Why Plato's Republic is not Plato's Republic

Plato did not write a dialogue called "The Republic." The correct title is Politeia (Πολιτεία) in Greek, which translates to "constitution" in English. In ancient Greece, one might be a citizen of a given polis (city-state), and all poleis had some form of politeia - written or unwritten - which outlined the organizing principles of how the polis was governed.

We have Cicero to thank for this historical mistranslation. He referred to the dialogue as "de res publica," meaning "of public matters," and the name has persisted. This translation error has contributed to centuries of confusion about the dialogue's primary focus. Cicero should have used the Roman equivalent of politeia - "constitutio" - from which we derive the English word "constitution.”

Cicero's interpretation emphasized external politics, as evidenced by his own work "Res Publica," which analyzed the Roman political system and advocated for a balanced government combining monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic elements. This conception evolved into our modern understanding of "republic" as a representative government, as opposed to a monarchy.  

However, I contend that the Politeia is fundamentally about our inner constitution - our self-government. This is not a public matter but a private one, making "res privata" a more fitting title. While the dialogue's discussion of an ideal state recommends rule by philosopher kings (suggesting monarchy or aristocracy rather than representative government), its deeper message is to avoid the "sandstorm" of public politics and instead become a philosopher king or queen over oneself, the self being the psyche.

This interpretation aligns with the original Greek concept of idiotes, meaning "private person" (as opposed to one participating in public affairs). While idiotes devolved into our modern "idiot," its original meaning suggested someone focused on private matters. The Politeia doesn't discourage political participation, or even being a politician, but rather advocates ordering one's internal constitution before engaging in public life (or any other occupation).  Here's another example of how some words have devolved in modern discourse (others, as Pigliucci has highlighted, being stoic, cynic, skeptic, and epicurean).   This kind of idiot is a wise idiot.

At the very end of the Republic, Socrato presents the hero Odysseus as having learned a great lesson in life: “And it fell out that the soul of Odysseus drew the last lot of all and came to make its choice, and, from memory of its former toils having flung away ambition, went about for a long time in quest of the life of an ordinary citizen who minded his own business [bion andros idiōtou apragmonos, literally ‘the life of a private man who doesn't meddle in the business of others’], and with difficulty found it lying in some corner disregarded by the others, and upon seeing it said that it would have done the same had it drawn the first lot, and chose it gladly.”  (620c-d)