The ἀπράγμων Busybody: Political Engagement and Socratic Politics in Gorgias, Republic and Theaetetus

Abstract

In archaic Greece, the so called χρηστοί had played a dominant role in society. They were principally responsible for the city’s defence and reaped proportionate levels of acclaim. In the democratic city state, their role was less clear and their societal preeminence was compromised. Dissatisfaction with this reorientation of society manifested in rhetoric that developed and emphasised terms like ἀπραμοσύνη and the decision to disengage from society.

At first blush Plato’s philosophy of political engagement seems to accord with and develop some of the behaviours exhibited by these elites. Indeed, scholarship on the subject converges on the idea that the disengaged contemplative life stands as an ideal in Platonic thought. L.B. Carter suggests that Plato introduces a supernatural justification for ἀπραγμοσύνη and in so doing elevates the debate about engagement. For Richard Kraut Plato thinks that “the philosopher is not only free to withdraw from politics in ordinary cities but in fact justice consists precisely in such withdrawal”. Eric Brown suggests that Plato, like Aristotle, does not reject the “dominant ideology” of Greek society that mandates political service, but argues for a number of exceptions for an elite few who “can live the best possible human life by withdrawing from politics”. These views accept the primacy of the life disengaged from the polis in Plato’s thought, in order to facilitate contemplation.

This thesis offers a reading of three passages in Plato’s middle dialogues Gorgias, Republic and Theaetetus, through the lens of the fifth century rhetoric surrounding ἀπραγμοσύνη. I suggest that Plato appropriates this rhetoric, subverts it and subordinates it to his philosophical project. I will also argue that this project, and philosophy as Plato conceives of it, require some degree of engagement with the city and its citizens.