Quote:
|
Originally Posted by politicophile
I see this as a sign of Plato's idealized (and highly unrealistic) vision of government in general. The Athenian government was right about most things most of the time, or so I believe Plato would say. If the regime is inherently just, then it is easy to see why Plato would be opposed to actions that would destasbilize the regime, such as civil disobedience.
Perhaps, then, Socrates is actually failing to deal with the possibility of an immoral regime, rather than neglecting moral analysis in general. Alternatively, perhaps Socrates' comments about the importance of following the laws apply only to generally moral regimes such as Athens and would not apply at all to fundamentally unjust regimes. Interesting...
|
I could buy that. At least from his view, the order there worked and was coherant with his worldview. I won't say it was moral, it was patriarchal and was based on slavery, but as an observer in that context, it is unlikely that Socrates/Plato saw any wrong in the system worth challenging it.
but what i would add is that i don't hold that civil disobedience has to destabilize. that's what i meant by my example of indian resistance. far more effective than armed sepratism, civil disobedience provided a context of affirming the idea of order while explicitly rejecting the order that currently existed.