In Socrates’ ideal city, division of labor existed. Each person had a certain job to do that best suited him and was not involved in …show more content…
Guardians were raised separately and differently from the rest of society. He proposed the abandonment of family. In turn, this meant that the guardians could focus entirely on their duties towards the city instead of worrying about the welfare of their loved ones. If they were to die while in combat, they would be selflessly devoting themselves for the good of the city and would not be leaving their families to grieve. As far as the procreation of children, men and women were coupled based on the quality of their genes, their eugenics. The strongest and healthiest men were paired with the strongest and healthiest women. Unfortunately, this class of society was not based on love, therefore couples could not be based off of who was interested in whom. Since guardians were coupled up, this meant that men could have multiple wives and therefore a multitude of children from different mothers. This idea goes against our today’s society. Socrates also proposed that everyone would be taken care of by each other. Since there was no family, each child was one’s son or daughter, since one did not know who they were blood related to. The problem lies when the children do not know who their parents or siblings are. When the children grow up and are coupled up to procreate, they will not know if their job is being done with a relative. The situation, …show more content…
Everything belonged to everyone and there would be no need for money. Each individual had an equal share. Therefore, the idea was that there would be no poverty because money would not be present. Therefore, thieves and stealing would not exist because everything would belong to everyone and there would be no need for it. However, even though Socrates wants his ideal city to have people that will always look out for each other, there will always be those who feel they deserve more if they have done more work. If, say, one farmer produces more produce within a month than another farmer, he may feel entitled to more property since he feels he worked harder to gain more resources.
Socrates’ utopia may seem like a respectable idea considering all the thought put into it because essentially it would be a city filled entirely of justice. Since justice is supposed to make citizens happy, one would think that everyone in a city of justice would be content, but the result would most likely be the opposite. The natural needs of individuals would not be met. Peace would not exist and overall the city would not be able to function. Socrates’ perfect city would be too strict and conventional for any