5/12/2007
Eric Voegelin, Plato and Aristotle,
vol. 3, chap. 4 – The Creation of Order – pp. 81-117
Joanne Tetlow, J.D., Ph.D.
Download a PDF version of this document
Having dealt with and disposed of the conventional views of justice expressed in the characters of Cephalus (telling the truth
and paying one's debts), Polemarchus (giving every man his due), and Thrasymachus (right as the interest of the stronger), and having
accepted the challenge to show that it is better to suffer injustice than to do injustice, Socrates moves into the subject of the
nature of the ordered polis. Recall the prior emphasis and distinction between a philosopher ("lover of knowledge-wisdom")
and a philodoxer ("lover of opinion") in which Voegelin notes the modern exclusion of the comparative pairing term Plato uses. The
idea of a philodoxer has been lost in political reality despite the fact that modern societies are full of them. Unfortunately what
has been abstracted from Plato is the idea of a philosopher defined in terms of opinion not knowledge. By omitting the pairing of
philosopher and philodoxer, the latter as the negative comparative term, a gross misunderstanding has occurred. Voegelin points to
the concrete, historical nature of Platonic political theory in its comparative method. Ideas, concepts, theories must be
understood in relation to something else not in isolation; otherwise, the problematic of philodoxers falsely becoming philosophers will
occur.
Now that the philosopher (not the philodoxer) has been identified as the true founder of political community, how can he create order
in the polis? This can be accomplished only by an existential order in the soul of philosopher and society. The virtue and
life of the soul is not a concept or ideal, it is a state of experiential existence. There are no comparisons, because it is
reality itself. Hence, the inquiry is into the depth itself, and the direction of the depth upward. As Voegelin explains, "The
concepts of the inquiry do not refer to an external object, but are symbols evolved by the soul when it engages in the exegesis of its
depth. The exegesis has no object that precedes the inquiry as a datum, but only levels of consciousness, rising higher as the Logos
of the experience becomes victorious over its darkness." (84) Thus, it is in the inquiry and illumination of the soul by the vision of the
Good (Agathon) that the right order of the soul is experientially understood as the substance for the polis. Plato’s paradigm
of the best polis is charted by the following parallels:
Man
Polis
Daemon
Ruler
Paradigm of Life Polieia
According to Plato, the polis is man writ large. Whether or not the polis is good is not determined institutionally, but
spiritually: the soul of the ruler must imprint his virtue onto the wider society. Creation of order in the polis is accommodated by
creation of order in the philosopher-king’s soul. As difficult as this is, the transcendent source of order illustrated in the Parable of the
Cave is the power which draws and sustains the ruler in his attempt to restore society. Notwithstanding, a perfect, good polis is beyond the
reach of the ruler. The question is whether the defect is in the philosopher-ruler or the polis itself? In other words, why is there no such
thing as Plato’s Republic in real existence? Is it the class society of Guardian, Auxiliaries, and Workers? Is it asking too much of
man? or Is it that the philosopher will never become king, because the demos lacks knowledge of the good and will never choose him?
To answer this question, let us see who the philosopher must be in order to rightfully become king. Voegelin describes the process of discovery
with a new word: poleogony, which has six stages cascading from within each successive stage: 1. dialogue as a comprehensive symbolic form, 2. within
dialogue, inquiry from the depth of darkness to light, 3. within inquiry, the foundation play of the good polis, 4. within the foundation play, the
cognitive inquiry into nature of the good polis, 5. within cognitive inquiry passing through ages of the polis to a complete order, and 6. within
the dramatic form of "ages", the characters which represent the genesis of the polis as dramatis personae. Voegelin states that, "The growth
of the soul into the transcendent politeia…was achieved by passing through the stages of the inquiry." (92-3). By entering into the depth of one’s
own psyche and moving upwards from that point the illumination of consciousness of the ground of being and true knowledge is experienced spiritually
and a matter of the whole of being. It is only by way of inquiry into the depth and a growth of the soul experientially and truly that one has
acquired knowledge of the good.
Corresponding to the movement of the individual soul upward toward the good, the polis also moves from primitive, luxurious, purified, to the
philosophers’ polis. The long, arduous training of the philosopher, both physical and spiritual, is necessary, all of which can be classified as
Plato’s paideia, or education. Philosophy, politics, and education are inseparable. The Guardian class consists of those who achieve the
highest end of the gold metal soul. All justice is measured in terms of the divine justice in his soul, which has been wrought by the three class
hierarchy of order in the polis, extirpation of the bad poets, selective breeding, communism of families and materials, and the foundation play.
The mythology of the poets is vanishing and the philosophy of the rulers is ascending. Nevertheless, the noble lie is still needed to convince the
people that the Republic is the best polis. Following Heraclitus, the diversity of individual capacities brings unity to the polis. Unity is
imperative within each class community; hence, the unnatural breeding of families and abolition of private property. Apparently, the individual
is subsumed within its community, but all for the Republic, for the common good. The one (unity) and the many (diversity) is the form for the
society. The problem is that no one can recognize this but the philosopher. Sophists like Callicles and Thrasymachus betray the true political
reality by peddling opinions not knowledge. Unfortunately, the people are fooled by the demagogues. The individual who experiences the depth in
the cave and moves upward out to the Vision of the Good—the Agathon—is not accepted upon return to the prisoners in the dark shadows of lower
existence. To them, philosophy and an experience of the transcendent order of being is nonsense.
Plato offers the tripartite classes of guardian, auxiliary, and worker as societal forms of the individual soul: rational, spirited, and
appetitive. Both the individual and society must represent the reality of unity within diversity. As such, Paideia, Periagoge, and Agathon
aptly represent the intellect, will, and soul of man. By education, by a turning around, and by a vision of the good, man can become a philosopher.
The question is whether he can ever become a king. Socrates’s death is not a promising precedent. Thus, the problem is not finding a
philosopher-king, albeit rare, but that no society will elect him as ruler.
Justice is an ordered soul with the divine as a source of its order. Unity by way of diversity in the individual and society harmonized towards
the good is the best constitution for the polis—it is justice, which is the entirety of virtue. And so, Plato has postulated an entirely different
conception of justice than the conventional ones; but, is his vision of political reality true in whole or in part? Does Plato’s Republic transform
the individual into a nature he is not?
|
