This article rejects the claim made by other scholars that Plato in the Statesman, by employing the so-called ‘architect’ (ὁ ἀρχιτέκτων) in one of the early divisions leading to the definition of political expertise, prefigured and anticipated the architectonic conception of political expertise advanced by Aristotle. It argues for an alternative reading in which Plato in the Statesman, and in the only other of his works (Gorgias) in which the word appears, closely tracks the existing social role of the architektōn, who was designated as such only in virtue of appointment by a city to a role that was crucially defined as epitactic, involving overseeing the workers on site engaged in constructing some civic building works. It is this epitactic dimension of the role on which Plato relies in the Statesman, as opposed to the kind of claim to overarching integrative expertise that Aristotle would use the figure of architectonic political knowledge to make.

本文拒绝了其他学者的主张，即柏拉图在政治家中采用所谓的“建筑师”（inectρχιτέκτων）在导致政治专业知识定义的早期部门之一中进行了预谋，并预见了政治的结构性构想。亚里士多德先进的专业知识。它主张一种替代性的读法，在这种读法中，柏拉图在《政治家》中以及在他的仅有的其他作品（《戈尔吉亚斯》）中出现这个词时，都紧密地追踪了建筑师的现有社会角色。，他仅是由一个城市任命的，才被任命为至关重要的角色，这是指将其定义为“流行病”，包括监督现场从事建造民用建筑工程的工人。柏拉图在政治家中所依靠的就是这种角色上的认识论层面，而不是亚里士多德将利用建筑政治知识这一形象来主张那种综合综合专长的主张。