Specialization: Fundamental to the “Ideal” City
In Plato’s Republic, Socrates articulates the “ideal” city in detail, crafted by the combination of certain conditions. Among these favorable circumstances, is the specialization of individuals, which was thought to be achieved through proper education. In Book II, he explained, “So on this basis each thing becomes more plentiful, finer, and easier, when one man, exempt from other tasks, does one thing according to nature and at the crucial moment” (370c). Therefore, Socrates believed the best way to maximize the common good was to find an individual’s skill and assign them a job where they could apply it. In doing so, society could operate more efficiently. I argue that specialization, as presented by Socrates, is fundamental to the “ideal” city, despite any criticism raised against it. Based on the execution of the principle, its self-fulfilling nature, and its contribution to justice, I defend this position.
At the start of Book II, Socrates was posed with a challenge from Glaucon and Adeimantus, to prove that justice in its very nature, without any social consequences, was good for the individual. To answer to this, Socrates decided to describe a just city. He reasoned his decision on the fact that both individuals and cities could be just. He also added that cities were much bigger and therefore could be looked at exclusively. Ultimately this led him to begin crafting an “ideal” city in speech (368e-369a). However, as Socrates began to advance his argument, he was met with an objection. Glaucon argued that human beings have a list of wants and luxuries, therefore creating the need for a bigger city. As a result of this necessity, a city is surely to break out in a war with a neighboring one. Rather than abandoning his position, Socrates agreed with Glaucon’s claim and built his argument from it. This led to his plan of creating a suitable army in speech, thus explaining the emergence of specialized education (371d-371e).
Socrates valued education as it provided the means of building an authoritarian city. He explained, “That the starting point of a man’s education sets the course of what follows too” (425b). In this conversation, Socrates discussed the nature of education with Adeimantus, how it should be restrictive with the intent of placing citizens on their destined path. This also complemented his view that education was most effective at a young age; since, the information that a child absorbed became embedded and difficult to erase. He believed that the training of children was a crucial component in promoting a healthy society. Therefore, he urged that early ideas should contribute to the city’s ideal model (378e). In accordance with this view, Socrates believed that education took two forms. The first was through the ancient practice of storytelling, when children were first exposed to ideas. For example, Socrates asked Adeimantus whether it was advantageous to tell the guardians stories that would increase their fear of death, if they wanted them to be courageous. Evidently, Adeimantus responded no (386a). For this reason, this was one of many areas that Socrates believed should be controlled, to prevent children from developing false morals and unfavorable behaviors.
One can argue that this was quite impossible, especially given the dominant literature during the time. Stories told by Hesiod and Homer had long held popularity and Socrates was well aware that erasing them would not be easy. However, he also knew that these were the exact stories which brainwashed the minds of young children with injustice, as they depicted false representations of what it meant to be a god or hero (377c-378b). This was exactly why Socrates believed this change had to be implemented early on, as the target audience of these narratives were children. He stressed this importance through his comparison of children to plastic, explaining that both are most malleable in their earliest stages (377b). Consequently, Socrates claimed that this form of censorship would be best applied by nurturing figures, such as mothers or nurses, who would be convinced which stories to tell (377c). Filtering these types of stories was important and if achieved, kalliopolis was sure to head in the right direction.
Furthermore, during his conversation with Glaucon, Socrates elaborated on his idea of training children in their future careers, by having them experience the environment. He explained that children would be brought to the employment sites of their parents, where they would see the work ethic for themselves. In addition to watching, they would even begin their own training as assistants. This would apply across all fields (466e-467a). Ultimately, in employing this education system, Socrates took the first step in rendering the city automatic. After all, he envisioned a city that could take care of itself, in terms of reproducing its form of governance across generations. However, Socrates did not believe this could continue indefinitely. Nonetheless, he intended to create a city that would last for long periods of time, until it required some sort of intervention, before being reset.
Socrates was keen on maximizing the productivity of goods and services, even at the cost of individuals’ interests. To achieve such efficiency, he claimed that each person should find their place in society, where the quantity and quality produced from their labor would be optimized. Socrates explained that a city emerges because no individual can fulfill their needs entirely on their own, rather that they must rely on others (369b). For this reason, he recognized the importance of implementing a production system that would better satisfy the needs of all citizens. As a result, specialization became a key condition for the “ideal” city. With each worker being assigned a particular good to produce, a collective effort would satisfy the needs of all. Skill level would first be determined on the basis of natural strengths and later be perfected through proper training (433a). Ultimately, individuals were to produce not only enough to satisfy their personal needs, but enough to also satisfy the needs of those they relied on (371a).
One argument that could be raised against this principle of specialization is that citizens would have a desire to rebel. Living in a city where they must do the same work, day in and day out, people would begin to feel like their freedom to do things they genuinely enjoyed would be stripped from them. This is because citizens would have less time for themselves, as they would be forced to work enough to provide for others. Although this would seem like a logical argument, if implemented properly, specialization would only save individuals time. Once they had mastered their discipline, their production time would surely be cut. Their work would become so effortless, since they would no longer have to think of what to do, their bodies would simply do it mechanically. Consequently, two other benefits would stem from this principle of specialization. The first is that individuals would be less stressed. Rather than having to worry about satisfying their needs in areas they had little expertise in, they simply had to focus on doing what they did best. This would leave them with greater leisure time. The second is that because they relied on others, they would be forced to form good relationships with them, resulting in harmony among the whole.
However, this is not the only argument that could be made against specialization. One might question how to justify a laborer receiving less than what they’ve exchanged in work? Adeimantus raised this concern in regard to the guardians of the city. He asked Socrates how he would deal with the unhappiness of guardians, that resulted from their lack of earnings (419a). Although this argument seemed valuable, Socrates quickly disproved it. His response to Adeimantus was that such inequalities were essential in rendering a city just. The ultimate goal was to have a happy whole, not a happy few. In order to realize this, Socrates claimed that rewards should be balanced throughout groups, to prevent them from decreasing work efforts (420b-420e). He clarified this reasoning by providing the example of a potter. He explained that if a potter became too rich or too poor, the quality of his work would decline because he would become corrupt (421d-421e). Therefore, it is crucial that he, and other laborers, were rewarded just the right amount, to maintain both the happiness and justice of the whole. However, this was not to say that personal benefit would be completely sacrificed. By implementing this principle of specialization, both the quantity and quality of products would improve for citizens. After all, both Socrates and Adeimantus agreed that a man who does one job properly is more successful than one who does several of a lesser quality (370b).
Moreover, once this system was up and running, Socrates explained that the city would begin to take care of itself. He described to Adeimantus how the city would naturally develop a cyclical nature. This claim is one that many can disagree with, as it may be argued that it would be impossible to maintain such a strict control over individuals. After all, human beings are not robots, therefore difficulties are likely to arise. For example, some individuals might have a harder time following these “rules”. With such a fixed structure, it is difficult for humans to be kept in line. This is especially problematic when it comes to children, who have a mind of their own and a desire to break the rules. However, Socrates did not intend for the system to be perceived as a burden of rules, at least not for long. Instead, he planned that the principle would gradually embed itself into the city, as a form of socialization. In doing so, individuals would never feel trapped by it, but be naturally drawn to it. Once the first group of individuals were properly educated, trained, and had attained their maximum efficiency, they would later teach their offspring to do the same. With each generation, the output of work would only improve, according to the nature of procreation. Therefore, the hardest part would only be adapting the first group of individuals (424a). Based on the connection he developed between education and specialization, Socrates aimed to mechanize the city. By training individuals to reach their maximum production level, in a short time, their work would become automatic.
Ultimately, specialization is the only way to achieve the ideal city, as it fosters justice among the people. The first way it does this is by ensuring that each individual consumes goods and services produced of maximum quality. This of course is only possible through the assignment of specific jobs (374b). However, specialization also promotes justice by preventing individuals from getting involved in others’ affairs. Socrates defined justice as, “the minding of one’s own business, and not being a busybody” (433a). In assigning each individual a particular job, there would be no reason for them to intervene in someone else’s work. Individuals would only know the value of their own labor, since this is their only responsibility. Consequently, specialization would eliminate any room for jealousy, judgement, or competition. The ultimate goal of specialization is for all to enjoy the same quality of life, regardless of individual reward. Therefore, it would be counter-productive for one to interfere in the work of others, who are ultimately working toward something they will be benefitting from.
Although, it might be argued that meddling is not always ill-willed. In some cases, having the advice of someone from a different field of work might be helfpul. This can be the case when two individuals already work together to produce a good or service. For example, a farmer has someone that makes his required tools (470b-c). In these situations, a minimal relationship is indeed required between these two types of workers. However, the way specialization is set up, the advice of a plow maker will not be very valuable to a farmer anyway. This is simply because these workers receive different types of education and training. Therefore, with no knowledge or expertise in an area of work, their advice can only go so far and would likely cause more damage than good. As Socrates explained, if one were to actually interfere in another person’s work, this would lead to the city’s destruction (434b). Therefore, it is best that such a risk not be taken, and that the relationship between workers respects the guidelines of specialization. Ultimately, the principle ensures that justice is maintained among the people, something that is necessary in achieving the “ideal” city.
In conclusion, throughout The Republic, Socrates crafts the “ideal” city in speech. Among his propositions, he asserts the need for specialization. To implement this principle, he believed it was necessary to set up an education system that placed children on their future paths. This was done by both restricting the information they were exposed to, as well as by introducing them to the work field early on. From there, individuals would be assigned specific jobs, based on their natural strengths. Over time, their labor would be optimized through adequate training, eventually becoming natural to them. This would result in a heightened quantity and quality of goods and services, for all citizens to enjoy. Finally, specialization is necessary to maintain justice in the city, as it stops individuals from meddling in each other’s business. Ultimately, although there are criticisms raised against the principle, I maintain that specialization, as presented by Socrates, is fundamental to the “ideal” city.
Word Count: 2238
Works Cited
Plato, & Bloom, A. (1991). The Republic of Plato. New York: Basic Books.
Image #1: Retrieved from https://www.classicist.org/articles/the-architecture-of-the-ideal-city/
Image #2: Retrieved from https://brewminate.com/education
Image #3: Retrieved from https://greece.greekreporter.com
Image #4: Retrieved from https://rossulbricht.medium.com
