Noble Lie and Platos Republic - Essay Example

Noble Lie and Plato’s Republic Noble lie is a myth or not a true thing that is clearly in religious nature. In Plato’s republic, this lie is told by elite or the ruling class to the ruled or the common man to maintain social harmony. In this paper there will be discussion both in favor and against the noble lie. In the context of imaginary challenge of Meletus to Socrates regarding Noble lie, the conclusion and analysis after the discussion will be that lying is against the enquiry of nature according to Socrates or by scientific procedure that ensures revealing of facts and truth. The noble lie, though it is told for the sake of social harmony, it develops ignorance in common man and suppresses his opposition or nature of enquiry in his mind. Moreover, the social harmony can be achieved only after developing awareness in common man and make him to understand about the importance of harmony in the society and family. Supporting the Noble Lie The important aspect that supports noble lie is that the social harmony. According to the doctrines of Western philosophy that proposes noble lie gives the opinion that myth or illusion is necessary to maintain harmony in the society as well as to obey the elite or the rulers. Hesk Jon (2000) quotes Michel Foucault’s ‘The order of the Discourse’, that proposes to identify the processes that control the society in a selected and organized by redistributing the certain number of procedures. The noble lie gives a chance to ruled class to mould and shape the belief they want their subjects develop and if the ruler is benevolent, the belief inculcated in the people can result in harmony and after all harmonious life is the final objective of any society. The Platonic opinion regarding problem of discourse is regarding ‘powers and perils’ and noble lie is an aspect that minimizes the perils of the power from the people who question the right doings as well as wrong doings of the ruling elite. The noble lie is good as long as the elite people do not exploit the ruled people from the privilege they gain from the belief of the people in noble lie. Though it can be termed as a tool for thought control of the ruled, it will be good as long as it is related to ‘will to truth’. Hesk Jon (2000) quotes Marcel Detienne who argues about Greek notions of truth. By accepting the noble lie as part of a model republic, the rulers should concentrate only on submissiveness from the people but the activities of rulers should not undermine the rational thought of the ruled in their daily chores. However, benevolent rulers take care that the noble lie aspect does not interfere in the justice delivery system. In the context of delivery of justice, it is possible to ignore noble lie if the rulers are enough discretion regarding it. It can be understood from Socrates interpretation of justice definition that it cannot hold for all cases of human interaction. The same can be interpreted in case of Noble lie and it can be ignored to treat ruled and the rulers equally while delivering justice. Hence, the supporters of Noble lie should not create obstacles in ignoring noble lie aspect when the elite people are before judiciary at par with the common people. Hence, noble lie can be used as a tool to control society. However, there are no less arguments against noble lie concept in a republic.1 Noble Lie as Against the Republic and a Society The important aspect that opposes the concept of noble lie is the development of ignorance of ruled people. The ignorance even makes them to move away from the enquiry of the nature as the society and rulers are also a part of the nature. Hence, being accustomed to not enquire about the elite and the rulers will lead to the same in other activities of the ruled and as result elite remain as elite and ruled remain as ruled. This leads to lack of equal opportunities in the creation of god, which is available in the modern society. In that sense it is undemocratic to deny opportunities to the ruled as they are deceived of utilizing opportunities. In addition to that when just and unjust nature is considered, the lie cannot be considered as a just one as per the challenge of Meletus. However, lie can only be supported if it is said in case of saving least privileged from their predators. However, the noble lie context is not like that and it can be considered as universal deception of the ruled people by the rulers or the elite on the name of social harmony. The term righteous deception by Euthydemus cannot be true in case of noble lie that is said to all the people as they are not insane. One cannot compare the noble lie to all the people who are ruled by elite with a lie to an ailing son who refuses to take medicine. In the latter context, the lie is temporary and not universally told. However, the noble lie context is different and surely is a term that makes the ruled class to remain as they are far away from the comforts and privileges of elite. The lie to an ailing son can be termed as sophisticated trick but noble lie will not come under that category. Hence, the deception using noble lie according to Meletus challenge is unjust and there is no consistency in the theory that supports noble lie. Moreover, the theory that supports noble lie in terms of modern understanding amounts to racism and divides society on the basis of class; the rulers and the ruled. Moreover, the irrational aspects in any theory cannot guarantee the development of society as the noble lie talks about golden souls for the guardians, silver for auxiliaries and bronze for the other classes. When a noble lie is expressed in the above context, it is not possible to pick the golden souls from the people who are branded bronze souls and if so, one has to tell another lie to support their deed.2 Strength of Noble Lie in a Republic or a Society It is clear that noble lie concept is the one that is suitable for city states with limited population and closed organization. As every closed organization or a society concentrates on protective activities rather than progress, the noble lie ensures protection of elite from avoiding the ruled to be revolutionary in nature. Moreover, the republic, which uses noble lie, results in a hierarchy to rule and the society that belongs to a common mother. Hence, the diversity is unwanted and the people are forced through conventions to follow certain norms instead thinking critically the deeds and actions of the elite and ruled. Against the context of this paper that takes challenge of Meletus who questions the noble lie aspect of Socrates’ city, he wishes to impose the vision of noble lie in Athens. Considering his imaginary opposition as the context of this paper, he wants to exclude Socrates for the sake of uniformity he desires. As he challenges noble lie as the one that rules out the just people as unjust, the piety of the concept cannot be observed in the wake of Meletus challenge to Socrates. However, against to the supposed challenge of Meletus to Socrates in this paper, the noble lie is used by Socrates in his Plato’s Republic as the political expression of unity but not as the one that discriminates the just and unjust individuals. That means the challenge of Meletus does not stand with philosophy of noble lie that Socrates explains in Plato’s republic as it is the expression of the political unity and not the one that suppresses the ruled ones for the sake of elite. However, Meletus challenge points out the lack of universal nature in the noble lie that makes the youth like Euthyphro think about who is father and who is not. Hence, the noble lie concept can hold good as long as a system prevails instead of hereditary to ensure only benevolent ones ascend the throne through the hierarch. If not, the noble might be used to suppress the ruled and to protect the rights of ruling elite to have the same privileges for the generations to come. Hence, the elite people should like be Euthypro, who wants to indict his father in murder charge irrespective of his relationship with him. That means, the actions of the ruling elite should be according to laws of moral universe, which act irrespective of the relationship of the individual who rules the republic or the society. However, the imaginary Meletus challenge supposed in this paper do not consider the democratic polity, which is the aim of Socrates. According to Arlens W. Saxonhouse (1995), it seems Socrates tries to minimize the problems of the concept of noble lie by equality before the laws and a citizenry of equals bound to the city by their uniformity. However, the above concept can guarantee only equality before law despite noble lie but not diversified thought that is progressive in nature. 3 The strength of any concept lies in universality that ensures development of democratic polity in a society. Though Socrates’ thoughts are about achieving that aspect, the noble lie aspect can be a hindrance in that way as long as there is no equality before law. As noble lie divides the souls of humans into gold, silver and bronze according to kings, auxiliaries the ruled people, a system that degrades the golden souls to the lower ones and upgrading of silver and bronze ones to the higher levels can help in strengthening the democratic set up in a society. The above-mentioned aspect can minimize the negative aspect of noble lie in a democratic society as it gives an opportunity to the ruled class to be upgraded to higher class. Saxonhouse quotes Cleisthenes ‘Do not judge by tribe’ that prompts an administration and society to recognize individuals by their virtue instead of birth. Hence, as long as the egalitarian views dominate the society despite the presence of the concepts like noble lie, the society can be progressive. The challenge of Meletus, which is the basis of this paper, also constitutes egalitarian views as he questions the right of the privileged to tell a lie to the ruled class. The question itself expresses the equal social right that lets the people know about what the elite class knows. 4 Noble lie and Social Relations Another aspect that arises from the challenge of Meletus is regarding social relations. The social relations may result in dominating the ruled class by elite and to protect their privileges for the next generation using the noble lie concept. Hence, the weakness of noble lie lies in the selfishness of the ruling elite and the strength lies in their broadmindedness to maintain social harmony and give a chance to ruled class to upgrade themselves in the hierarchy of the society. However, as the period mentioned in the challenge is the time of hereditary, hierarchy does not allow the ruled class to jump into their elite positions. Hence, the serious problems that are posed by the noble lie concept is that it presents just and unjust persons in the same way to the ruled class and that results in dissatisfaction and up rise in the ruled class if there is unjust person in the ruling elite. Conclusion or Overall Assessment of Noble Lie and its Challenge Considered As per the above discussion and the supposed challenge of Meletus regarding noble lie, it is clear that it can only be limited to city states and is not suitable to the modern society. The reason is that, the organizations and administrations are closed to change and in contrast the modern societies are open to new thoughts and changes. In that concept the noble lie can be considered as the one that resists change in the presence of an unjust ruler and the absence of a system that ensures equality before law for every individual from top to bottom in the hierarchy. Works Cited Hesk, Jon (Author). Deception and Democracy in Classical Athens. West NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Arlene W. Saxonhouse, Fear of Diversity, Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press, 1995. Read More