Abstract

In European thought a fairly general tradition has existed as to the necessary and even sacred character of any legitimate authority. Though excesses were condemned as contrary to justice, and though theories about the right of revoluion existed, in practice the concept of authority was considered as having its justification in itself. The Platonic version of this belief is that justice in the ruler consists in his conformity to preestablished and divine laws. This conviction was for the first time seriously challenged in our century, as a consequence of the fact that large-scale crimes had become possible because millions of people had delegated the responsibility for their actions to authorities in command. It was Karl Popper who identified this Western tradition as an heritage from Plato. His views went contrary to the standard interpretation of Plato by the majority of classical scholars, who took great pains to refute Popper's work, though with little succes. The originality of Popper's work is twofold. Plato's theories about justice in the state were historically interpreted as representing the mentality of the closed society in opposition to that of a more developed and open type of society. Moreover, Popper was the first to give an analysis of the philosopher's unconscious motives by interpreting, on psycho-analytical principles, a wide range of significant passages in Plato's work