mere lack or simply a shortcoming. The turn of phrase παντοπόρος-ἄπορος names in a "general" and "indeterminate" way a counterturning within the essence of human beings. So it seems, at any rate. For what is named second, ὑψίπολις-ἄπολις, speaks in the direction of a particular realm within which human action is accomplished. This is the realm of the "political." Yet what is the latter? If "the political" is that which belongs to the polis. and therefore is essentially dependent upon the polis, then the essence of the polis can never be determined in terms of the political, just as the ground can never be explained or derived from the consequence.
What. then, is the πόλις, and how is its essence manifest specifically for the Greeks and according to their way of thinking? The πόλις is and remains what is properly worthy of question in the strict sense of the word, that is. not simply something questionable for any question whatsoever, but that with which meditation proper, the highest and most extensive, is concerned. That this is the case can be seen even from those late reflections that are passed down to us in the works of Plato and Aristotle. Plato, in his Republic (Book V, 473c ff.), says, among other things, the following:
Ἐὰν μὴ ... ὴ οἱ φιλόσοφοι βασιλεύσωσιν ἐν ταῖς πόλεσιν ἢ οἱ βασιλῆς τε νῦν λεγόμενοι καὶ δυνάσται φιλοσοφήσωσι γνησίως τε καὶ ἱκανῶς, ... οὐκ ἔστι κακῶν παῦλα ... ταῖς πόλεσι
Wenn nicht entweder die Philosophen Herrscher werden in der πόλις, oder aber die jetzt sogenannten Herrscher und Machthaber in echter und geeigneter Weise "philosophieren" — ist kein Ende des Unheils für die πόλις.
Either the philosophers must become rulers in the πόλις, or the present so-called rulers and powers that be must "philosophize" in a genuine and appropriate manner, otherwise there will be no end to disaster for the πόλις.
Modern human beings will indeed consider this view of Plato's to be distinctly "Platonic," that is, in this case to be groundless and extravagant. It is well known that "philosophers" lack any "experience of life" and, moreover. are unpractical. So how are they to assume the business of the state? Yet Plato does not mean that philosophers are to assume the business or the state. because πόλις, properly speaking, is not the "state," and the "business" in it is not what is essential. Nor does Plato mean that the rulers should "busy themselves" with "philosophy," as though this were something like collecting beetles. According to what Plato says elsewhere. the philosophers stand in the radiance and light of being. which is why it is very difficult for ordinary eyes to discern whether or not someone is a philosopher. The statement cited from Plato. which has been greatly abused, means rather the following: The πόλις is founded upon the truth and essence of being. in terms of which all beings are determined. Yet this