Modern Sophists

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that Thrasymachus was an ideal example of the type of lawgiver the human race has had through out our history. If you recall the story of Socrates and Thrasymachus in Plato’s Republic. Thrasymachus argues with Socrates that justice is for the weak to believe and the strong to use, like a tool, to control the weak. He also goes on to say that justice is not only a tool to the strong, but is foolishness to actually believe, because it weakens the strong. With this Socrates two friends ask if Justice is a good that one should follow for the good it brings (extrinsic) or for an intrinsic reason, It is the highest good for example. Like brushing your teeth is a good we do to protect our teeth. Not for it’s intrinsic good. Or on the other hand like when we play. It is for it’s own sake and not for something we seek to gain in the future from the action, thus it is an intrinsic good. They asked if justice is an intrinsic or extrinsic good. To answer this question is why Socrates builds his fictitious Republic.

But back to Thrasymachus and his sophist philosophy of injustice. Even Thrasymachus admits the strong should pretend to be just, to keep the weak in line, and that the strong should look as just as they are unjust. The rulers that Thrasymachus imagines are the very ones we have endured for so long. People who pretend to be just. They hold up their arm in protest, screaming for justice, red faced. Indignant at the injustice in the world and pledging to put an end to it. While at the same time being as unjust as it is possible to be. Moreover pledging to use unjust means to achieve what they call just ends. Decrying Machiavelli all the while.

They never argue that people should be given equality. They always argue that people should be treated unequally. (To make up for past injustices). They argue that people should be put into groups to be better protected by the power of the State. They argue for diversity while denouncing other opinions as hate speech. There is no end to the injustice and hypocrisy of the modern sophists.

Textbook example of Thrasymachus‘s maxim that the rulers should appear just while actually being unjust. Calling for justice with indignation at the circumstances of a stranger smacks of insincerity. How can a person be indignant at the way a stranger is treated? I can be indignant at the way I am treated, I can be angry at the way a friend is treated, but how can I feel another’s pain that I haven’t even met? Then to act on this feigned indignation to force my version of justice on society is to be truly in love with oneself. Those that are in love with themselves focus inward and don’t see others as equals only as fools that need to be manipulated. (For their own good).

I am amazed that people who call for others to look at evil and discern the subtle shades of black. But when confronted by a world of color they staunchly see grayscale. They are incapable of seeing in any more than one dimension. Yet they must force their version of justice on society. All the while acting unjustly (not paying their taxes, etc…)and using unjust means (seizing the property of others, etc…) to their ends.

So I argue that these people are not just, but are in fact, are the heirs of Thrasymachus. Their rule has taken continents from prosperity to poverty. (while retaining the wealth of the Elite). Their rule has reduced empires to puppets. But they keep getting in power.

It is because their siren song is heard by upper middle class youth (the most dangerous people on Earth)… Weren’t the people present, at Plato’s discourse, the upper middle class youth of their day?