Status
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Description
One of the most widely studied texts of ancient philosophy and politics, Plato's Laws is his last and most substantial dialogue, debating crucial questions on the subject of law-giving and education. This two-volume edition of 1921 was prepared by the classicist Edwin Bourdieu England (1847-1936), who describes the dialogue as 'the treasury of pregnant truths which Plato in extreme old age left ... as his last legacy to humanity'. Generally held to have been written after Plato's failed attempt to influence Syracusan politics, it concerns the just city and its constitution, including discussions of divine revelation, the role of intelligence in the creation of laws, and natural law itself. This edition comprises a short introduction, England's helpful analyses, the Greek text of the dialogue, and extensive notes. Volume 1 is devoted to Books 1-6.… (more)
User reviews
Written about 390 B.C., the Laws argues that the ideal city would ban music, theater and art, replacing such activities with a rigorous system of public education for both men and women. This latter idea was radical in Plato’s time. He got the opportunity to try out his political philosophy in Syracuse, working, basically, as a consultant to the king of that island kingdom. Plato failed miserably, and apparently spent several years in prison for his screw up.
At the end of his life Plato wrote a kitchen-sink book (or maybe several books that have come down to us as a single work) that tried to summarize a lifetime of political philosophizing. There is a great deal of dross in the Laws (and some of the material, some scholars argue, is probably spurious), and the minutiae it contains can dissuade even the hardiest reader from carrying on. Those interested in the heart of the matter would be well advised to read selections, as in Keith Quincy’s recent Plato Unmasked. One of the key points of the Laws, though, is Plato’s moderation of his opinion of democracy. There’s still a distinct hierarchy in the rule of law and the administration of justice, but this is now spread out among a group of “great men”:
Whether it is a matter of art, music or politics, it is only the ‘best men’ who are capable of true judgment. The true judge must not allow himself to be influenced by the gallery nor intimidated by the clamor of the multitude. Nothing must compel him to hand down a verdict that belies his own convictions. It is his duty to teach the multitude and not to learn from them.
If one looks at the United States’ system of government with a clear eye, at least some of the material in the Laws describes our situation: the masses are to be guided by shepherds who are wiser and more refined than we are. This empirical evidence perhaps argues against the soundness of both Plato’s and our own system of governance. Although our elected representatives ostensibly enact the will of their constituents it is common knowledge that they usually act in spite of us and instead deploy the will of the rich, i.e., the corporate interests that fund their election campaigns. In other words, the “good men” of our times are CEOs and others who work for the interest of themselves and their (comparatively few) shareholders. But it is exactly this conflict of interest, and how to safeguard against it, that Plato struggled with over his long career. And it is precisely this struggle that make Plato’s works on political philosophy worth reading today, despite their sometimes strange obsession with minutiae and anti-democratic ideas.
[Originally published in Curled Up with a Good Book]
That said, there's no getting away from the fact that parts of this book are unbelievably boring. My darlings, you're just going to have to power on through those bits. There's a sequence of unalloyed delight in Book VII for example which is a succession of good and bad ideas, all fascinating, which he rounds off by proposing the theory of evolution.
Don't think that because he's writing about a pre-industrial society that Laws has no relevance today. There is a clear line of descent from the thoughts in this book to the gas chambers. Every time he uses the word “slave” switch it out for “Jew” and you'll see what I mean. You can do this for the target group of any authoritarian state and it holds true whether it be “intellectuals” or the “working class” etc. This isn't pleasant reading but it is required reading if you want to know your enemy. The mindset is one of complacent arrogance. What I found most frightening is that Plato doesn't consider himself evil. He looks on this sort of treatment of his fellow man as elevating the perpetrator closer to God.