The Ring of Gyges PDF

;,. With all reading assignments, I assign an un-graded one p~ge.writing exercise i.n o~der to help students begin processing the ideas.. They get credit simply for comple~lng It, and this constitytes a "class preparation" portion of their grade (about 10%). I find then that...

;,. With all reading assignments, I assign an un-graded one p~ge.writing exercise i.n o~der to help students begin processing the ideas.. They get credit simply for comple~lng It, and this constitytes a "class preparation" portion of their grade (about 10%). I find then that I rarely need to worry about class participation since they come much better prepared to discuss the material in class. For this piece, I would ask them to try to explain what Glaucon thinks the story of the Ring of Gyges demonstrates. The Ring of Gyg~s Plato Plato (ca. 428-348 [or 347] B.C.), considered by many to be the greatest phi­ losopher who ever lived, is the author of The Republic and other great dia­ logues. Plato's influence on Western culture is incalculable. In The Republic, Plato describes the ideal society where justice reigns supreme. It opens with a scene in which Socrates confronts powerful arguments that.dis­ parage justice. We find Glaucon summarizing the views of those who think that justice is merely a compromise between the freedom to do wrong with impunity and to sufferwrong without redress. GLAUCON (TO I have never heard from anyone the sort of defence ofjustice SOCRATES): that I want to hear, proving that it is better than injustice. I want to hear it praised for itself, and I think I am most likely Excerpt from Tilr Repliblic by Plato, pp. 31-33. Translated by G. M. A. Grube. copyright 1974 by Hackett Publishing Company. Inc., reprinted by perl11i.~sion of Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved. 312  Plato: The Ring of Gyges 313 to hear this from you. Therefore I am going to speak at length in praise of the unjust life and in doing so I will show you the way I want to hear you denouncing injustice and praising jus­ tice. See whether you want to hear what I suggest. SOCRATES: I want it more than anything else. Indeed, what subject would a man of sense talk and hear about more often with enjoyment? GLAUCON: Splendid, then listen while I deal with the first subject I men­ tioned: the nature and origin ofjustice. They say that to do wrong is naturally good, to be wronged is bad, but the suffering of injury so far exceeds in badness the good of inflicting it that when men have done wrong to each other and suffered it, and have had a taste of both, those who are unable to avoid the latter and practise the former decide that it is profitable to come to an agreement with each other neither to inflict injury nor to suffer it. As a result they begin to make laws and covenants, and the law's command they call lawful and just. This, they say, is the origin and essence ofjus­ tice; it stands between the best and the worst, the best being to do wrong without paying the penalty and the worst to be wronged without the power of revenge. The just then is a mean between two extremes; it is welcomed and honoured be­ cause of men's lack of the power to do wrong. The man who has that power, the real man, would not make a compact with anyone not to inflict injury or suffer it. For him that would be madness. This then, Socrates, is, according to their argument, the nature and origin ofjustice. Even those who practise justice do so against their will be­ cause they lack the power to do wrong. This we could realize very clearly if we imagined ourselves granting to both the just and the unjust the freedom to do whatever they liked. We could then follow both of them and observe where their de­ sires led them, and we would catch the just man redhanded travelling the same road as the unjust. The reason is the desire for undue gain which every organism by nature pursues as a good, but the law forcibly sidetracks him to honour equality. The freedom I just mentioned would most easily occur if these men had the power which they say the ancestor of the Lydian Gyges possessed. The story is that he was a shepherd in the ser­ vice of the ruler of Lydia. There was a violent rainstorm and an earthquake which broke open the ground and created a chasm at the place where he was tending sheep. Seeing this and mar­ velling, he went down into it. He saw, besides many other won­ ders of which we are told, a hollow bronze horse. There were window-like openings in it; he climbed through them and caught sight of a corpse which seemed of more than human stature, wearing nothing but a ring of gold on its finger. This " 314 MORALITY AND SELF-INTEREST ring the shepherd put on and came out. He arrived at the usual montWy meeting which reported to the king on the state of the flocks, wearing the ring. As he was sitting among the others he happened to twist the hoop of the ring towards himself, to the inside of his hand, and as he did this he became invisible to those sitting near him and they went on talking as if he had gone. He marvelled at this and, fingering the ring, he turned the hoop outward again and became visible. Perceiving this he tested whether the ring had this power and so it happened: if he turned the hoop inwards he became invisible, but was visi­ ble when he turned it outwards. When he realized this, he at once arranged to become one of the messengers to the king. He went, committed adultery with the king's wife, attacked the king with her help, killed him, and took over the kingdom. Now ifthere were two such rings, one worn by the just man, the other by the unjust, no one, as these people think, would be so incorruptible that he would stay on the path ofjustice or bring himself to keep away from other people's property and not touch it, when he could with impunity take whatever he wanted from the market, go into houses and have sexual rela~ tions with anyone he wanted, kill anyone, free all those he wished from prison, and do the other things which would make him like a god among men. His actions would be in no way different from those of the other and they would both fol­ low the same path. This, some would say, is a great proof that no one is just willingly1but-under compulsion,so thatjustice---- - -~-­ is not one's private good, since wherever either thought he could do wrong with impunity he would do so. Every man be­ lieves that injustice is much more profitable to himself than justice, and any exponent of this argument will say that he is right. The man who did not wish to do wrong with that op­ portunity, and did not touch other people's property, would be thought by those who knew it to be very foolish and miser­ able. They would praise him in public, thus deceiving one another, for fear of being wronged. So much for my second topic. As for the choice between the lives we are discussing, we shall be able to make a correct judgment about it only ifwe put the most just man and the most unjust man face to face; oth­ erwise we cannot do so. By face to face I mean this: let us grant to the unjust the fullest degree of injustice and to the just the fullest justice, each being perfect in his own pursuit. First, the unjust man wilJ act as clever craftsmen do-a top navigator for example or physician distinguishes what his craft can do and lThis directly contradicts the famous Socratic paradox that no one is willingly bad and that people do wrong because they have not the knowledge to do right. which is virtue.  Study Questions 315 what it cannot; the former he will undertake, the latter he will pass by, and when he slips he can put things right. So the un­ just man's correct attempts at wrongdoing must remain secret; the one who is caught must be considered a poor performer, for the extreme of injustice is to have a reputation for justice, and our perfectly unjust man must be granted perfection in in­ justice. We must not take this from him, but we must allow that, while committing the greatest crimes, he has.provided himself with the greatest reputation for justice; if he makes a slip he must be able to put it right; he must be a sufficiently persuasive speaker if some wrongdoing of his is made public; he must be able to use force, where force is needed, with the help of his courage, his strength, and the friends and wealth with which he has provided himself Having described such a man, let us now in our argument put beside him the just man, simple as he is and noble, who, as Aeschylus put it, does not wish to appear just but to be so. We must take away his reputation, for a reputation for justice would bring him honour and rewards, and it would then not be clear whether he is what he is for justice's sake or for the sake of rewards and honour. We must strip him of everything except justice and make him the complete opposite of the other. Though he does no wrong, he must have the greatest reputation ______-'------'-_f(~o