1G0xxeB

Happy City, Happy Citizens? The Common Good and the Private Good in Plato’s Republic2 2 1individual” (in Popper’s words). 45 Yet there is much in the text that arguesagainst characterizing the city in this way. The unity of the city is manifestlya product of artifice. The borders of the city are changeable (373d–e) and aredetermined by the ruler’s policy (423b–c). The size of the population is determinedin the same way (423b). Likewise, the fraternity or solidarity amongthe citizens is the product of a lie (414b–415d) and of the artificial suppressionand rechanneling of natural ties of blood (457b–466d). Although foundedaccording to nature in the sense that natural talents and potentialities areguided toward their best public use (370a–c, 455b–c), Kallipolis as a singularentity is clearly an artificial whole made up of natural human beings. Thus, apurely holistic reading of the city’s happiness does not seem tenable.We are left, then, not only with an ambiguous statement (“the city ishappy as a whole”) but also with significant obstacles to resolving the ambiguityin any direction. This means, further, that the Republic leaves us withan unresolved tension or at least an unbridged gap between the happiness ofthe citizens who make up the city, on one hand, and the “happiness” of thecity as a whole, on the other. The situation can be described more preciselyas follows. In Kallipolis, all citizens are made to be useful to one another bybecoming “the best possible craftsmen” of whatever job for the city naturebest suits them for (421b–c). Hence, Kallipolis is an order in which eachcitizen has what civic responsibility best suits his talents and character, andhe receives in turn the fruits of the labors of others also suited by nature totheir particular tasks. In order to perform their jobs as best they can, citizensare allowed only those material conditions conducive to their occupations.Hence, the producers will not be allowed to grow too rich or too poor, andthe guardians will live ascetically and communally (415d–417b, 421d–422a).The city as a whole will be pervaded by solidarity, harmony, and a ratheraustere spirit of virtue. The Republic does not allow us to conclude, however,that anyone is made happy specifically by living in such an order. We simplydo not know whether being formed to live and work in such an order,while receiving its benefits, is sufficient to render a person happy. This is anespecially troublesome conclusion given what would seem to be the greatsacrifices required of the auxiliary guardians. How are we to make sense ofthese results?Someone might say that it is not surprising that we cannot fully determinethe relation of the city’s happiness to that of the citizenry—at least not45Popper, Open Society, 1:76.