The Ship of State

A ship operated by a dysfunctional crew is the metaphor of Plato when discussing the problems of governance in a political system not based on expert knowledge. The teller of this parable, Adeimantus, firstly asks his listener, Socrates, to imagine a ship which is in a state of mutiny, with sailors who are quarreling about the steering and take possession of the ship.[1]

Conceive this sort of thing happening either on many ships or on one: Picture a shipmaster in height and strength surpassing all others on the ship, [488b] but who is slightly deaf and of similarly impaired vision, and whose knowledge of navigation is on a par with his sight and hearing. Conceive the sailors to be wrangling with one another for control of the helm, each claiming that it is his right to steer though he has never learned the art and cannot point out his teacher or any time when he studied it. And what is more, they affirm that it cannot be taught at all, but they are ready to make mincemeat of anyone who says that it can be taught… [2]

Pondering this story for a while, I decided to firstly list the tricks played by men’s thūmos (heart, spirit). The summary below excludes the effects of direct divine intervention, such as atē (aberration, derangement), adikia (injustice), hubris (outrage) and moira (portion, lot in life).[3]

• Akratos: Intemperate behavior. Akratos was the daimōn of the drinking of unmixed wine.[4]
• Nēpios Child, metaphorically the meaning is “of the understanding”; childish, silly, simply, without foresight, blind. “Stranger, you are nēpios or come from far off …”[not to know that you are on the island of Ithaca].[5]
• Adidaktos: Untaught, ignorant.
• Atasthalia: Recklessness; wantonly unruly behavior that does not go unpunished.
  “Oh my, how mortals hold us gods responsible [= aitioi]! For they say that their misfortunes come from us. But they get their sufferings, beyond what is fated, by way of their own acts of recklessness [atasthaliai].”[6]
• Hamartia: Error or failure; “missing the mark”: a metaphor from archery where one seeks to hit a target but misses.
• Parálogos: Miscalculation, which ends in things contrary to the expectation.
• Axunetos: According to some (Heraclitus, Heidegger) we, humans, are uncomprehending.
  Demodocus: “The Milesians are not fools, but they do the sorts of things that fools do”[7]
• Koros: Being insatiable. Contrasted with dikē, at least indirectly, or associated with hubris or excess.[8]

A mix or abundance of such errors may lead to kakistocracy; rule by the worst of people. In such a state people are confused and unable to work together:

The winds’ fierce strife I understand no longer;
The rolling billows e’er are towering stronger,
Now here, now there. We, tempest-tossed,
In the black ship between are lost.

Fury of the storm our limbs is chilling,
The ship with water to the mast-hole filling.
Great rifts in every sail are torn,
To shreds our slackening cables worn.[9]

What Plato’s Socrates proposes, however, is rule by a class of philosopher kings.[10] His ideal city is named Kallipolis; a utopian city-state in which legislators, traders, and warriors play their own distinct role. There will also be law courts and judges, which creates the paradox that even a perfect city will possess both justice and injustice.[11]

Socrates builds his argument by comparing the governance of the city-state to the command of a ship. The foolish crew are the demagogues and politicians. The captain, although not gifted with too many talents, is the only one who can safely lead the ship to her destination. The philosopher-king of Kallipolis, of course, is intelligent, reliable, and willing to lead a simple life.

Through a dialogue between the young Socrates and a stranger [xenos], Plato discusses the various forms of government. In his division there are three forms of rule. Each of these three forms has a positive and a negative form. In the positive form, there is an urgency to serve the general interest. In the negative form, self-interest pushes the interest of the state to the background and the rulers are more interested in demanding rights than in performing duties.

Plato argues which of these three forms of government is the least difficult to live with and which is the most oppressive. The three forms are: rule by a single person, rule by a group of persons and (self-) rule by the people:[12]

Stranger
Well then, you may say that of the three forms, the same is both the hardest and the easiest.

Younger Socrates
What do you mean?

Stranger
Just this: I mean that there are three forms of government, as we said at the beginning of the discussion which has now flowed in upon us—monarchy, the rule of the few, and the rule of the many.

Younger Socrates
Yes, there were those three.

Stranger
Let us, then, by dividing each of these into two parts, make six, and by
distinguishing the right government from these, a seventh.

According to Plato, monarchy is the most efficient form of rule. The least efficient form of rule is democracy, but the advantage is that its negative form, which Plato calls demokratía paránomos, is the least damaging to the individual citizen. Aristocracy and its negative form oligarchy are in the middle of those.

Polybios continues to describe the origin of the constitution and the rotation of these three forms and deviations.[13] The first form of rule, the rule by a single person, is the oldest form. In the origin people were herding together like animals, following the strongest of their group. The expectation that the children of such a leader would have the same power, courage and intelligence as their parents was not without logic, so the
succession of monarchs in many cases became hereditary and the idea of royalty [basileia] was born.[14]

Sooner or later, the descendant of a good monarch would veer off the right path and start using his power to satisfy personal extravagances. Now the negative form of monarchy, which is tyranny, comes into place and people learn about the difference between honorable and disgraceful behavior, morality.[15]

Tyranny will ultimately call for resistance, and it is natural that a group of noble and high-minded persons will take over the power from the monarch who has degraded into being a tyrant. Rule by this privileged group of people can be called an aristocracy as long as this group consists of the best of people and keeps an eye on the general interest. Once this group shifts its interest from the general interest to its own privileges, aristocratic rule degenerates into oligarchy.[16]

After the rule of a single person and the rule of a group of persons, both in their positive and negative appearances, there will be self-government by the whole people, democracy.[17] However, also democracy has its negative form, which comes into place once a next generation of the people no longer sees democracy as an institution that allows it to carry out its obligations in the general interest, but instead they start using their constitutionally secured position for the benefit of individual rights. Politicians will act as representatives of partial interests and because they put their own interests above the interests of the state, they will be guided by public opinion rather than by vision.

Polybius calls this negative appearance of democracy ochlocracy; rule of government by a mob or mass of people including the intimidation of legitimate authorities.[18] The people want more and more in exchange for fewer obligations and less effort. The politicians, who depend on the favor of the people for their position of power, begin to mobilize all kinds of indignation, presenting themselves as champions of injured dignity and squandered interests.[19]

In this critical and volatile phase, the political course of the state depends on the whims of the public opinion. In the same way that the people start democracy, it will also end by the people by the call for a new master. From here the cycle of the three forms of government [anakuklōsis] will start again from the beginning.[20]

Polybius resumes that a blended form of government with built-in checks and balances, was the best way to avoid this recurring cycle. In such a government, each of the three forms he described (monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy) would play some part, giving different sectors of society. Polybius, however, cautions that no state can avoid its inevitable decline and breakdown.[21]

What may come to mind first to the reader of Plato, Aristotle and Polybios, is that the Ship of State is an inefficient ship; it tends to leak both from the top and from the bottom. If this negative finding is your conclusion then remember that metaphorical ships—when operated by an oar-loving crew—can also sail at the speed of thought “and not even a falcon, raptor that he is, swiftest of all winged creatures, can keep pace with it”(free after Odyssey 13.86).

Bibliography

Alciphron, Letters. The Athenian Society’s Publications. III. Alciphron. Literally and
completely translated from the Greek, with Introduction and Notes. MDCCCXCVI.
Online at Topos Text

Aristotle, Politics. Aristotle. Aristotle in 23 Volumes, Vol. 21, translated by H. Rackham. 1944. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd..
Online at Perseus

Pindar, Olympian Odes, Diane Arnson Svarlien, 1990
Online at Perseus

Plato, The Republic. Translated by Paul Shorey, 1969. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.; William Heinemann, Ltd. London.
Online at Perseus

Plato, Statesman. Plato. Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 12 translated by Harold N. Fowler. 1921. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd.
Online at Perseus

Polybius, Histories. Evelyn S. Shuckburgh. translator. London, New York. Macmillan. 1889. Reprint Bloomington 1962.
Online at Perseus

Notes

Image credits

Hieronymus Bosch: The Ship of Fools, c. 1490–1500
Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Thomas Bühler: Narrenschiff (Ship of Fools), 2009
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Germany license, via Wikimedia Commons

John La Farge: The Relation of the Individual to the State: Socrates and His Friends Discuss “The Republic,” as in Plato’s Account; Color Study for Mural, Supreme Court Room, Saint Paul, Minnesota State Capitol, Saint Paul, 1903.
Public domain dedication, via Wikimedia Commons

Detail from: Stele of Democracy, 336 BCE, personifying the dēmos crowned by democracy
Photo: Marsyas, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic license, via Wikimedia
Commons

Note: Images have been selected from pictures that are freely available with open source or Creative Commons licenses or from photographs sent in by community members for the purpose. The images in this post are intended to suggest the subject, rather than illustrate exactly—as such, they may be from other periods, subjects, or cultures. Attributions are based where possible by those shown by galleries or museums, or on Wikimedia Commons or Flickr at the time of publication on this website.

Images retrieved May 2024

___

Rien is a member of Kosmos Society.