%0 Journal Article
%T Questioning the <i>Statesman</i>
%A Bela Egyed
%J Open Journal of Philosophy
%P 7-31
%@ 2163-9442
%D 2023
%I Scientific Research Publishing
%R 10.4236/ojpp.2023.131002
%X There are three major themes in the dialogue thought to be Plato¡¯s <i>Statesman</i>: the nature of statesmanship, the difference between perfect and less than perfect regimes and the method of division. In this paper I focus on the first two themes. I argue, first, that the dialogue makes a plausible case for what it takes to be a wise statesman. In doing so, I play down the importance of the second theme: the difference between regimes. In fact, I consider this discussion to be deeply flawed and even irrelevant to the argument of the first. My main purpose is to provide a critical analysis of the political theory articulated in the dialogue. My analysis is made plausible by abandoning the traditional view that the <i>Statesman</i> was written Plato in its entirety as a unified whole. In my view, a close reading of the text supports the hypothesis that it is, at best, semi-authentic; namely, that it is most likely a collage of fragments written at different times by Plato and other members of the Academy.
%K &lt
%K i&gt
%K Statesman&lt
%K /i&gt
%K Regimes
%K Plato
%U http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=122858