5 - The Hidden Philosopher King

Summary

The Capuchin monk François Leclerc du Tremblay, the close confident and counsellor of Cardinal de Richelieu, was referred to as the éminence grise. Since then, grey eminence has been the sobriquet for influential counsellors to political leaders, the hidden power behind the throne. History offers many instances of such a complex relationship between advisor and ruler. Joseph became counsellor to the Pharaoh, Seneca the Younger advised Nero, Averroes was physician and counsellor to Caliph Abu Yaqub Yusuf, Su Shi served Song Emperor Shenzong, Descartes was associated with Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia and Queen Christina of Sweden, Leibniz was employed in the House of Brunswick. But history also testifies to the dangers of such associations. Perhaps the most famous is Plato's failed attempts to instruct Dionysius I and II, tyrants of Syracuse. As we saw, though initially admired, Legalist philosopher Han Fei was later forced to drink poison by Emperor Qin, founder of Imperial China. Lord High Chancellor Sir Thomas More was beheaded by Henry VIII, King of England. Marxist theorist and revolutionary Nikolai Bukharin was executed by Stalin in the Great Purge.

That a philosopher may serve as counsellor or advisor to kings acknowledges the problems we have explored in the paradox of the philosopher king. It recognises the different character and virtues of philosophers and kings; that philosophers may be reluctant to rule and may not be skilled in ruling; and that rulers may seek wisdom to rule better but are jealous of their dignity and power. In doing so, however, such an advisory role also seems to offer the ideal solution to the paradox, overcoming these obstacles. By separating the philosopher king into its two constituent elements while linking them in the role of counsellor and ruler, it exploits the specific strengths of each while lightening the burdens they would otherwise bear, so that the philosopher need not sacrifice completely the life of the mind, while kings can defer to wisdom to enhance their rule without jeopardising their power and dignity. Does the philosopher as advisor to rulers therefore represent the conclusive union of the wisdom and power and the definitive answer to the paradox and promise of the philosopher king?