"The Republic and Over-Specialization"

by Walter Jensen

In this paper, I will continue my inquiry into Plato's account of Socrates' discourse on the nature of justice. It will focus on Socrates' society and how it is critically flawed due to its foundation in over-Specialization. I will also show that a social norm of over-specialization in any society would cause more problems then it would solve. Since I have not finished the Republic, I will give predictions why it is highly unlikely that Socrates' society will divulge the true nature of justice.

Before we address the how and why Socrates' society is critically flawed, we must clarify the difference between specialization and over-specialization. Most of us would agree that specialization in any profession is not only good for the individual but also society. You would not allow an auto-mechanic who earned his automotive certificates from the Knoxville Tennessee Academy of Faith Healing to work on your car. Or even worst, a physician working on your injured son or daughter who took a 15-week crash course in medicine. Simple logic leads one to realize that it takes specialized training to acquire the skills to perform any profession well. It is also general knowledge that human beings can have more than one profession: a man can be a surgeon, a teacher, and a father. But this is not the case for Socrates' "perfect" society. He does not promote specialization but "over-specialization." Socrates' job ethic is based on the idea that doing more than one profession or job would be unjust. He believes that every human being has only one skill or talent that makes them ideally suited for one particular job or profession. In Socrates' eyes, if an individual enters into a second profession, that individual is doing wrong to both professions. He feels that the individual is dividing their time, effort, and energy between the two professions, lowering the overall quality of the services or products produced. Socrates introduces Over-Specialization into his "just" society during the conversation with Adeimantus. This is where Socrates takes the idea of over-specialization too far.

Socrates believes that over-specialization is the key to any just society, I disagree. Using Socrates own idea, I shall define over-specialization as a state where one human being can perform only one profession regardless of difficulty and neglects all others.

The first problem with Over-Specialization is how the people are forced to accept any information from the state without question or analysis. According to Socrates,

Having a social policy of over-specialization, as the norm, would allow the state to impose what it wanted the citizens to believe, fear, or think about. The state would control what the people think because it would not promote or allow critical thinking skills to flourish. If an individual's opinion on taxation is not the same as the state, what then? If Socrates' society locked up its independent thinkers, the state would be acting unjustly and lose a portion of its creative thinkers. If Socrates' state reverted to mass executions for this infraction, it would be no different than the states controlled by Hitler, Mussolini, or Stalin. This leads one to believe that this "perfect" state would only promote weak egos, a mental state where the individual is extremely susceptible to any form of propaganda, because the individuals would lack the education and understanding of one's own environment due to over-specialization.

Another problem with over-specialization is how it generates low self-esteem within the individual. When a human being performs only one skill, over time and through different circumstances, they develop a confidence in their own ability. This confidence is not transferable unless the individual attains similar skills in a related field. A brain surgeon lacks the confidence to build a Global Area Network and a network information specialist lacks the confidence to perform brain surgery on his wife. Let's also take, for example, a transmission specialist. The transmission specialist would specialize in the repair and maintenance of all forms of transmissions. In Socrates' society, this would be the extent of his profession. If our transmission specialist could learn the skills of a brake specialist, engine specialist, and electrical repair, the transmissions specialist could start to understand the true nature and habits of the repair and maintenance of automobiles. These additional skills would greatly increase the transmission specialist self-esteem and confidence in every aspect of automotive repair. This would also give him the confidence and self-esteem to take on the repair of other mechanical devices of similar nature and design because he is a specialist in several professions.

Over-specialization also causes poor socialization skills. Let us create an example of over-specialization, relative to Socrates historical setting, that will explain my point. Take a cobbler for example. Our cobbler is excellent at making and repairing shoes. Day in and day out, he makes or repairs shoes. This basic fact of his existence causes problems. If our shoemaker is drawn into a conversation or, worst yet, a discourse, he will have nothing to contribute but his knowledge of cobbling. His lack of education and knowledge on any subject but cobbling would not allow him to add any meaningful insight into the conversation or discourse. If one of the conversationalists ask the cobbler a question concerning inter-state commerce, what could he contribute? His knowledge on the subject - he has none. His opinions on inter-state commerce - his opinions are generated by the state. His understanding of the subject - again, he has none. How would the cobbler come to understand anything other than shoes? If he studied inter-state commerce, according to Socrates, he would be acting unjustly to this cobbling profession. The worst case scenario, which would, be complete indifference to the question, he would simply walk away. The reason he would walk away is based in the fact that he had no interest in the subject because they were not talking about shoes. The cobbler would be the perfect one-dimensional personality.

Since the social fiber of Socrates' society is over-specialization, what happens if one social group ceases to exist? If a society loses all of its ship pilots, due to naval engagements or storms at sea, who would pilot the ships carrying the equipment, fuel, and raw materials that the "just" society could not produce on its own? Would this not have a domino effect on the entire economic structure of the country? But this type of catastrophe is not just limited to the economic side of human interaction. If half of all the physicians that deal with viral infections are killed off because they contracted the disease they were trying to cure, what then? The medical care provided by the physicians would be severely hampered by the lack of qualified doctors. Many of the sick would just die. Those individuals, who survived, would go untreated, lowering the individual's overall quality of life. Similar scenarios such as this one are located all a long the human historical timeline: the Black Plague, the cholera epidemic, and so on. Would it not be an unjust to allow all the physicians that deal with viral infections to take their knowledge to the grave?

The problem with over-specialization, as a social norm, does not just affect the individual in which he lives. It affects the interaction between different societies. Socrates states his view on social interaction between states during his discussion on the behavior of the Guardians,

Socrates goes on to say that the qualities a guard-dog, annoyed when it sees stranger even though the stranger has done no harm, is what is needed to be instilled into his Guardians. This kind of behavior would only create hostile interaction between two or more countries. The "just" society would act unjustly towards other countries. This kind of interaction between countries would only lead to the militarization of individual societies, ethnic cleansing, military takeover of weaker nations, mass consumption of natural resources, and sporadic civil wars. In our historical situation, this type of behavior would only lead to ecological, biological, and/or nuclear war.

This brings us to the relationship between over-specialization and warfare. I believe that Socrates takes the concept of war too lightly. Within the section entitled civilized society, Socrates address the concept of building an army,

I side with Sun Tzu and his philosophy about war, not Socrates. Sun Tzu states,

The end conclusion of war is that human beings die, randomly. Contrary to popular belief, war is a completely chaotic event. To prove this point, I refer to an old 20th century military expression that there is nothing you can do about the bullet that has your name on it; beware those labeled 'to whom it may concern'. The structure of an army should be arranged in a manner that if the leader falls in battle, his subordinate would take his place. This will help the overall structure of the army defend against the chaotic nature of war. If the second in command falls, the next soldiers in the chain of command takes his place, so on, and so forth. For this to happen, every soldier must instinctively know every profession within the army. Take the Russian infantry for example during World War II. The Russian infantry was structured in such a way that if the squad leader died, the entire squad would either run away or surrender because no one knew how to take command. This type of over-specialization was not just confined to the infantry; it was the cornerstone of the entire Soviet military organization.

Over-Specialization as a forced social norm is harmful to any given society and its members, regardless of circumstance. Contrary to the examples given by Socrates, human beings are more capable of performing more than one profession with great success. Socrates' society is critically flawed due to its foundation in over-specialization. Over-specialization causes more problems then it solves. In our present historical situation, the influential and powerful members our society have a diversified professional expertise. It is very hard for me to perceive that Socrates will divulge the true nature of justice on the backdrop of such an unjust society. The only thing I perceive that Socrates is reaffirming is the lesson taught by my grandparents: "never put all your eggs in one basket".

Walter Jensen is an undergraduate student at WMU. This paper submitted for academic review October 30, 1997.