The Republic

by Plato, Desmond Lee (translator)

book data

6,605 ratings, 3.76 average rating, 426 reviews (more data...)

rating	frequency	%
5		26%
4		35%
3		28%
2		7%
1		2%

edit

published

January 30th 2003 (first published 380) by Penguin Classics

binding

Paperback, 496 pages

url

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato

characters

Socrates, Thrasymachus, Glaucon, Adeimantus, ...more

setting

Greece

isbn

0140449140 (isbn13: 9780140449143)

description

Ostensibly a discussion of the nature of justice, The Republic presents Plato's vision of the ideal state, covering a wide range of topics: social, ed...more

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | compare prices ($3.99)…

new topic
discuss this book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Gigi's Company: Author - Title Game	422	197	3 days ago, 08:01AM
100+ Book Challenge: Jane G.'s Annual 100+ books	22	502	7 days ago, 12:36PM
The Great Books C...: Which Great Books have you read?	19	25	13 days ago, 09:41PM
Moja: Your book, 9/26	15	16	09/28/2008 10:13AM

friend reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

The Most Influential Books in History

51 books | 151 voters

Best Books Ever

3914 books | 14242 voters

More lists...

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 9,266)

sort: default (?) | date
filters: all | text-only

09/25/07

Brendan James rated it:

Read in November, 2001

recommends it for: everyone

Let me explain why I'd recommend this book to everyone: Plato is retarded.

Seriously.

And it's important that you all understand that Western society is based on the fallacy-ridden ramblings of a retarded person. Read this, understand that he is not joking, and understand that Plato is retarded.

Every single one of his works goes like this:

SOCRATES: "Hello, I will now prove this theory!"
STRAWMAN: "Surely you are wrong!"
...more

Like this review? yes (17 people liked it)

7 comments

04/04/08

Jason Pettus rated it:

Read in April, 2008

(Reprinted from the Chicago Center for Literature and Photography [cclapcenter.com]. I am the original author of this essay, as well as the owner of CCLaP; it is not being reprinted here illegally.)

The CCLaP 100: In which I read a hundred so-called "classic" books for the first time, then write reports on whether or not I think they deserve the label

Essay #11: The Republic, by Plato (~360 BC)

The story in a nutshell:
For those who don't know, the...more

Like this review? yes (7 people liked it)

1 comment

07/20/07

aisha rated it:

(review of isbn 0465069347)

i have read plato's republic...three times.

and i've actually enjoyed every time, although i hadn't thought i would each round.

i love greek writing, and though aristotle and thucydides are my favorite, plato is a close second (third?).

even if you disagree with the ideas he presents, the ideas are fascinating to discuss. i actually kind of think it is way more fun to discuss when someone contradicts an idea or assumption made.

the dialectic style is o...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

05/21/08

Everyman rated it:

(review of isbn 0465069347)

bookshelves: my-library

Read in January, 1967

All the criticisms of Plato are valid. He raises straw arguments. He manipulates discussions unfairly. He doesn't offer realistic solutions. And so no.

But he is still, and for very good reason, the most influential philosopher in Western civilization. He makes people think. Most authors we read today are trying to persuade us to agree with their point of view. Plato, not so. He wants you to disagree with him. He wants you to argue with him. He wants you to identify the fallac...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

06/20/07

Mark rated it:

Read in October, 2007

recommends it for: those with a philosophical bent

I finished reading The Republic on my birthday and now am both older and wiser. The Republic is in essence one long argument why a person should lead a just life verses choosing a life of pleasure, riches, ambition, or power. It is deeply concerned with the nature of the human soul and how to prepare one's soul for eternity. Socrates/Plato uses a plethora of logical examples for this argument, although it is the logic of 400 B.C. Greek culture, which seems somewhat fractured to us today. The ...more

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

08/16/07

Thomas Pfaff rated it:

(review of isbn 0872201368)

bookshelves: history

Read in March, 2000

This seemed like an appropriate book to read in the new milleneium. So I did. It was interesting. Some say it is the template for socialism.

Some say it is the template for democracy.
People say lots of things about it.

The concept of reading Plato's Republic is pretentious.
So I admit it- I'm at times such a little snot.

Some idjut on NPR said the other day that Plato's Republic was just sooooooooooooo much more enlightening after the third read...more This seemed like an appropriate book to read in the new milleneium. So I did. It was interesting. Some say it is the template for socialism.

Some say it is the template for democracy.
People say lots of things about it.

The concept of reading Plato's Republic is pretentious.
So I admit it- I'm at times such a little snot.

Some idjut on NPR said the other day that Plato's Republic was just sooooooooooooo much more enlightening after the third reading! :-o If only everyone would give Socrates & Aristotle a third go-around!

After hearing that I think it is a fairly conceited, elitist and self-absorbed thing to admit to having read this. I will... but only because I've already listed half a dozen motorcycle books along for the ride. And that guy on NPR made me laugh my head off.

I thought that Plato's Republic was kind of an expansion of codes given to people by the likes of Moses, Hammurabi, etc.

It is surprising to read thru the book and come across ideas... then realize that people have been thinking about things like this for thousands of years- just like you've always thought they might have been! In a sense people haven't changed much. At least moderately educated people like me in some sense probably haven't changed much. It is surprising to think about how many more educated people there are now than back then. The bar clearly has been raised.

I also read this about the same time as a book that I think was entitled "Letters from George Washington." There was some crossover. Also a huge amount of difference.

The style of ancient writing is of course different. Reading letters from George Washington made him seem like a real human being. Reading dialogue between Aristotle and Socrates made them seem no different than before. Maybe I think worse of them after hearing some of the stranger musings in Plato's Republic.

Plato's Republic has a feeling of prescience about it. Overall I liked the book. The dialog between Aristotle and Socrates gets a bit old... especially when it diverts from dialog and goes to monologue.

(less)

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

3 comments

06/27/07

Covert.adrian rated it:

Read in October, 2002

recommends it for: Those seeking answers, or at least the means to help you find your own.

No book has influenced my life more than Plato's Republic. It admittedly can be a difficult read: it is almost entirely a back and forth conversation between two people, Socrates and Glaucon, discussing the nature of man, the soul, justice, and what the most just society, or Republic, would look like. In this highly utopian account, Socrates expresses little hope in the common man, and instead suggests authoritarian rule, by philosophers, would lead to the most just state. His contempt for democ...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

07/09/08

Christopher rated it:

Read in April, 2009

I'm really glad a read The Republic. Even though I knew anecdotes for the books, and the discourse centered around the ideal city-state, I did not realize that it was really about the nature of Justice.
I was surprised to discover how much I disagreed with some points, in particular Socrates' final definition of Justice. There were many chilling moments when I contrasted his conclusions to such dystopian literature such as Brave New World. I was also heavily struck by his criticisms of D...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

06/12/08

Erin rated it:

Read in September, 2008

This was a tough book to get through, mostly because the ten chapters are so big, that it was hard to find a place to stop. If you're not familiar with it, it is a conversation between Socrates and some of his pupils or followers beginning with the question of who has a better life, a just man or an unjust man. The students make a pretty good argument at the outset as to why a person who is unjust but keeps it hidden is happier than the just man with a bad reputation. Socrates then begins to bui...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

5 comments

05/28/08

Tyler rated it:

bookshelves: philosophy

Read in June, 2008

recommended to Tyler by: _Socrates
recommends it for: _Academics, Philosophy Students

This essential work of philosophy suffers from its antiquity. Long stretches of Plato's famous dialog make the point over and over, too much for today's readers. Though repetition may have been useful in ancient times, it's through modern lenses that I read. Any editor today would have chopped fifty pages off this treatise in an eye blink.

Through these lenses too, the ideal state Plato suggests will make a reader's hair stand on end, knowing as we do how his proposals can only end...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

1 comment

02/04/08

Dan rated it:

I'm not sure why people read this. For those interested in the history of philosophy it's undoubtedly important. For everyone else... meh. A lot of people comment that Plato deals seriously with all the big issues. Well, he brings them up, but never seriously engages with them.
Maybe the problem is that I'm reading this at 25 after spending a couple years seriously reading philosophy. Maybe Popper inoculated me. I might have felt differently if I started reading The Republic with a less cri...more I'm not sure why people read this. For those interested in the history of philosophy it's undoubtedly important. For everyone else... meh. A lot of people comment that Plato deals seriously with all the big issues. Well, he brings them up, but never seriously engages with them.
Maybe the problem is that I'm reading this at 25 after spending a couple years seriously reading philosophy. Maybe Popper inoculated me. I might have felt differently if I started reading The Republic with a less critical eye. I honestly found myself giggling at some of Plato's arguments, due to their specious, and often obviously false nature. Plato's rhetorical style is also laughable.

The format for much of the book is this: a topic is introduced, "rules for allowable art" for example. Next, Plato makes a dishonest but true-on-the-surface argument. Listener agrees wholeheartedly. Plato uses that simple argument to argue for some ridiculous position like actors not being allowed to play bad men or women or children because they might become like bad men, women, or children.

My big criticism is that for most of the book, the listeners do nothing but agree. They are at least interesting in the first book, but by the second have been reduced to a sycophantic chorus.

This is a representative snippet of Plato proving that an unjust person is not clever or good.

“And about knowledge and ignorance in general; see whether
you think that any man who has knowledge ever would wish to
have the choice of saying or doing more than another man who
has knowledge. Would he not rather say or do the same as his
like in the same case?

That, I suppose, can hardly be denied.

And what of the ignorant? would he not desire to have more
than either the knowing or the ignorant?”

His reasoning goes: a knowledgeable man never tries to outdo or be different from another knowledgeable man, and knowledge is good. An unjust man tries to outdo other unjust men, so is not good. There's more to the argument than that, but no one ever challenges this (arguably false) assumption that competition and difference are inherently unwise and ungood. If Plato doesn't bother to think about that, why should I bother to think about Plato. There's a dozen better Greek texts, and a rereading of The Orestia will teach you a lot more about life. If you want to think about justice pick up some Rawls. Seriously, this should have been buried with Sparta.(less)

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

3 comments

01/11/08

Tim rated it:

(review of isbn 0465069347)

When I wrote this review I failed to mention Bloom’s essay (and translation). It’s possibly the best commentary on Plato I’ve read. An overly simple summary is that Bloom suggests many of Socrates’ proposals were intentionally preposterous, with the aim of leading his interlocutors to grasp that no truly legitimate political system is possible, and that the best course for individuals is to tend their souls, necessarily within a polity, going along with its requirements as necessary, b...more When I wrote this review I failed to mention Bloom’s essay (and translation). It’s possibly the best commentary on Plato I’ve read. An overly simple summary is that Bloom suggests many of Socrates’ proposals were intentionally preposterous, with the aim of leading his interlocutors to grasp that no truly legitimate political system is possible, and that the best course for individuals is to tend their souls, necessarily within a polity, going along with its requirements as necessary, but avoiding involvement in it as much as possible. Also, he suggests much of what Socrates says is not a definite political program, but directed to the particular characters of his interlocutors (Glaucon and Adeimantus) to lead them towards philosophy and away from their particular weaknesses (as Socrates saw them).

Bloom makes a very good case for this interpretation, which I’ve grossly oversimplified (and left important parts out). There’ll never be an end to the debate, but this essay is one to be reckoned with by anyone interested in the Republic. Regarding the translation, it’s very precise; someone with a little knowledge of Greek can often see the Greek through the English. This makes for less flowing language; with a lesser dialogue such as the Euthyphro I prefer a more literary translation, but it seems appropriate for such an important work. My review was:

In the West, at least, this is the touchstone of all political philosophy, and Plato pretty much covered all the issues people have been fighting and arguing about since people started wondering how societies should be organized and governed. It's easy to say that Plato's ideal state is nutty beyond imagination, but that misses the point. He asked the questions that really matter, and just about all of them, and considered them deeply and carefully, and then came up with his nutty system.

What about us? We live in a largely unquestioning age - maybe virtually everyone has. But it’s hard for, say, a modern American to read Plato’s assessment of the relative merits and demerits of different political systems and come away with the kind of mindless idolization of “democracy” with which we’re inundated by politicians and the media. It’s easy to say Plato’s system is goofy, but do you ever hear anyone in America publicly saying, “Democracy has a lot of serious weaknesses, one of them being its tendency to develop a culture needing life support.” Or, “Elites provide some real benefits to society, as does an aristocratic element.” Could those ideas have some merit? Well, we never even get that far since those ideas are too blasphemous for our society.

It’s funny how open-minded we consider our modern selves. But when’s the last time you heard a serious, thoughtful critique of modern liberal democracy (as opposed to a silly, neo-Marxist rant)? Plato had the courage, the detachment, and the brilliance to give his honest assessment of the various systems, compare them and then judge them. His purpose, at least apparently, had little to do with an agenda other than asking a question – what might constitute a good government? And not only good, but the best? Those questions require asking and answering questions about human nature and the nature of social relationships. Plato asks so well and considers so well, and so comprehensively, that his ideal system (regardless of whether he was even very serious about it) isn’t the issue. The significance, I think, is that he gets us to consider all the important questions he considers, many of which we otherwise probably wouldn’t have considered, and among other things to then uncover our unexamined assumptions and prejudices and reassess them.
(less)

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

01/09/08

Lauren rated it:

Read in January, 2008

I have always enjoyed Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. I love to think of truths visually, often using metaphors to articulate and organize thoughts. The Allegory of the Cave is an excellent metaphor of truth versus reality or pretence versus perception. I believe in absolutes. There is truth, and then there is what we perceive to be true. Because everyone is viewing ultimate truth from their own perspective, truth is often misconceived as ambiguous, “in the eye of the beholder,” or circ...more I have always enjoyed Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. I love to think of truths visually, often using metaphors to articulate and organize thoughts. The Allegory of the Cave is an excellent metaphor of truth versus reality or pretence versus perception. I believe in absolutes. There is truth, and then there is what we perceive to be true. Because everyone is viewing ultimate truth from their own perspective, truth is often misconceived as ambiguous, “in the eye of the beholder,” or circumstantial. I do not suppose to know what truth is anymore than any other, yet I do believe that one must understand that when an opinion or a definition a truth is presented, it is based on limited perspectives.
Plato defines truth as the light behind us that casts the shadows we see. He further explains that we are bound to see only the shadows and therefore mistaken them for truth. Plato states, “To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.” . Paul, in the New Testament, describes this as looking through a glass darkly (See 1 Corinthians 13:12). Both wise men realize that ultimate truth is something beyond our comprehension with our present limitations. Yet both also affirm that obtaining this truth is possible over time.
Plato further explores the possibility of perceiving actual truth. What if the prisoners were set free and turned towards the light? What would the light do to these prisoners? Plato answers: “The glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see the realities…” After viewing the shadows in the dark, the immediate change to light will be painful and will cause him to seek the dark where he is comfortable. I remember when I was nineteen and realized the current path I was on was not only inaccurate but quite destructive. I decided to seek a new way of life. I began attending church, yet the change was quite uncomfortable. Each week after church, I would retire to the pool hall, my comfort zone. Even though I knew that church offered a better way, it was difficult to make the change. The glare distressed me and caused me to seek refuge in the comforts of my cave. Understanding the light was not enough to overcome the discomforts it caused.
Plato assumes that before we get to the point of this understanding, we will first reject its validity altogether. Because the shadows are all we have ever known, if given the chance to turn and see reality, we would dismiss it as fiction. Surely one glimpse at something that goes against all previous paradigms must be inaccurate. One might assume that from a logical standpoint, we would see the light, the actual images and the shadows cast on the wall we have been observing throughout our lifetime and conclude that the shadows are merely a distortion of a greater reality. Yet I oftentimes see contradictions of this assumption: people fighting for untruths, turning a blind eye to greater realities. I am sure I suffer from this on a more consistent basis than I would like to admit.
Plato then supposes that one can be convinced of the truthfulness of the light with gradual acclimation. The scriptures describe this learning process as “precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little there a little” (See Isaiah 28:10). In fact, most learning does take place through this process. For instance, I cannot learn calculus until I have an understanding of lower mathematical principles. Plato states that “he will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first he will see the shadows best…” Through a slow and steady process, we can begin to understand greater realities.
Once an understanding of this light is achieved, we should not assume that we have all truth, but rather a knowledge of where to obtain it. Plato further instructs us that with this understanding comes a responsibility to be patient with those who do not yet have it. Those still in the cave will not understand this knowledge and even look down on it. “Men would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes.” Furthermore those with this enlightenment would be bored or even irritated with the activities of the misinformed. My favorite quote in the Allegory of the Cave is where Plato is defining the two types of blindness and the others’ response to it: “Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light… And he who remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not be too ready to laugh; he will first ask whether that soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to the day is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy in his condition and state of being, and he will pity the other; or, if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes from below into the light, there will be more reason.” I believe it is important to understand where an individual has been and how they perceive reality. Realizing one’s limitations or strengths will surely make us more compassionate and in turn, more capable of gaining greater perspective.

(less)

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

07/18/07

Zoeita rated it:

bookshelves: academia

Read in January, 1996

recommends it for: anyone

i freakin' love this book!!! of course, it helps that i had a most excellant professor who guided our naive freshman class through the text. the second time around, i had a wider breadth of expierence and again, an excellant professor to facilitate discussion in an even smaller class. plato lays out the groundwork for much of what was to become Western Civilization as we know it. i agree w/much of what plato says, particularly when it comes to focusing on encouraging the traits or morals that on...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

12/16/07

Brian rated it:

(review of isbn 1593080972)

bookshelves: philosophy, politics

Read in August, 2007

recommends it for: people who are ready to accept that democracy is lame

This book is not for the faint of heart. It may in fact not be for anyone outside a select few who are either pretentious and intelligent or foolish and masochistic - or some combination of both.

The main thing one can take away from this book is the ability to tell the next person who says, "Democracy started back in ancient Greece with Plato and Co.," to shove off. The book attempts to answer the question of whether being good for goodness' sake is truly important, and i...more

Like this review? yes (1 person liked it)

add a comment

05/11/09

Kate added it (review of isbn 0915144034)

bookshelves: abandoned, wallbanger

I've tried to read this book twice. The first time I made it about 2/3 of the way through; the second time I made it less than halfway. I spent the entire time thinking of Dorothy Parker's review of The Cardinal's Mistress: "This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force."

My problem with the book was that Plato's ideas of what makes for an ideal society frustrate me. A lot. I would get so angry with the totalitarian regime he was s...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

12/01/08

Maria is currently reading it (review of isbn 0465069347)

bookshelves: currently-reading

I picked up this book again (which I haven't read since freshman year in college) because what Plato says about the cave has been on my mind. I am working on that issue in my life and in a play I'm writing so I thought it was high time for a refresher course. A few pages in, I am reminded of why this book is classic. Socrates talks to an old man about what again is like to age and if he misses the pleasures of his youth. The man replies, "If they [human beings] are orderly and content w...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

01/10/09

Carla rated it:

Read in January, 2009

Not finished-finished, but within the last pages.
Better than I expected...glad that I got a Classical translation, and not one of the more idiotic lyrical-Modern English ones. *gags* Easier to read, my patoot! If it doesn't sound like Shakespeare, it's Not Classical language.
Not a dull book...just a tad verbose. Not Sexist, either...really, You have to Search for those conversations. Not unlike Socrates turning arguments onto his opponents, people that wants to see anti-female stanc...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

12/03/08

Kris rated it:

bookshelves: scholarship

Read in January, 1997

recommends it for: philosophers/students

One of the greatest books ever written. Plato transcends time and locale to bring us THE philosophy text to begin and end all others. All one has to do is read his student, Aristotle, to appreciate the literary gift that Plato demonstrates in his Republic. Not only does he deal with such foundational concepts like metaphysics, political philosophy, epistemology, education, and ethics... but he does so in a deeply interesting dialogical format, using the quintessential philosopher Socrates as his...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment

05/09/09

Neal Tucker rated it:

Plato's corpus is, as has been said, the footnote to all of Western philosophy. This text is a great basis for further reading in Plato. The translation is pretty good, and the book itself is pretty cheap in nearly any translation, unless you want a complete works, in which case I recommend Complete Works, a significant addition to any philosophical library, including even pseudepigraphal-Platonic works. I personally liked Republic so much because of the nature of the arguments, which are, at...more

Like this review? yes

add a comment