In Republic Book 9, Plato finally answers Glaucon’s Challenge from Book 2:
he shows how being just is advantageous, even when it is not rewarded by good reputation.
Glaucon suggested comparing two extreme lives: (A) the unjust person with a reputation for
justice, and (B) the just person with a reputation for injustice.
Which person lives the happier/more excellent/objectively better life?
Which person would we choose to be, if we had a choice?
Plato argues that person B is far happier, and that anyone who knew the truth about human
beings would choose life B over life A. In Book 9 Plato gives three arguments that
the just life is happier than the unjust life.
In this video I will discuss parts of the first two arguments, and give you two discussion
questions to consider.
At 576b, Socrates begins his analysis of the worst type of man.
The worst man’s tyrannical soul is like the tyrannical city.
Like a city ruled by a tyrant, his soul is wretched and full of misery and slavery.
Like the tyrannical city, the tyrannical soul sees one part of the soul (the appetite) free,
while the rest of the soul, including its highest and best parts, is enslaved.
At 577e, Socrates says the tyrannical soul is “least able to do what it wishes.”
And this may surprise us, because we would assume that the tyrant, of all people,
is free to do whatever he wishes.
So my first Discussion Question is: How is the tyrannical soul unfree, according to Plato?
Why isn't it the case that tyranny simply means the freedom to do whatever you wish?
When Glaucon says the tyrannical-souled man is the most wretched of all humans, Socrates disagrees.
There is one person more wretched than the tyrannical-souled man, and this is the tyrannical-souled
man who becomes an actual tyrant.
(Note here that the very situation praised by Thrasymachus, achieving a life of “complete
injustice,” is described by Plato as the absolute *worst* thing that could happen to anyone.)
So my second Discussion Question is: How is the tyrannical-souled tyrant
more wretched than the tyrannical-souled non-tyrant?
Next, Socrates says the tyrant lives in a kind of prison, made of his fears and passions.
We see again that tyranny is not a source of freedom, but of loss and limitation.
Thus the tyrant’s life is not one that any reasonable person would prefer to the just life.
This is Plato’s first argument in reply to Glaucon’s Challenge.
The second argument in favor of the just life begins at 580d.
Plato tells us that each part of the soul loves, or takes pleasure in, a different object.
Appetite loves many things, chiefly the satisfaction of its many desires.
Since this satisfaction (food, drink, etc.) can often be purchased with money, Plato calls
Appetite the money-loving part of the soul.
Spirit is the victory-loving or honor-loving part, and Reason is the learning-loving part of the soul.
Plato then asks us to consider which type of person has the most experience with all
three types of pleasure.
Since the philosopher, governed by Reason, has experienced all three types, we should
accept his judgment that the life of knowledge and justice is the best life.
The money-lover and the victory-lover do not have enough experience to give their judgments authority.
This ends my brief look at part of Book 9 of Plato’s Republic.
Thanks for watching today; goodbye.