The Perfect Society

 

The Perfect Society

            “Therefore this day marks a happy occasion—the day on which we receive our new initiates, who will work with us toward a better society and a better world.” –Marcus Eaton, Divergent

Utopia, as defined by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is a place of ideal perfection especially in laws, government, and social conditions. Most of mankind is consistently surrounded by society; however, the word “utopia” is a word that we do not make a habit of using to describe the societies we are surrounded by. Is utopia something that can ever be achieved? By looking at The Republic of Plato we will explore the meaning of Utopia and compare a utopian society to a dystopian society.  

The Republic of Plato follows a conversation where the perfect society is being discussed. What makes the perfect society? According to the conversation within The Republic of Plato, the perfect society is one in which each individual must follow a particular set of rules that those conversing believe will have the best effect on the society. Therefore, a perfect society is one where strict rules are set forth and it is required that these rules be followed without exception.

            Utopia and dystopia are two words that both describe a place; however, the places that they are used to describe are on opposite ends of the spectrum. A utopia is an imaginary society where everything is perfect, whereas, a dystopia is defined as a place where people are unhappy and afraid due to unfair treatment. It seems unlikely that this perfect society that is being discussed within The Republic of Plato was meant to be anything other than a utopia. Despite their best intentions, when you look at the strict rules set up for this utopian society the resemblance to that of dystopian society’s in popular culture books today is astonishing. As I sat pondering the different directions that I could take with The Republic of Plato text and trying to find a piece of modern media that would fit well with that direction, it suddenly dawned on me just how many similarities could be found between the text and one of my favorite trilogies.

            A favorite trilogy of mine is the Divergent trilogy by Veronica Roth. The Divergent trilogy is set in a dystopian Chicago where its citizens are separated into five factions based on what they value most: selflessness, peace, honesty, intelligence, and bravery. The factions are quite segregated with very little interaction between the different factions. The whole city is fenced in and heavily monitored and its citizens do not bring into question why they do not ever leave the city. To question that would be to question the government.

            Within The Republic of Plato, one rule that is hypothetically set forth is one where it is stated that each individual is to have one job and only one job. It is quoted in book II of the text, “And, what about this? Who would do a finer job, one man practicing many arts, or one man one art?” In theory, each individual would find where their talents lie at a young age, and based on that talent, each individual would be placed in the job that they would continue in for the entirety of their lives.

            Similarly, in Divergent, all individuals receive an equal education until the age of sixteen at which time each individual participates in a test to determine which faction they would be best suited for. Ultimately, each individual has the freedom to choose whichever faction they desire to be a part of regardless of what their test results are; however, once an individual has chosen a faction during a ceremony attended by all citizens, they are locked into that decision.

            After joining a faction, each individual must go through an initiation process in which they are trained in the ways of the faction. Assuming that they pass the initiation, they are welcomed into the faction where they will now remain for the remainder of their lives. Devoted to their faction and what that faction stands for.  In both The Republic of Plato and Divergent, individuals, upon reaching a certain age, are placed in a role that they are expected to remain in permanently.

            The society discussed within The Republic of Plato was meant to be a utopian society, but by examining the similarities between this supposed utopian society and a very dystopian society, I feel that the society within The Republic of Plato becomes more and more dystopian. While reading dystopian novels that are popular today, there are several elements that make a dystopian society what it is, but perhaps the most important is the absence of freedom. And looking at The Republic of Plato, I do not see a lot of freedom within the fictional society that is being built. This leads me to the belief that The Republic of Plato could easily be seen as a very early writing of a dystopian society.      

The Republic of Plato discusses a society that would completely shape the individuals and guide them to a point of excellence that would be fitting for a perfect society. But this raises the question, “what is a perfect society?” According to the description we have in The Republic of Plato, the perfect society is one in which every individual willingly participates in bettering themselves and therefore better their society. I feel that this description is a far cry from what might be described if you were to ask someone today how they would define a perfect society.

“One man’s trash is another man’s treasure,” so the old saying goes. It is easy for us to grasp how a pile of old furniture thrown out on the curb by one man could be a treasure to another man. Not necessarily because we think that furniture is valuable, but because at some point in our lives, we have all stood in the shoes of the man who has found a treasure among somebody else’s trash. In the same way, we can grasp how this fictional utopian society seemed like a winning idea to one man. Not because we agree with everything about this society, but because at some point we have all come up with an idea that, in our own minds, was flawless.

The ultimate question here is: can a utopian society exist? The evidence that we have looked at in comparing the society within The Republic of Plato to both a utopian society and a dystopian society, has shown that even this “perfect” society has at least one major flaw; a flaw that leads me to believe that a utopian society cannot exist on earth. That flaw is that the society discussed was a utopia to only one man. Because humans were created to be free-thinking and free to make decisions based on what they believe individually, it is impossible that all of mankind, or even a town full of people, would entirely agree on what makes a society a utopia. If it is not a utopia for everybody involved, it is not a utopia.

In conclusion, the society discussed in The Republic of Plato is not a utopia. The idea of this society is flawed because a utopian society cannot exist. Society reflects people and people are not perfect. A utopian society cannot exist because there is no such thing as a perfect society. There is no such thing as a perfect society because there is no such thing as a perfect people. It is this idea of forcing one man’s ideal of a perfect society on a group of people that leads me to believe that the society discussed in The Republic of Plato is more like a dystopian society rather than a utopian society.