(Review of Plato's Republic )
As the definition towards justice and injustice remains unclear in this sophisticated world, the foremost thing I need to do here is to make it clear that for Plato, justice means things that harm no one. This I agree.
Here comes to the question: what answer people will give when being asked "Is justice more powerful than injustice"?
In a world that injustice permeates, the answer is no. Because the injustified earn more fortune; they possess the power; they can live an injustified life claiming that they are the most justified of all!
In a justified world, the answer is no because the injustified people can hurt the justified without feeling guilty thus it is always the kind people who gets hurt.
Time and again, such conclusion has been proved by the unfainess conducted by evil. But is the answer correct?
No matter what kind of world it is, people will answer "no" without factoring in social status, personal reputation and anything relates to his reputation. Only when all of these conditions are added they will answer yes in case being called unjust person so that their social reputation is tarnished.
Let me borrow words from Glaucon
Men practice justice unwillingly because they lack the power to violate it.....If we give full liberty to the just man and the unjust alike, we shall surprise the just man in the act of traveling in the same direction as the unjust, owing to that covetous desire, the gratification of which every creature naturally pursues as a good, only that is forced out of its path by law, and constrained to respect the principle of equality.
Let's follow the logic of Plato to analyse this question in a country that is devoid of all dependent variable such as covetous desire, social inequailty, or imperfect political scheme. This country is Republic. The detailed description is in this article
If I were a citizen of Plato's republic
He answered YES.
He pictured four kinds of political schemes,namely, timocracy,oligarchy, democracy, despotism. Each of the system has one thing that is honoured by the whole society. In timocracy, spirited element is the core value;oligarchy, the wealthy; democracy, freedom and despotism, absolute power. When one of the factor is canonized, virtue and the virtuous sink in estimation.
What is honoured at any time is practiced and what is dishonoured is neglected.
The thing that they worship most laid the foundation for its destruction and gave way to despotism in the end.
Is tyranny happy? In most peope's eyes, yes. They are so omnipotent that no one dare to challenge their power. The palace they live in is just gorgeous. They never have to worry about money issue, unemployment of themselves. They are the chosen one.
For Plato, their life long live friendless, and always either masters or slaves for a tyrant nature can never taste real freedom and friendship.
Which of the understanding towards tyrant is correct? I believe it is worthwhile to consider as none of us is or will be tyrant. Plato is justified in saying so because he find that
Either all their associates are their flatterers and creatures. If they want anything from anybody, they go down on their knees for it, and do not blush to assume all the appearance of intimate friendship,whereas when they have gained their point they become distant and estranged.
He looked at this issue from the perspective of people around a tyranny. This put me in mind of an article that I read" If I were king" by Xia Gannu. In it, he wrote that If he were king, he would be nothing more than a master of slavery!
A tyranny repletes with terror, which is generated by those who are under his contol as well as those who against his way of learning. He is in real truth a very slave in the most object and intensive shape.
In consequence, he must in the first place unhappy in himself, and in the next place, he must make those who near him as unhappy as himself.
This is the illustration Plato made from the country level. The conclusion is inevitablly be that " Unjust is far more miserable than just"
While in personal level, Plato said
The man of wisdom is fully authorized to praise his own life. The pleasure of the war-lime and honour-loving man is placed second and the third is the pleasure of love of gain.
While the organ by which judgement is passed is an organ belonging to the lover of wisdom but not to the latter two. Thus the unjust man be twice in succession foiled and twice conquered by the just.
Apart from illustrating why justice is right, he also graciously told us what benefit just can bring to our life.
When injustice and other vices resides in the soul, they corrupt and wither it by contact or indwelling, until they have brought it to death, and severed it from the body....It kills other people if it can, while it endows its possessor with peculiar vitality, and with sleeplessness as well as vitality.
This is why injustice cannot be conducted. How about the wages of virtue? Men are lime runners running well from the start, but the unjust men start off briskly but end by making themselves ridiculous, and slink away crestfallen and uncrownd while the really good runner will be the praise runner in the end.
In real life, when advance in years, it is the unjust men who are insulted in their misery by strangers while the just will live the life they want.
Pitifully, too many people are too impatient to see the result in the old age, thus they behave badly thinking that they can escape detection!
I would end the composition with an aphorism Plato said in the lastchapter
It is wrong to honour a man at the expense of truth. ...It is wrong to be heedless of justice and the rest of virtue, under the excitement of honour, or wealth, or power, or even poetry.
This is a declaration of truth pursuit and this is what makes the man marvelous. I wish the vision of the great man will come into being and injustice can extinguish from the world for good.
