著者

奥田 和夫

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典學研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.59, pp.22-33, 2011-03-23

---

In the Laws the philosopher-king argued in the Republic does not appear explicitly. So it has been maintained that Plato abandoned the idea of the philosopher-king because of experiences in Syracuse or change in metaphysical thought. But some insist that the Nocturnal Council and its systems reflect the idea of the philosopher-king. This is correct, I think. And the philosophical theology in Book X is said to be the prologue to all laws. I believe that the work is a product of the idea of the philosopher-king. In this paper I argue that there is a strong possibility that Plato has eagerness for its realization in the future and does not exchange it for thought of rule of law. Points of the argument: 1. In the Laws Plato evidently abstains from philosophical discourses. 2. Plato gives a term of legislator in place of philosopher in our text (708E-712B). 3. It is significant that a main political ability of a philosopher (or a philosopher-king) is legislation. 4. The text 709E-711D ('the young tyrant') appears to be intended to tell us that the easiest and speediest way to realize the philosopher-king is cooperation of a philosopher and a tyrant. 5. The text 711D-712A ('god-like eros in great political power') appears to be intended to tell us that eros is the philosopher-king in the meaning of the Republic, as eros is taken to be a representative of a philosopher's mind. 6. Plato has eagerness for the realization of the philosopher-king in the future and does not only hold the idea. For 2 above there is no direct support in the text, but when the legislator is said to be 'axios epainou' (710C8), 'akros' (710D7), and 'alethes nomothetes' (710E8) in conjunction with 'the young tyrant' (709E-711D), we should consider the meanings of Plato's attribution of these terms to the legislator.