This essay takes issue with a common interpretation of Book II of Plato’s Republic as anticipating the modern theory of division of labour, first promoted by Adam Smith. It is argued that, far from anticipating Adam Smith, Plato developed original reflections which, though naturally shaped by the economic reality of his time, reveal a concern for fundamental issues of economic thought: the value of labour, the nature of economic interdependence in a political association, the relation between economic behaviour and justice. (...) However, despite having recognized some of the fundamental forces behind human economic behaviour, Plato ends up with an envisioned ideal state in which those forces are given no scope, for he makes no room for economic competitiveness and technological advancement. (shrink)

This essay takes issue with a common interpretation of Book II of Plato's Republic as anticipating the modern theory of division of labour, first promoted by Adam Smith. It is argued that, far from anticipating Adam Smith, Plato developed original reflections which, though naturally shaped by the economic reality of his time, reveal a concern for fundamental issues of economic thought: the value of labour, the nature of economic interdependence in a political association, the relation between economic behaviour and justice. (...) However, despite having recognized some of the fundamental forces behind human economic behaviour, Plato ends up with an envisioned ideal state in which those forces are given no scope, for he makes no room for economic competitiveness and technological advancement. (shrink)

Although Plato did not explicitly propose any principle of distributive justice, he indicated that justice involves both the doing and the having of one's own. On the interpretation I am proposing: (i) 'having one's own' refers directly to the compensation one receives for doing one's own; (ii) the principle of distribution of benefits that is actually operative in Plato's system is that any form of compensation must be such that the worker (whether ruler, soldier or producer) has his needs satisfied. (...) I also highlight how Plato's account does not quite fit any contemporary conceptual framework--either utilitarian or desert-based. But it encourages us to reflect on the moral aspects of economic interactions of exchange, resulting from a fundamental collective choice to associate in order to satisfy individual needs, broadly understood as what human beings need to flourish in their social life. (shrink)