The Justice of Socrates' Philosopher Kings

[Pages:38]The Justice of Socrates' Philosopher Kings Author(s): Darrell Dobbs Source: American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 29, No. 4 (Nov., 1985), pp. 809-826 Published by: Midwest Political Science Association Stable URL: Accessed: 10/12/2010 23:55 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@.

Midwest Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Political Science.



TheJusticoefSocrates'PhilosopKhienrgs

DarrellDobbs,UniversitoyfHouston

Asagainstcurrenntotionsw, hichtendtoidentiftyhejustwiththevoluntarayndthereby toespousea politicallsyuicidailndividualismPl,ato'sSocrateds evelopasnaccountofjustice thatinvolvecsoercione,venagainstheeliteh, isphilosopherws,homustbeforcedfroma lifeof contemplatiotno ruleas kings.Thisessaysuggestsa,ccordinglyth, atdespitethemodern emphasiosnindividuarlightsit,isPlatowhomostfullyexposestheperplexitoyfjusticeand politicaplartnershiapn,dwhothusprovidetshesoundesbtasisforitstheoreticeaxl amination. Itisfurtheargueda,gainstprevailinignterpretatiotnhsa,tthemanifestatiofnthips erplexity intheRepublic-theconflicbtetweenSocratesc'ityandphilosophy-ismerelyprovisional, notfundamentLale.arning-lovipnhgilosophearcstuallybenefiftromthepoliticarlesponsibilityforceduponthemingainingaccesstothe"greatesltearningmatter,t"heideaofthegood. Thisresultprovidestrongesrupportforthereconciliatioonftheindividuatlo hisown citizenshiapn, dthusforpublic-spiritedntehssa,nmighottherwisbeeavailabletoday.

Introduction

Withoujtustice,decentpoliticaslocietywoulddeclineintoanarchyor tyrannYye. teachofuswouldlikebesttopursuehisowninteresut,nimpeded bycivicobligationws,hileothershouldeorurcommonresponsibilitiTesh.is inclinatioins significantflyortifiebdycertaincurrenntotionos fjusticeo,r politicalrightw, hichdesignatceonsentas thefountainoflegitimacaynd posita "socialcontracta"s thebasisofpoliticalauthorityIn. sofaras civic obligatioinsmerelyderivativferomindividuarlightsh,owevert,hetendency toidentiftyhejustwiththevoluntariys,as Leo Straus(s1953,pp. 186-87) suggestfs,undamentalilryresistiblAec. cordingloyn,emighdtenyonprincipletheauthoritoyfpoliticaslocietyf,orexamplet,oinstitutceonscriptioonr inflictcapitalpunishmenrte, gardlesosfthepossibleconsequenceosfthe formeirnpromotintghecommondefensaendthelatterinvalidatincgommonmorailndignatiobno,thofwhicharepresumablnyecessaryina thriving polityF.latterintghoughitmaybetoourproperconcernforhumandignity, soabsolutea commitmentotthetheoryofindividuarlightcsouldprovein practicetobe dangeroutsothepreservatioonflibertyitselfP. rudentselfintereswtouldurget,hena, seriousinvestigationfotheraccountsofman's tiestopoliticaslocietythatarenotstrictldyependenutponthedoctrinoef individuarlightsIn. deed,thisinvestigatiomnaybe regardedas partofthe perpetuavligilanctehatissaidtobethepriceofliberty.

*IwouldliketothankEvelynC Fink,J.PeterEuben,JohnW.Danfordt,hisJournal's refereesa,nd,aboveall, AlfredGeierfortheircommentosn earlierdraftsofthisessay.

810

DarrellDobbs

Onesuchalternativwearrantsspecialattentionin, asmuchas itstands as a deliberateresponseto a particularlpyrofoundformulatioonf the contracttheoryofjustice.Glaucon,a younginterlocutoinrPlato'sRepublic,formulattehs elatterexpressltyoprovokSeocratesr' esponseA. ccording to Glaucon,justiceis essentiallya compromiseI.t originateisn mutual consentt;heconsentinpgartiesagreeto renouncewhatis bestbynature, namelydoingwhateveornepleaseswithimpunityso, as nottosuffewrhatis worstn, amelyservinganother'psleasurewithourtecourse(358e3-359b5).

AlthougGhlauconsharetshemodernviewthatjusticeoriginateins consent, he differismportantliyn notregardintghecompact,and thuspolitical

partnershiaps,an unqualifiegdood.Inthisrespecth, eaddressetsheproblemofjusticeandpoliticalifemoreprofoundltyhansubsequenctonsent

theoristW s. hereasHobbes(Leviathan,13),forexamplec,ontendtshatthe socialcontracatndjusticeareuniversallbyeneficiailnprovidinngaturally diffidenmt anan assuranceofself-preservatioGnla,uconmaintainsthat justiceis beneficiaolnlyfortheweakorpowerlesst;hereis no advantage, Glaucondeclaresi,njusticeorpoliticaltiesfor"a realman"(hosakthos

andra).SocratesmakesitquiteclearthatGlauconis himselfsucha man (357a2-3).TruetothisdescriptionG,lauconchallengeSsocratesto show thatjusticeandpoliticallifeareprofltablne,otjustforthosewhosepreservationdependsuponit,butforthebestandstrongesint dividuals.

GenerallyspeakingG, lauconrepresenptsreciselythehighspiritedness onwhichthepolitydependsintimesofitsgreatesctrisesS. ohisdemandcan hardlybedismissedas politicallyirrelevanBt.ut,as Glaucon'sratherswaggeringafflrmatioonfsuperiorittyestifieps,oliticalsocietycannotwinthe allegianceofitsmostspiritedindividualosn thebasisofitsratherhumble claimtofacilitatseelf-preservatiPoonl.iticapl artnershimpustoffearccess to somethingfineri,f Glauconand thoselikehimare to be included (372c2-d5;398c7-8).To respondadequatelyto Glaucon'schallengea,n accountofpoliticalpartnershimp ustultimatelpyitjusticeand political responsibilitaygainsttheindividualifeofgreatestexcellenceand selfsufficiencyth, etheoreticaolr philosophicallife.Socratesundertakeas responsteoGlaucon'schallengienexactlythesetermsW. ithhisinterlocutors,hefoundsa cityinspeechinwhichpoliticajlusticecomestolightas requirinegachtoperformthecivicfunctiofnorwhichheorsheisnaturally bestqualified(370c3-6;374b9-c24; 34c7-10).Inthenameofthips rinciple, Socratescompelshismostphilosophicaclitizensfroma lifeofblissful, transpoliticcaol ntemplatiobnacktothedrudgeryofpoliticalofficeJ. ustice,evidentlyis, notcoextensivwe iththevoluntarye,venforthebest individualsB. ut ifjusticeis done onlyat thecost ofthepurest,most self-sufflciehnutmanactivityi,tsgoodness,as wellas thatofpolitical partnershigpenerallyis, indeeddubious.Socratesthusacknowledgetshe

THE JUSTICE OF SOCRATES' PHILOSOPHER KINGS

811

decisivequestioncontainedinGlaucon'schallengeB. ut,as I shallsuggest, he does more.In fact,Socratesproceedsto revealthathisphilosophers actuallybenefiftromtheirconstrainerdesumptioonfpoliticarl esponsibility.Ifthisiscorrecto,nemayfindinPlato'sRepublican accountofman's tiesto politicalsocietythatis neitherbiasedby thepresumptionnsor plaguedbytheshortcominogfsthedoctrineofindividuarlightsa,ndyetis capableofsatisfyintgheprofoundesatnd noblestlongingosfthehuman

soul. 1 Accordingto theviewnowcurrenatmongstudentosftheRepublic,

howeverS,ocratesp' hilosophekringdoesnotbenefiftromhisresumptioonf politicalresponsibilitAyl.lanBloom(1968,pp.407-8),forexamplec,ontendsthat"itwouldbecontrartyo[thephilosophersg']oodtoreturn... in thedecisiverespecthecityisnotnaturali:tcannotcomprehentdhehighest activityofman"(pp.407-8).ThustooJohnSallis(1975,pp.379-380),who interpretthsephilosophekringasa comicfigureo,wingtowhathedescribes as the"radicaldiscontinuitoyfphilosophyand politics."ArleneSaxonhouse(1978) notestherelevanceof thisputativediscontinuitfyorthe problemofjustice,maintainingthat"theattempto praisejusticeby unitingpoliticsandphilosophyand bymakingthephilosopheSrocrates engageinthepoliticaalctivityoffoundinagcityonlyrendertshediscussion

of justice more laughable.... The biggestjoke of all in Book 5 is the proposalforthephilosophicarluler"(pp. 889-90).SimilarlyE,va Brann (1967)contendsthat"ifjusticecan onlywithdifficultbye provedto be profitablfeortheguardianrulersbecauseofthehardlifetheylead(419a, 465c4),forthephilosophekringsthisisaltogetheirmpossible("pp. 17-18). Dale Hall (1977) and GeorgeKlosko(1981) agree,despiteothernotable differencwesiththeprecedincgommentatortsh,atthephilosophedroesnot benefiftromhiscompulsoryreturntothecave.In thejudgmenotfthese scholarst,henG, laucon'schallengteobringtolightheinherenptrofitabilityofjusticeandpoliticalifeisnoteffectivealnysweredbySocrates.2

'Plato,wemustremembedro,esnotspeakinhisownvoiceinthiso,ranyo, fhisdialogues.

ButwemayI,trustu,nderstantdheworkasa whole-theweaveofitsargumenatns ddramatic actions-tospeakforhimB. ecauseofthipseculiaritoyfthePlatonimc odeofwritinhgo,wever, thecomprehensiofnitsteachingrsequireasspecialattentiotnhatiseasilymistakefnora kind ofspecializationF.oran illuminatindgiscussionofthecharactearndspecialdifficultioefs

Plato'swritingsse,eJacobKlein(1965,pp.3-31)andLeo Straus(s1964,pp.50-60). 2Myattempto showthecontraryis notunprecedentedR.ichardKraut(1973) and

EdwardAndrew(1983)addrestshisdifficultayndtrytoshowthatphilosopheirnsdeedbenefit as kings.Specificallyb,othclaimforthephilosophear gainthataccruesfromteaching, whethearkindofimmortaliitnyinfluencinsgubsequengtenerationosrthesatisfactioonfan eroticlongintgosharetheirinsightwsithothersB. utSocratesp' hilosopherarseexpresslaynd aboveall loversoflearningS.o a conclusiveargumenftorphilosopherbs'enefitinfgrom

politicallifemustfocusonwhattheyn,ottheirstudentlse,arnbackinthecave.

812

DarrellDobbs

Againstthe prevailinginterpretatioIn,shall arguethatSocrates' philosophekringt,hechiefpoliticailnstitutioonfhisbestcityi,sa meaningfulexpressionofa profoundlayrticulatedreconciliatioonfmanand the politicacl ommunityT.heconflicbtetweenSocratesc' ityandhisphilosophersisindeedgenuinet,henb, ut,inmyviewp, rovisionaFl.orSocratest,he conflicbtetweenthepoliasndphilosophiysakintotheilluminatinfgriction thatprecedesb, utculminateisn,thelightinogfa match(434e4-435a3). Onlybyfocusinagttentiveolyn thisfrictionS,ocrates ays,canonecatcha glimpsoefthjeusticeorcommongoodthattranscendasndyetembracetshe interestosfboththebestpolityandthebesthumanbeing.

In thefollowinpgages,I shallpresenetvidencedrawnfromtheargumentand dramaticactionoftheRepublicrevealingthatthephilosopher benefltbsyhispoliticalresponsibilityoSocratesc' ityI. shallsuggesthat Socratesp' hilosopherw,hois bynaturea loveroflearning(philomaths, 376b8-10;485a10-b4;490a8-b8),gainsan adequatecomprehensioonf whatmostneedstobelearned(tomegistomn athema)t,heideaofthegood, intheglimpseofthekosmosheattainsas a resultofbeingjustlycompelled toreturntopoliticalifetoconcernhimselwf ithhumanaffairsS.imilarly, as disclosedintheactionofPlato'sdrama,Socrateshimselbfenefitisntellectuallyg,aininga soundbasisforhisconvictionin favorofjustice,as a resultofhiscaringfortheorderandintegritoyfthecityhefoundisnspeech.

PhilosopherBsenefiftromPoliticalResponsibility

A momentr'seflectiownillrevealthatanawarenesosfanyprospective benefltpresupposeas recognitionofdeflciencyS.o thefirststepin an analysisoftheprospectivbeenefltgainedbyphilosopherfsrompolitical responsibiliitsytoconsidertheirdeflciencpyriortoundertakinigt.Disclosureofthisdeficiencyin, boththecase ofSocratesandthatofthephilosophersbeyondthecave,willitselfsuggesthecharacteorfthebenefithey haveyettogain.I shallbeginineachcase,accordinglyb,yspecifyintghe deficienctyhatpointstowardthisprospectivbeenefitT. henI shalltryto indicateas clearlyas possiblewhatthisbeneflits,itsimportancteophilosophicailnterestis.,e.,educationa,ndhowitsgenesisisboundtothepolitics ofPlato'sRepublic.

TheCase ofSocrates

Theawarenesosfanyprospectivbeenefipt resupposesa,s I suggesta, recognitioonfdeficiencyT.his recognitionofdeficiencyis particularly difflculftorus in thecase ofSocratesa, manwhoseveryprofessionosf ignorancheavecometobetreatedas indicativoefhiswisdomB. utSocratic ignorancme ightsometimessignifythegapbetweenwhatSocratesunderstandsandwhatishumanlypossibletolearn,rathetrhantheupperlimitof

THE JUSTICE OF SOCRATES' PHILOSOPHER KINGS

813

thatlearningitselfS. ocrateshimselfsometimefsailsto distinguisthhese cases.Infacti,tmighbte saidthatthisconfusionisattimesresponsiblfeor "thecharacteristirconySocrates,"his peculiarbrandof haughtyselfdepreciationT.husitwouldbeas mistakentoexempftromcriticaslcrutiny Socraticironyas anyotherspeechordeedonefindsina Platonicdialogue. OnlybyrecognizintghedeficienciympliciitnSocraticironyisitpossibleto graspthesignificancoef muchofthedramaof Plato'sRepublic.This deficiencyis disclosed,neverthelesast, themomentthereaderis least preparedtoexpectit,andforthisreasonperhapsiseasilyoverlooked.

Justas Socratesconcludesan apparentlysuccessfurl efutationof Thrasymachuasr'gumenftorinjusticeh,esurprisingclayllsattentiotnothe fruitlessneosfshiseffortd,eclaringthathedoes"notknowatall whatthe

justis,ifithappenstobe a virtueornot,andwhetheirn havingitoneis unhappyor happy"(354a13-c3).3Socrates'effortosnlysilenceThrasymachus,theydo notrefutehisargumenftorinjusticeJ. udgingfromthe responseosfGlauconandAdeimantutsoSocratesd' eclarationo,necould attributheisexpressioonfdissatisfactiotnoan accurateassessmenotfthe circumstanceAss. Adeimantuesxplainsa,betterargumenitsnecessaryn,ot onlytrulytodisplaythesuperioritoyfjusticeb,utalsoifSocratesisevento distinguishhispositionfromThrasymachu(s3'67c2-3).

Neverthelesws,esensesomethinogftheironicinSocratesc' onfession ofutterfailureI.ndeed,thereissomethinhgighlypeculiarinthebehaviorof a loverof learningwho so complacentlyacceptshis own ignoranceindeed,whowouldmarchoffwithitas witha trophy-particularwlyhen thelikesofGlauconandAdeimantuasreavailableandeagertofurthetrhe investigatioYne. t Socrateshimselfsayshe had thoughtb,ymakingthis confessiont,hathe had "escapedtheargument("357al). Socrateshere underestimattehseextentofhisremediabliegnoranceB. utGlauconand Adeimantufsorcehimbacktomakea freshstartC. ompulsionisnecessary becauseSocratesevidentlywouldhavebeen contentto havemade his escape,regardlesosfitsconsequencefsorhisownunderstanding.

The differencbeetweenthenewline of investigatiopnroposedby GlauconandAdeimantuasndthepreliminariynquirywithThrasymachus highlightthseproblemofSocratesc'omplacenrteticenceG. lauconmakesit clearthatitwillnolongerbeenoughforSocrates"tocharm"otherws ithhis powerosfrefutatioSno.cratems ustnowsayinwhathethinktshenaturaend profitabilitoyfjusticeconsistsG. laucon'scompulsionhereneatlyfrees SocratesfromThrasymachuisn' junctionagainstanswerinagccordingto certainofhisownopinions(336c6-337b5).Contraryto Thrasymachus' statedintentionth, isdemandactuallyleftSocratesa,s itwouldleaveany-

3MytranslatioanrsebaseduponJohnBurnet'Gs reektext(Oxford1,902).

814

DarrellDobbs

one,nochoicebuttobeironicT. heemergencoefGlauconandAdeimantus as Socratesp' rincipailnterlocutomrsarkst,hereforaen, importantturnin theRepublic,heraldingtheconstitutioonfa regimein speech,a dialogic communityth, atwillnotpermitSocratestherefugoefa complacenitrony.

To appreciatethebenefitSocratesgainsas a consequenceofbeing forcedtoengageintheaffairsa,ndonthetermso,fthisdialogiccommunity, one mustrealizethegenuineinadequacyof his apparentrefutatioonf Thrasymachuasr' gumenftorinjusticeI.mplicitin thisinadequacyis the precariousnesosfSocrateso' wnconvictioninfavorofjustice.For,firsti,f

Socratestrulyfailsto refuteThrasymachush,is own convictionto the contrarywouldseemto lackrationalsupporta, circumstancwe hichto Socratesespecially("theunexamineldifeis notworthliving"s)houldbe a matteorfseriousconcernN. everthelesSso,cratese'scapeattheendofBook

One wouldhavepreventedtheneededself-examinatioSne.cond,as is evidentoSocratesi'nterlocutoarnsywayS,ocratesa' rgumenits notmerely inconclusiveb,utactuallysupportivoef Thrasymachucs'ontentionT.o appreciatienfullmeasureSocratesd' eficiencyth, eno, nemustobservehow Socrates'responseto Thrasymachuisn factsupportsthesuperioritoyf injusticen,otwithstandiSnogcrateso' wnconvictiontothecontraryT.o do thiswe mustreviewi,n somedetail,theconversatiobnetweenThrasymachusandSocrates.

Thrasymachuws,erecall,affirmtshatjusticeis theadvantageofthe strongerF.oreverywher"ee,achrulingclasspositslawsto itsownadvantage... declarinagsitpositsthemthatthist,heirownadvantagei,sjustfor theruled.... [Thus]everywhetrheesamethingisjust,namelytheadvantageofthestronger(3"38e1-339a4).Itfollowtshatactingjustlyi,nconformitywiththelaw,doesnotpromoteone'sowngoodbutthatofan alien rulingclass.OnthisbasisThrasymachusus bsequentlcyontendtshatinjusticeis mightiearndmoreprofitablfeoroneselfthanjusticesincejusticeis, essentiallyso,meoneelse'sgood(343cl-344c8).

InhisresponseS,ocrateds oesnotdisputeThrasymachucso'ntentioans itappliestocurrenptoliticalpracticei;nsteadhecontestTs hrasymachus' implicipt remisethatrulersbynatureaimattheirownadvantageintheir rulingH. e raisesthepossibilittyhat"rulers"wholookonlytotheirprivate interestms aybe actingcontrartyothenatureoftruerulerst,hatprecisely speakingtheyarenotrulerastall.Socratebs uildshisargumenotna premise sharedwithThrasymachuIsn.everyinstanceofruleexercisedindisputably on thebasisofknowledget,heonlyclaimto rulerecognizedbyThrasymachus(340d1-341a1),Socratesobservesthattherulerlooksnotto his ownprivateadvantageb, utto theadvantageoftheruled,viz.,thosewho followhisprescriptionTsh. us,a knowledgoefmedicinew, hichlendsauthorittyoa physicianr'sule,pertaintsothebenefioltftheonewhofollows

THE JUSTICE OF SOCRATES' PHILOSOPHER KINGS

815

"doctor'sorders"(cf.332c5-334a9).Ifa physicianweretotreata patient withoubteingpaid,thebenefietnjoyedbythepatientwouldbe undiminished,althoughthephysicianhimselwf ouldgainnothingH. ence,against Thrasymachutsh' esisS,ocratesmaintaintshattheweaker(i.e.,theruled) benefiftromobedienceW. hatbecomesquestionablienSocratesa'nalysiiss whethetrherulergainsfromhisruling.

Socratesthusconcludesthatrulingdoesnotseektheadvantageofthe strongetrh, erulingclass,butratheroftheweakert,heruled.Thisfinding, we immediatelydiscover,entailsthe impossibilitoyf a good political community"I.fa citycomposedofgoodmencameintobeingtherewould probablybe a fightovernotrulingj,ust as thereis presentlyoverruling..... [Forieveryonoefjudgmen(ptashogignosk6nw) ouldchoosetobe benefitebdyanotherathetrhantohavethetroubleofbenefitinagnother" (347d2-8).The"goodmen"Socrateshasinmindwould,ofcourseb, eboth justandprudentB.utSocratesresisttshemoralistipcresumptiotnhatgood thingasrealwayscompatibleh;einsteadindicateas probleminpositintghe harmonyofjusticeand prudenceI.nsofaras thegood manisjust,ifhe shouldcometorule,hewilllooktothebenefiotftheruled.Insofaras heis prudenth,oweverh, e willbe unwillingto engagein suchan inherently unprofitabalectivityT.heeligibilitoyfjusticeis mostquestionablet,hen, fromtheperspectivoefthemanina positiontorulea cityI.n hiscase,as Socratesindicatest,heveryqualitiessupportinsguchprominencaeppear to be incompatibleO. ne can establishharmonyamongthemonlyby avoidingpoliticalresponsibilitFyo. rthesake ofthisinnerharmonyor ordert,hegoodmaniswillinga,s Socratesupposest,ofighttoavoidruling inthecityF. romthisitfollowtshata goodcityissimplyimpossibleF.orthe harmonoyfsoulthatcharacterizeasgoodmanisattainabloenlyatthecost ofcivildiscord.

Surprisingltyh,isfindingcastsdoubtuponSocratesu' nequivocaelxpressionof disagreemenwt ithThrasymachu(s347e1). Thrasymachus' praiseofinjusticiesbased,likeSocratesr' esponseo,na conflicotfinterest

separatinrgulersandruled.BothSocratesandThrasymachuasccordingly say thejust is somethingadvantageous(339b3-4). Theydifferin that Thrasymachucosntendtshatthejustistheadvantagoefthestrongewr,hile SocratesuggesttshatitistheadvantagoeftheweakerT. hisdifferenicseless remarkableh,owevert,hanthecommonimplicationofboththeirargumentst,hatjusticebenefitosnlya classorpart,andisnota goodembracing thewhole.It followsfromSocratesr' easoningn,o lessthanfromThrasymachus't,hatjusticeis"someoneelse'sgood,"andthereforthe atinjusticies moreprofitablfeoroneselfthanjustice.Theperplexittyhatemergeisnthe proemofPlato'sRepubliccenterspreciselyon thisrupturoefjusticeand prudence.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download