The Hi, I'm Peter Adamson, and you're listening to the History of Philosophy Podcast, brought to you with the support of the Philosophy Department at Kings College London and the

LMU in Munich. Online at www.

History of Philosophy.net.

Today's episode, Render Unto Caesar, Marsilius of Padua.

Political rulers should govern in the interest of their subjects, not in their own interests.

It's a common enough sentiment, even if it is a guideline more honored in the breach than in the

observance.

Already Plato, in the first book of his republic has Socrates argue that rulers must look after the welfare of the citizens the way that Shepherds look to the welfare of their flocks.

Medieval thinkers in both the Islamic and Latin Christian worlds followed a similar broadly Aristotelian line,

a state should be governed in such a way that the citizens of a state become virtuous.

It's on this basis that Alfarabi distinguished between what he called

the virtuous city and other cities in which citizens seek lower ends like pleasure or honor.

Aquinas likewise took the purpose of laws to be the training of citizens in virtue.

And just in the last episode, we saw Dante justifying the idea of universal rule in terms of the universal shared goal of humankind to achieve

the contemplative virtue of intellectual perfection.

All these high-minded recommendations provoke a pretty obvious response, easier said than done.

It's one thing to say how rulers should govern, and with what end in view, another to ensure that

they do govern in this way.

Much ancient and medieval political philosophy is disappointingly sketchy when it comes to that

question.

Describing an ideal state where virtuous men and even philosophers are in charge is all well and good, but it smacks of utopianism.

Plato already recognized this, contenting himself was showing that it is just about possible for philosopher Kings to come to power, albeit very unlikely.

...