THE SOPHIST IN PLATO’S STATESMAN: AN ARGUMENT FOR THE TYRANT AS THE FALSE IMITATOR OF THE STATESMAN

Abstract

The use of the term “sophist” in Plato’s Statesman has been understood to apply to all rulers who are not statesmen. They do not have the statesman’s expert knowledge but they all imitate the statesman. This seems to be consistent with the idea that a sophist is a false imitator. I argue against this interpretation and instead insist that only the tyrant in the Statesman is a sophist. I base this argument on the final definition of the sophist in Plato’s Sophist and the discussion of imitation in the Sophist. The tyrant is an important figure in the Statesman, even though he is only mentioned briefly. He is the ruler who pretends to be a statesman so that he can rule with the statesman’s power which is above the law. I use my narrower interpretation of the term “sophist” in the Statesman to argue that Plato’s purpose in the discussion of laws and regimes in the Statesman is to protect the city from the tyrant as a sophist. This requires that the people of the city recognize their own ignorance and completely forbid any type of political leadership that would make the city vulnerable to the false statesman. Instead, they imitate the statesman by their complete obedience to the law. The idea of complete obedience to the law, without any room for modification or change, is not politically appealing. However, it is important that part of Plato’s solution to the problem of tyranny is self-awareness of our lack of political knowledge.