3

Last night I was reminiscing upon Plato's Republic as an attempt for constructing as best a city as possible, and the latter The Laws which attempted to implement such.

Initially I was thinking of whether an ideal society necessarily entails it is composed of ideal individuals. Whether it was possible for all individuals to be perfect but for there not to be a perfect society, or for there to be a perfect society but not all perfect individuals.

This is what led me to the more crucial question: to what degree are the two intertwined? For sometimes political philosophies are explored, at least in emphasis, separate to ethical ones.

Improve this question
7
  • I am aware of the some of the sociology of such, however that is not what this question aims for.
    – Xeon
    Commented Aug 22, 2022 at 15:05
  • Single question please.
    – BillOnne
    Commented Aug 22, 2022 at 20:57
  • "There is dispute about how to interpret Plato’s elaborate analogy between justice in a soul and in a city. According to the Whole-Part account, a city is just if and only if all or most of its members are just; but this view leads to considerable difficulties. For example, Plato thinks that even in the ideally just city, most people aren’t just; only the guardians are.61...This suggests the Macro-Micro account, according to which there is a structural isomorphism between the justice of a person and a city." —Gail Fine in The Oxford Handbook of Plato
    – Xeon
    Commented Jan 24, 2023 at 0:16
  • continued: "For a person to be just is for the parts of her soul to be in a particular sort of harmony, and for each part to fulfill its function. For a city to be just is for its occupationally defined classes to be in structurally the same harmony, and for each of its parts to fulfill its function. On this view, a city can be just even if not all or most of its citizens are just. All that is required is that each class fulfill its proper function, and that the classes stand in the appropriate harmonious relations to one another.62" —Gail Fine in The Oxford Handbook of Plato
    – Xeon
    Commented Jan 24, 2023 at 0:16
  • 1
    "When there is righteousness in the heart, there is beauty in the character. When there is beauty in the character, there is harmony in the home. When there is harmony in the home, there is order in the nation. When there is order in the nation, there is peace in the world." - Confucius
    – Scott Rowe
    Commented May 21, 2023 at 15:06

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

Can, or should, one separate improvement of society from improvement of individual ethic?

Whether it was possible for all individuals to be perfect but for there not to be a perfect society, or for there to be a perfect society but not all perfect individuals.

Here is the affirmative statement: A society can be perfect if and only if all of its individual members are perfect. The question here asks about the denial of that statement.

On a theoretical level, it’s almost a matter of definition. A society is not perfect if one or more of its members are not. If one or more of the society’s members is not perfect, then the full society is not perfect.

On a practical level, a definition of “perfect” is essential, because that will decide what “not perfect” looks like. Is the imperfect citizen a shoplifter? Is this person a serial murderer? There is a difference in quality that makes a difference in whether such a person could exist and yet the society could still be called perfect.

There is a also the question of prevalence. Suppose that a serial murderer appears once per century. Are you still willing to call that society perfect, or has it lapsed into imperfection?

Improve this answer
1
  • I think perfection is not a useful concept. If something is wrong, fix it. If it ain't broke, enjoy it.
    – Scott Rowe
    Commented May 21, 2023 at 15:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .