Plato's Educational Systems And Divisions Of Classes In The Republic On "Educating Philosopher Kings," the in Republic, trans. Robin Waterfield

(Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 250-276.

Unlike the democratic society of ancient Athens, Plato's philosophical conception of the self and state is based upon divisions of education, politics, and social stratum, rather than unity. Of course, it should be noted that even democratic Athenian conceptions of the larger body politic were divided into Greeks v. Barbarians, Women v. Slaves, and that not all individuals received an equal education from tutors and public schools. However, the division of the self within the human person and the importance of categorization are reflected in Plato's discussion of the formulation of an ideal society within his Republic to an extent not found even in Athenian society of his day. (250-276)

Plato, it should be noted, wrote from a society where the division in terms of human categorization was paramount to conceptualizing the world from a philosophical point-of-view. The nature of philosophy was establishing division, rather than intellectually conferring a sameness upon all humans. Even the ages of Gold, Silver, Bronze, etc., were of common parlance. Thus in Plato's own rigid ideal of a society, individuals from birth were classed in terms of their utility like gold, silver, iron, and brass. Plato argues that human beings' functionality within the state structure were not unlike these metals. For instance, one would not use gold the material to construct a yolk for oxen, nor use brass for a setting for a diamond engagement ring, correct? (At least, in the...

Rather they are based on the judgment of who is most fit, temperamentally to govern by the rulers of society. Someone who is a good farmer will not necessarily make a good governor. Thus, those who are most philosophically apt should be educated to govern, and those who are best at farming should be taught to farm, and those who are best at fighting should fight and guard the kings as an elite unit (a.k.a. "The Guardian" class) and those who are most skilled at shoeing horses, should well, shoe horses.
In defense of Plato's conception of society, one could state it is an excellent antidote to the 'Peter Principle,' the theory where every individual is promoted to his or position of greatest incompetence. In other words, just because someone is a great teacher doesn't mean he or she will be an able administrator, just as because someone is a wonderful coffeemaker doesn't mean that he or she will make a great manager of Starbucks. The question arises, however -- if this is not a democracy, and individuals have no free choice in determining where they fit in best, or what education they should receive, who decides who will fulfill all of the functions of this ideal society? Plato answers, infamously, the personas of philosopher-kings.

But who chooses these philosopher kings? Do they…