The idea of the techné principle illustrated in Plato’s The Republic and Huxley’s Brave New World have the same goal: the betterment of society. Huxley, however, held that good intentions do not make up for evil results. For Plato, the idea of techné was the root of good in society: it represented the base of justice that would pervade in the perfect society. But for Huxley, this represented the worst of a forceful, overbearing government that abandoned freedom of choice and the philosophies of democracy. Huxley showed it of a world of perfect imperfection: the only reason that harmony existed was because it was forced, not out of the will of the people but the will of a select few. Huxley and Plato have philosophically opposite views on the idea of predetermined destination; their respective books pit freedom of choice against communal good.

In Plato’s The Republic, one understands that the idea of the techné principle is to designate jobs to people most qualified to help create a balanced and fair society. Plato states that the justice of society is the balance of life and community, and the non-interference of people in others' jobs and lives (434c). At the root of the techné principle is the selective breeding of people. There are selective mating festivals where the elite of society randomly produce children that will be apart of the guardian or ruling classes. From these, children are born, taken from their mothers, and then raised at the social level that is deemed appropriate for them. They are treated and educated on the level that their role necessitates, and grow to serve their duties to the community. Their lives benefit from the community, as a balanced and just society can better provide for the needs of each individual and therefore create more happiness for everyone (352e). Plato’s ideal is for justice to thrive in a society dependent on the rearing and social programming of people to specific responsibilities in a well-developed community.

To Huxley, predetermination of life was an unnecessary evil. In Brave New World he portrays a world which has consented to domination by World Controllers. They govern through an absolute dictator over a utilitarian system suppose to maximize overall happiness. He paints a picture of a society that shuns creativity in deference to conformity with the social motto of “Community, Identity, Stability” (4). This world understands nothing of true happiness. For its inhabitants, life is a joyless, monotonous round with only artificial emotions, similar to their artificially inseminated lives and intelligence. They have no “self”, only an imposed self. There is no change, only a constant flow of work and boredom controlled by an absolute régime. Huxley shows his distaste for the elimination of the individual in favor of the community by repeatedly showing the absurdity of a government, which neither recognizes nor respects the dignity of the individual spirit.

Huxley intended his book to be a warning to future generations not to trade in their liberties for ascertained “happiness”, while Plato wanted his book to serve as a guide for the form of society that could best serve the community, and therefore the individual. It is through these intentions that we can compare their respective philosophies. To both, the techné principle is similar in its origin and execution, but drastically different in its results. In The Republic, one's metal type— gold, silver, and bronze, representing the three social classes— determines social position. In Brave New World, as in The Republic, people are born with respective roles already designated (13). Here, however, the science of genetic engineering designs each person for a particular position and to accept it.

Plato saw the matter as more of a social engineering project: his ruling and guardian class would be indoctrinated with the ideals that a select ruling few, the philosophers, thought necessary. Their education would rely on theme-ridden yet altered mythological stories (389c) and a rigid physical regimen (404a). While Plato saw this as a benefit to the community, and therefore the person, Huxley regarded this as a loss of freedoms for partial communal security and happiness. In both books, freedom does not exist. But for Plato, this represented the positive evolution of society, while Huxley saw it as the desecration of true humanity. Plato believed music and “bad fiction", i.e. novels, with dubious moral value or which misrepresented the gods had to be censored. The philosophers, who knew what was best for the people, decided what learning was acceptable (377c). This is similar to Brave New World, where reading was prohibited, children were conditioned to not touch books, and originality was a vice, not a virtue (20). Plato’s world based on the techné principle is able to find justice because everyone is in accord with the demands and needs of the community and has no reason to trespass on the needs of others. To Plato harmony and justice forced upon a people is better than a world without either. To Huxley there is no true justice or harmony if it does not arise out of the conscious choice of each individual. That is, to live in 'perfect' harmony because people know of no other way to live is neither perfect nor harmonious. Huxley detests a world that finds an “perfect” harmony out of ignorance and coercion, while Plato admires it.

The main point of contention between their philosophies is the individual and the community. Is the person a servant of the community or is the individual above the community? For Plato, the individual was a tool of society: a person existed for the community’s good. The benefit of the community is the sole purpose of the individual. Plato does indicates, however, that the well-being of the community means the well-being of the individual; and, the use of the techné principle to help the community helps each individual attain happiness (353c). Only through a techné-based society can a genuine balance exist where true justice can thrive. In contrast, Huxley expresses his admiration for the individual by stressing the harm inherent a society lacking personal freedom: no common good is worth its loss. To create a perfect society, the government limits intelligence to that necessary for each to perform his or her job. Iconoclasts are forced out to ensure they do not disturb the social fabric. And in this sense, the government has killed humanity itself. There is no real happiness in their society but only a shadowy simulation of it through drugs. There is no imagination or innovation, so the society ends up stagnated. Life is nothing more then a cycle of work, reproduction, and narcotic-induced happiness instituted by the government. It is from these positions that we see the sharpest difference between Plato and Huxley, the happiness of the individual through community or happiness of the individual through his own autonomy.

Huxley and Plato are theoretical opposites who are trying to guide the unforeseen future. They are trying to inspire future generations to understand a specific principle and apply it to their lives. But their desires are different, centering around the techné principle: Plato utilizes it to show how the world can cooperate under justice and work together towards collective satisfaction while Huxley satirizes it to show the engineering and manipulation of human emotions to create a perversely despondent world.