Socrates and Democracy

Shariq Ali
Valueversity

In a public square of ancient Athens, people had gathered around. Socrates was asking questions in his usual thoughtful manner.

Looking at the crowd, he posed a curious question:
“Suppose in an election there are two candidates. One is a physician and the other a confectioner. The physician gives bitter medicine and is not very popular among an immature public. The confectioner, however, says: Vote for me and I will give you more sweets.
Tell me, whom will most people choose?”
People began to smile. The answer seemed obvious.
“The confectioner!”
Socrates nodded with a gentle smile and said:
“But who will cure the illnesses?”

This simple example was actually a profound criticism of democracy. Socrates believed that governing a state is also a professional skill and an art, just like medicine or navigation. If the passengers of a ship vote and appoint an inexperienced person as the captain, the entire ship may be put in danger. In the same way, if decisions of the state are based only on public popularity, society may move in the wrong direction.
Socrates feared that in a democracy people often choose those who make pleasant promises rather than those who have the ability to make difficult but necessary decisions.

Skilled speakers and those who inflame emotions can easily influence the public, even if they lack real wisdom.
Interestingly, even two thousand years later, many democracies in the world still show the same weakness. In politics, popularity and slogans often prevail over wisdom and foresight.

Perhaps this is why Socrates’ real intention was not to reject democracy completely, but to remind people that the true strength of any society lies not merely in the vote, but in an enlightened public, citizens who understand the value of knowledge and character, and choose their leaders on that basis.