Dear Friends,
It seems to me, that it depends on what type of society you live in, whether or not Socrates or Thrasymachus was correct in their summations of the question… Is living the just life good in itself (intrinsic) or is it at best for some external good (extrinsic) or is it even good at all.
Of all the interlocutors in the Republic Thrasymachus is the most interesting. Angry and like and overheated pot he opens up what he thinks is the “truth”. Namely that justice is for fools and the weak. The powerful never are just and they shouldn’t be.
Poor Socrates has to make a just life appealing to the upper middle class youth, (the most dangerous people on Earth). They have heard Thrasymachus talk of the natural law as the Gaul King saw it… The strong must take from the weak, to insure the survival of the strong. Justice is but a tool. But how is Socrates to defend Justice under such a powerful attack?
Religion has always been affective at taming some people. The youth in this house were indifferent to religious inducements… Threats of Hades and punishment. They were more inclined to logical dialectic reduction of the arguments.
Fortunately Socrates was expert at this. He created a “perfect” republic that even Socrates admitted wasn’t possible. But this “Republic” was used as a device to deduce that each person must be just and be dutiful for society to work. That when there is anarchy in the countryside society breaks down. In that breakdown men have no use of one another. The very thing that has allowed our species to develop to the extent it has is undermined. I do my thing and you do yours… together we all make the stuff of civilization. When justice is rare starvation is rampant.
So Socrates basically argued that society depends on justice, and if the injustice of bread makers has such a negative impact on society, then how much more the impact when lawmakers themselves are corrupt?
So back to the original assertion. Take a society like Afghanistan. Apparently no one is just. From Karzai to the guy who issues the license for latrines they are all utterly corrupt. Read one issue of the Kabul Press. Corruption is rampant in Afghanistan.
In this situation who is right? Socrates or Thrasymachus? This situation is a live demonstration of a non functional Republic. Were a miracle to happen, and the government and the people of Afghanistan were to become just instantly, society would right itself in minutes.
How to make that happen… Sufficient troops will stomp down a peace. That is unquestionable. But what then? The problem is how to establish a just government while a peace is being forced. One where elections are free from corruption. (The US is still working on that). One that is free of graft. One that would be an example for the people of Afghanistan to follow… Possibly a NUMA?
I guess I was wrong, no matter what society you live in, Socrates was right.
