" is not illuminated by Socrates besting Thrasymachus. So Glaucon is asking for Socrates to not simply win a contest but get rid of the argument for all time. That is the meaning of the first passage I quoted above.

Socrates explains that is a formidable enterprise which will involve a commitment to an investigation that requires patience and resolve to carry out. The brothers agree to follow it under those conditions.
Then Socrates begins as heard in the second quote I gave above.

The rest of the book is the "mentioning" of justice, if you will. We were warned.