Many of the Greeks believed that harmonious functionality within society was a priority. This was certainly the case for Plato, but his inquiry goes deeper, in particular, there were three pillars that defined his ethical prose - Justice, Beauty and Truth. Plato fetched for a more common ground between the three. He felt that all three were closely connected. In Plato's mind, his definitions of Justice, Beauty and Truth provided contextual answers to “the Nature of Things”, more importantly, the “the Nature of Society”.
In Plato’s Republic we see one of the earliest attempts at a systematic theory of ethics. Plato wants to find a good definition for “justice,” a good criterion for calling something “just.”
Maybe justice is “telling the truth and paying one’s debts.” But no, Plato says, for sometimes it is just to withhold the truth or not return what was borrowed.
How about “Do good to one’s friends and harm to one’s enemies”? But that doesn’t work, says Plato, because any definition of justice in terms of “doing good” doesn’t tell us much. It only repeats the question, “What is just?”
Plato then suggests that “justice” is twofold which are:
Maybe justice is “telling the truth and paying one’s debts.” But no, Plato says, for sometimes it is just to withhold the truth or not return what was borrowed.
How about “Do good to one’s friends and harm to one’s enemies”? But that doesn’t work, says Plato, because any definition of justice in terms of “doing good” doesn’t tell us much. It only repeats the question, “What is just?”
Plato then suggests that “justice” is twofold which are:
- Justice for the state, and
- Justice for the soul.
Justice for the state is achieved when all basic needs are met. He is quoted as saying that "if everybody should mind his business without intruding into others' business, then there will be just state.
Three classes of people are needed: artisans and workers to produce goods, soldiers to defend the state, and rulers to organize everything. But you cannot have a just state without just men, especially just rulers. And so we must also achieve justice of the soul.
He believed the soul had three parts: reason, appetite, and honor. The desires of these three parts conflicted with each other. For example, we might have a thirst (appetite) for water, but resist accepting it from an enemy for fear of poison (reason). Justice of the soul requires that each part does its proper function, and that their balance is correct.
Justice of the soul merges with justice of the state in that men fall into one of the three classes depending on how the three parts of their soul are balanced. One’s class depends on early training, but mostly, persons are born brick-layers, soldiers, and kings – depending on the balance between the three parts of their soul.
Plato’s ideal of philosopher kings. To bring about the ideal state, Plato says, “philosophers [must] become kings… or those now called kings [must]… genuinely and adequately philosophize.” Among other things, the philosopher king is one who can see The Good, that transcendent entity to which we compare something when we call it “good.” The idea of the philosopher-king still appeals to philosophers today, though it has rarely been achieved.
It is against this ideal state, ruled by philosopher kings, that Plato can compare other forms of state. The state under martial law (Sparta) is the least disastrous. Oligarchy (Corinth) and democracy (Athens) are worse, and tyranny (Syracuse) is the worst. These problem states come from a lack of justice in the soul. For example, a state of martial law comes from the restriction of appetite by the wrong soul-part: honor instead of reason.
Plato’s ethical theory is this: proper balance in the tripartate soul and proper balance in the tripartate state, ruled by philosopher kings, brings justice and happiness.
It is clear that nobody believes this anymore, but Plato’s was an interesting first attempt at a systematic ethics.He believed the soul had three parts: reason, appetite, and honor. The desires of these three parts conflicted with each other. For example, we might have a thirst (appetite) for water, but resist accepting it from an enemy for fear of poison (reason). Justice of the soul requires that each part does its proper function, and that their balance is correct.
Justice of the soul merges with justice of the state in that men fall into one of the three classes depending on how the three parts of their soul are balanced. One’s class depends on early training, but mostly, persons are born brick-layers, soldiers, and kings – depending on the balance between the three parts of their soul.
Plato’s ideal of philosopher kings. To bring about the ideal state, Plato says, “philosophers [must] become kings… or those now called kings [must]… genuinely and adequately philosophize.” Among other things, the philosopher king is one who can see The Good, that transcendent entity to which we compare something when we call it “good.” The idea of the philosopher-king still appeals to philosophers today, though it has rarely been achieved.
It is against this ideal state, ruled by philosopher kings, that Plato can compare other forms of state. The state under martial law (Sparta) is the least disastrous. Oligarchy (Corinth) and democracy (Athens) are worse, and tyranny (Syracuse) is the worst. These problem states come from a lack of justice in the soul. For example, a state of martial law comes from the restriction of appetite by the wrong soul-part: honor instead of reason.
Plato’s ethical theory is this: proper balance in the tripartate soul and proper balance in the tripartate state, ruled by philosopher kings, brings justice and happiness.
No comments:
Post a Comment