There is always constant debate on which system of government is the best or not. More importantly, on the virtue of a leader or what qualifies a president as a good or bad president. Mostly, we judge actions of leaders based on results or consequences. 

Credit

For a leader to be regarded as good, he must have done so many things which were right by virtue of their consequences. This is actually based on his intellect.

Mostly, I know that every political system need the knowledge of philosophers to make rational and sound decisions. However, the failure of such decision to materialize lies on the shoulder of the leader in question. He must bear the brunt of it alone and can only sack the adviser in question.

My topic is not actually on the importance of philosophers per say in every political system. I intend to enlighten us on what philosopher king means as explained by Plato.

Plato, an ancient Greek philosopher theorized on a just state. His aim was a state where justice is the goal of the people. He came up with the idea of philosopher king in his work Republic.

Plato argues that state must be grouped into three classes. He never believed in Democracy and he called it rule of the mob. The idea that everybody is equal and can come together to make decision on how the state should be run is absurd to him.

So he argues that people should be grouped according to their strength. According to his classifications, we have the commoners, the auxillaries and the guardians. According to Plato, the commoners are the last people in the ladder. 

He believes that there should be rigorous training for the people. After the training, the people would be tested and would be graded according to their performances. Those who show high level of intelligence are placed in the guardians category, those with good courage and skills would be placed in the auxillaries category and those who do not have these two qualities are relegated to the commoners category.

Credit

The commoners are those whose job mainly is to provide for the state. They are the producers that produce the food for the whole state. So they are the farmers and they are ruled by inclinations. 

The auxillaries are the soldiers. They are skilled men with martial qualities. These people are very courageous and their work is to protect the state from internal and external forces. 

The guardians are those with good intellect. They are intelligent people that can make rational decisions for the good of the state. These set of people according to Plato cannot have personal property or claim possession of anything. They cannot have wives to themselves and cannot claim to have children. 

The guardians are the philosopher kind. They have mastered the skills of rigorous and logical thinking. They can make wise decisions that will benefit the state. They are people with great skills demanded of a ruler. Only philosopher king - intelligent people, can rule a state.

According to Plato, the Guardians and the auxillaries must have wives and children in common. They must not own any property. Their major task it to protect the state against external forces and make sure that justice is served. Plato believes that his Utopian is an ideal state for a just society.

Perhaps you are wondering what kind of state is that. You are wondering if the idea of having wives and children together is itself ideal. But Plato’s idea should first be understood before any attempt is made to criticize his Republic.

For him, those who have properties, those who have wives, and those who have children find it very difficult to make rational decisions on certain things. He believes that people with feelings confuse duty for family protection. They tend to make decision that will favor their family above the state. So those who do not have any of these things make decisions in favor of the society at large.

The above are Plato’s classifications and what he thinks makes a  just society. His conception and ideal state has been regarded as Utopian for simple reason and that is because such state can only exist in the imagination. It is an imaginary state where everything must be done and guided by certain principles and rules. 

The idea of having wives and children in common will sound absurd to many people. It sounds that way to me too! I cannot imagine myself having my wife with another guy not to talk of guys. We always want children for ourselves and would love to refer to them as ours by virtue of giving birth to them. So to say a state should own these children because the guardians must not have any feeling is illogical.

I also think his classification brings about inequality in the society. People are not solely responsible for lacking natural qualities. Now if they are stopped from ruling a sate, would that not create a difference among them? Such classification suggest natural inequality.

This reminds me of 2Baba’s (2Face Idibia) song Go Down There where he said: …the peace of a dull with the instinct of a leader. This suggest that some people might not have the physical qualities we look for but within them, they are very talented with unimaginable qualities.

The philosopher king as argued by Plato does not mean a philosopher in the strict sense of the word. Philosopher king is that person who can make rational decisions, who placed reason above feelings, who is very intelligent. The philosopher king is someone who is very wise.

I guess you now have an idea of who a philosopher king is. However, do you agree that it is only when wives and children are shared together or owned by the state that we can have a just society. Do you think there can be such a state where true justice? Can we actually have an ideal state similar to that of Plato?

Thanks for reading. Its your boy @smyle the philosopher.

Please resteem, upvote and comment