96: The Republic: Book 1

Hello and welcome to Classical Stuff You Should Know, a podcast about classical stuff, the ancient world, classical education, teaching, old things, brought to you by three guys who are into that stuff. Yep, yep, that's us. Dearest always, we are gathered here today for another episode of Classical Stuff You Should Know. Yeah, we are, this is a podcast we've been around for a little while now, and we're just nearing episode 100.

Nearing episode 100. We've actually just had a little powwow trying to figure out what to do for episode 100. I haven't quite figured it out yet. If anybody has any suggestions, hey, you can always email us.

But my name is Graham Donaldson, and I'm a teacher at a school called Veritas Academy in Austin, Texas. This is a classical Christian school, and I'm here with my two colleagues, Arthur Jan Hanberg. That's me. Lovingly known as AJ.

Or respectfully known as Lord Hanberg. And Thomas Fletcher Magby, known as Bees. Yes, neither lovingly nor respect. No, no, no.

It is just, I mean, is there a term that encompasses both love and respect? And if so, that is the term that I use when I say Bees. I appreciate it. Today, we are going to be learning about childhood development toys, especially building things out of a dough, like soft, malleable substance.

Usually in pretty funny colors, there's a green. It's salty. It is a little salty. Why have you all tasted this?

Well, when I was a kid, my mom didn't want to buy, she thought that Play-Doh that you could probably make her own with just water and salt to stop it from going bad. That's a lot of salt. And then flour. Oh, thank you.

And something else. I mean, I'm sure there's some sort of binding agent. So we had homemade natural Play-Doh that you could eat, but it was really super salty. So in my mind, Play-Doh is just like this salty green dough.

My mom used to do the same thing. Really? Should we make homemade Play-Doh? Yeah, homemade Play-Doh.

Maybe this is like what got us started on the class question. I've never had some Play-Doh. She was really focused on taste for the kids. It was like a peanut butter base.

It was actually pretty tasty. But maybe not the greatest actual Play-Doh. Oh, there you go. But it's also like you use your hand with it.

Yeah, you want to eat it. And you put it away and you play with it again the next day. Well, when you're a kid, you're putting your hands in your mouth anyway. It's not, you know.

You're just bringing an intermediary. There's no real thing. So AJ, teach us about Play-Doh. Okay.

So we are talking about Play-Doh today. Not the malleable goo stuff that you played with when you were a kid. Oh, I misread the notes. But the philosopher from ancient days of York.

So I'm going to start quick with a brief overview of his life. I'm going to do just terrible justice to that and do a really bad job of it. And then we'll move on to book one of Play-Doh. I sure did.

And did I deliver? Sure did. Are you going to look at a great deal? We keep getting listeners asking for it, which is a surefire message that will probably never happen.

Okay, great. Good. So I'm going to keep on trying to do this. Let's do send $10 to classical school.

Oh, there you go. I'm starting to bring up to 12 on the pageants, though. So we have some long. So seven.

Okay, yeah, 12. That's what I said. Yeah, I figured, like, Play-Doh's Republic is important enough to observe real attention. And I started reading through it, and I'm like, I can do two books in an episode.

I was like, I cannot do two books in an episode. One book is more than enough to handle. So, well, let's start with Play-Doh. He was born sometime between 429 and 423 B.C.

to an aristocratic family to, if I can read my handwriting, Ariston and Peritione. Sure. And this was just after the golden age of Athens, so right after Pericles died. I think they actually died the same year.

So Play-Doh was born in Pericles. Kicked it. And if you, as a listener, don't know Pericles, you can go back and listen to several episodes ago. We talked about him.

Funeral oration? Yeah, I think he's funeral oration. He was the youngest of four. He had two older brothers and one older sister.

And the two older brothers actually show up a ton in the Republic. He uses them as characters a bunch. And he also does that with the rest of his family. Like, his uncles will show up and his cousins.

Apparently, he had a good family life. His father died in childhood. His mom remarried. And his actual, the name Play-Doh comes from Play-Ton, which means broad.

And that can be referring to three different things. You guys have any guesses? Bigel forehead? I was going to say the exact same thing.

Bigel forehead. Bigel forehead. That's option number three. What are the other two?

Broad knowledge of the ancient world. Yeah, like his sort of interests. Broad eloquence. And chest and shoulders.

Apparently, the creepy dude, yeah. More like Slato. So weird. So we got a review.

Why not more? Listeners. We got a review, listeners. And I feel like we just got a...

Because I've been conscious of it the whole time after hearing about it. Do you guys want to say what it says? This is the one that I just read. Yeah.

It's my favorite review. It's a three-star review that we got not too long ago. I'm trying to fill time as I... This isn't awkward.

This is gold. No, this is 100% the most awkward thing that any of us do. All right. So this review...

I'm still pulling up, guys. This is taking an embarrassing... Anyway, as he takes time, we'll come back to it. Okay, got it.

Yeah, they're classical reviews. You should know. So the title of it is Classics, guys. I just love Classics, guys.

Sorry. They are funny. That's air quotes. They are funny.

Awkward. Not funny. Ha-ha. But their enthusiasm for the subject matter is undeniable.

Funny, awkward. I take Umbridge. This is 100% the most accurate review we've ever received. I don't think we're awkward.

I 100% think we are. Now that I think about it, I'm just feeling it through the whole thing. Anyway, so Plato means broad. His true name was Aristocles.

And Ambrose... You guys know Ambrose? From Alon. Yeah.

Ambrose thought that Plato at one point went down to Egypt and there... Jeremiah. And Jeremiah. I forget.

I think that Augustine was like, maybe, but probably not. He wasn't prophesying the doom of Israel. Yeah. He was the same.

Well-educated, which back then means private teachers mostly, which means, you know, wealthy family. If you wanted to be educated, you sent him to teachers that would teach him specific things. So he was well-educated. Yeah.

He may have traveled broadly. We're not quite sure. In 404 and 403 BC, this was the reign of the 30. You guys know about this?

Oh, no. I was thinking where he tried to start a utopian colony on Sicily. Right. That's not this?

That's not this. Oh, okay. So, right then, Athens... Athens was in decline after Pericles, right?

The old age of Athens was falling off. And the Spartan-backed rule of 30 tyrants. They ended up killing sometimes just to take their stuff. Sometimes it was because they didn't agree with their rules.

Sometimes it was for political reasons. Sometimes they're like, you have a nice house and we want it. They ended up killing 1,500 Athenians, which ended up to be about 5% of the Athenian population. Exiled a huge chunk.

I have no idea this happened. It's kind of referred to like he was... One of them was like the first Robespierre. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

There's so many dead. Whenever I think of Plato, I think, you know, sort of this urban man who lived a life, not carefree life, but lived a life of peace and security and contemplation, right? And to think, you know, yeah. I would have thought Plato lived in the gold made of Athens, not immediately after it.

And then, so during this time, many people, many Athenians fled to Piraeus, where the republic is set. So that kind of, you know, shine a little bit of info on why they set the republic there instead of Athens. At 40 years old, he returned to Athens to found the academy. Throughout his later life, he was embroiled in the politics of Syracuse and was brought to sort of teach a tyrant, Dionysius, and was sold into slavery and then got bought out of slavery by another guy.

And then he got rehired by Dionysius II, who rebelled and expelled his father. It was all this crazy stuff. So he's lived a pretty crazy life. But founding the academy was one of the most important things he did.

I think it stood for around 400 years or something like that. Veritas has a lot to love, too. We've been around for, since 2005? Like, 15 years?

Something like that? So we got a little longer in there? That's our goal is to be... 400 years?

Yeah. Yeah. And he died on his birthday. And how old he was, there's some contention, but around 81.

It's a good long life. Yeah, it's a good long life. So, listen, there's also this misconception that people in antiquity didn't live very long, right? That the life expectancy was like 40.

But that's not... People weren't just living to 40. The reason that number is so low is partially because of infant death. So people live to 40 on average.

But that's not helpful when a huge number of people die in infancy, because that throws off your averages. Right. And you've got a whole bunch of diseases that no one knows how to treat, and that'll bring your average survivability down. So it's not like when you hit eight, you're like, oh, I better start my vocation.

Like, if you hit eight, you're doing pretty good, and it's all likely that you'd grow up, right? The Spartans wouldn't allow you in the marketplace until you were 30. And if you died at 40, that leaves like 10 years of useful market stuff. So people really did live a long time.

It was just less likely. You're more likely to get a disease and take it before then. So, all right. That's Plato's life.

And, oh, man, I just finished the book. Ah, I reopened it. All right. Sometimes when I finish a sentence, I, like, close my book summarily and then realize that I still need to have it.

I don't need to do that. Yeah. All right. So let's get into book one.

And it starts with Plato and some buddies, and they go out to see... You mean Socrates. Yeah, right. Sorry.

Socrates is the main character here. You're right. It's Socrates, not Plato. So Socrates and some buddies are going to see sort of a parade and pray us to hang out, and then on the way back, a whole bunch of people stop him and say, you are going to come talk with us because there are a lot of us, and there's only one of you, and you can't get away.

And he's like, all right, it's all very good-natured. That's logic right there. They're not going to hang out. Also, there's going to be this sweet race tonight.

Have you heard about the torch race? He's like, no, I haven't heard about the torch race. Are they going to hand torches to each other on horses? And he's like, yeah, they're just going to ride around and hand the torch around.

And he's like, boy, I've got to see that. So they go, and they decide to spend some time hanging out prior to this horse race. And that's sort of the premise for where the conversation starts. And there's this guy.

We should do horse races. As I said, we do intramurals twice a week. Horse races could be a part of that. Yeah.

So there's a guy, Cephalus. Not poor guys. Not Cephalus. In his old age and how, you know, is it true what he hears?

That all these old guys are having a terrible time. It's all difficult. And he's like, I'm getting up there. I wonder what I'm looking forward to.

That's pretty wise. I feel like you should always find people to ask what's coming next. Yeah. So he replies with one of the most well-known quotes from the Republic.

I've actually read it in several other books, all sort of referring back to this. And he says, how well I remember the age of poet Sophocles when in answer to the question, how does love suit with age, Sophocles? Are you still the man you were? Do you still like the ladies?

Peace, he replied. Most gladly have I escaped the thing of which you speak. I feel as if I had escaped from a mad and furious master. But these regrets and also the complaints about relations are to be attributed to the same cause, which is not old age, but men's characters and tempers.

For he who is of a calm and happy nature will hardly feel the pressure of age. But to him who is of an opposite disposition, youth and age are equally a burden. So he's like, yeah, I always got to complain, but that's just because they're cranks. And they've been cranks for years.

It's not that old age makes them cranky. It's just that they're always a little cranky. They're not calm and peaceful. I mean, as the elder statesman of this podcast, I am here to tell you, lads, that it's true that with age, passions mellow, they simmer, and they no longer clutch and grab your soul.

But you enter into this serenity they see for you. That's wonderful. I'm sorry, I spaced out. All right, so then he's like, hey, by the way, did you make your own money?

And the guy's like, yeah, I made some of my own money. Sorry, he's asking that? Yeah, he's like, most of my fortune is self-made. And he's like, weird, because you're actually pretty fun to hang around.

And most people that make their own money are not fun to hang around. I've got to read you this quote. This is one of my favorites. The makers of fortunes have a second love of money as a creation of their own, resembling the affections of authors for their own poems and of parents for their children.

Besides that, natural love of it for the sake of use and profit, which is common to them and all men. And hence, they're a very bad company, for they can talk about nothing but the praises of wealth. So if you make your own money, just like an author makes his own poems, you have a certain attachment to it. It's true.

It's true, maybe? No. The only thing that's true, you don't think people make their own money or... I think people who make their own...

So I'm contrasting people who make their own money versus those who are born into money. Is that the thing he's making? I think I prefer people who have made their own money. They at least, I mean, they did something, like they earned that.

And so even though luck is a huge part of it, it's an interesting story how they made it. They're hardworking, they don't have the same entitlement that some people can have, that they're given everything that they have. Yeah, sure. I don't agree.

But they're tense. Depends on how they make their money. Yeah. So Socrates asks, well, what do you think is the greatest benefit you've gotten from your cash, especially in your old age?

And he says, well, when you get old, you stop worrying about a lot of things and you start thinking about, well, you're going to kick it soon. And so, like, have you wronged anybody? Have you done anything horrible to other people? Think about, you know, your relations and the things that really matter in life.

And he says, the greatest thing that is given to me is hope. And then he quotes it again. He says, hope, he says, cherishes the soul of him who lives in justice and holiness and is given to the gods what their due was, right? The sacrifice is because I was never too poor to give them.

So he's like, for that reason, like, that's really nice. I know that I was just in my dealings partially because I had enough money to go around and I never had to be dirty about it. And this quote, I think, is where everything begins in Plato, in the Republic. Because right there, cherishes the soul of him who lives in justice and holiness.

And that's the question that Socrates asks is, what do you mean by justice? What's justice? And that's the question that all of the Republic revolves around. Recephalus is like, oh, I'm getting kind of tired.

Well, he says it. He says, no, he gives a definition. He gives a definition. He says it's, let me see if I can find it.

Is it helping your friends and hurting your enemies? Is that his definition? Well, Plato kind of asks, he says, justice, what is it? To speak the truth and to pay your debts?

No more than this? Because that's what he implies. I spoke the truth. I paid my debts.

I didn't have to lie to anybody. And he says, is that all that justice is? Is it just paying your debts and speaking the truth? And so the kind of talking replies, and the better definition they give is, he really meant to say that justice is giving to each man what is proper to him.

And this he termed a debt, right? Giving to each man what is proper. That's justice. How do you guys go about that?

Have you seen problems? I think it's a pretty good definition of justice being giving what is owed. I don't know if I agree that it's a debt necessarily. I guess it's a debt in that if you say something that has to be paid, that makes it a debt.

But yeah, justice is giving. Yeah, that seems reasonable. It's hard. Yeah, it seems reasonable.

I agree. I like it as a definition. It's hard to sort of figure out. Well, if you're trying to create a standard, I guess, is justice individually calibrated to each person versus can you have a just system, a just, like, Thomas, let's say that you're in dire poverty and you steal to survive.

I am affluent and I steal just to be a punk. So in one sense, justice should be that we both get the same sentence because we both did the same action. But in another sense, it would be more just if I, doing it out of just malicious intent, got a harsher sentence and you did it and you got less of a sentence. This is like Jean Valjean, right?

This is Les Mis. So, I mean, which one is the true justice in that situation? Yeah, so I guess, so, A, to your question, a problem of using this definition is the fuzziness of it. So figuring out what that justice is and if it can be consistent.

So that's what Graham, I think, is pulling out. Sure. Yeah, well, this definition is bad, obviously, because Socrates is about to pull it apart. Like, otherwise, the book would just be over.

Like, guys, we nailed it. We got it. And only a few pages into book one. So there's some problems.

Socrates, uh, the, well, Cephalus, yeah, you're right, he's like, ah, I'm kind of tired. So he takes off and he's going to argue for him. And then, as an old man move, I mean, that is, for sure, here's my opinion, actually. And then, so, play over.

takes it on and he says, okay, so we're supposed to pay our debts. Socrates. Socrates. Socrates.

Socrates. Socrates. Socrates. It's like a retweet.

Oh, you're right. Wait, no. It's worse than that. The Republic.

Greatest retweets of all time. It's just a compendium. All right. So he says, okay, so Graham, say you're my buddy, right?

And you come and you're like, hey, would you do me a favor and hold on to these guns? I'm like, yeah, I'll watch your guns for you. I appreciate it. If you're like moving and stuff and your new apartment doesn't really allow guns and then you're, and then you store my guns for a bit.

Yeah, I store your guns. Great. And then you go totally bananas. Like your brain breaks.

You've been like eating cat food and you break all your relationships. You break up with your girlfriend and she was great. I guess you're married. So you divorce your wife and she's awesome.

So you're clearly insane. And you come and you're like, can I have back my guns? What would you term the guns other than the debt? I don't know.

Okay. So he's not owed the guns. I mean, I know it's a personal property. It is a debt that I owe him.

Give me my guns, maybe. Yeah, but you're insane, Graham. I'm not going to give you your guns. Like, so, and maybe the deeper question is like, is this the same Graham as before?

Because in a significant way, it's not. I made a debt with reasonable Graham, who is a charming, wonderful person, and now crazy Graham is coming back and I don't like him. So you're not turning a debt because he's a different person? DNA would say otherwise.

That's complicated. The cells in your body change. Anyway, this is a different conversation. But in some significant way, he's not the same person he was before.

Well, I mean, we can go way philosophical with it and say that moment to moment, moment. So by that, you're going to have to say any of your debts and then every society breaks down if we want to hang out there. As long as he doesn't shoot people. You anarchists.

You're saying my potentialities have changed. I have a higher potential for like crazy violence. Yeah. So are you saying it's, it is just to not give me back my guns?

Correct. How's that just? Maybe it's not just, maybe it's prudent, but it's denying justice. I don't remember if this is in the public, but at some point, the secret question is, you know, are there one virtue or many virtues?

Maybe that's my problem here is I'm complaining multiple virtues. Maybe justice would say, give it back. Well, if this is the definition of justice, certainly something is broken, right? If the definition is flatly to pay your debts, and this is clearly a debt, then you should not in your right mind pay it, right?

It would not be just to do so. Just, justice is simply paying your debts doesn't seem big enough to encapsulate what we feel like we mean when we talk about justice. Yes. Yeah, sure.

Or justice is not operating alone. Like, yeah, justice needs to be prepared. Oh, you're such a recitalian. I'm okay with that.

Sorry. Okay. And then they say, all right, well, what if it's just doing good to friends and evil to enemies, right? What if that's the definition?

Good to friends and evil to enemies. Nah. Because like, there's a way of going too far in evil to enemies that is unjust. That is just cruelty.

Or a way that when you say good to friends, sometimes friends need to be challenged. They need something that would look like bad, but it's actually for their good. That's for their good. I mean, like, you are doing good.

It's just that they might be a little too short-sighted to see it. But there are other problems, right? It's the same of, so what I would perceive as good, the friend might not perceive as good. What an enemy might perceive as good.

Like, we run into the same problem of agreeing to what is good and bad. So we'll get there. Right. Problems of perception.

The first problem is that, like, say you're sick, right? Do you want a just man or do you want a really good physician, even if he's a little corrupt? Good physician? Yeah.

Say you are going to go sailing. Do you want a just man? Like, would you rather have him or just someone who's really good at sailing, even if he's a little bit of a dirtbag? A dirtbag sailor.

Can't I get a just and a good sailor? I mean, maybe. What if you need to buy a horse? Do you want a guy who knows horses?

Or do you want, like, do you want me to come along? I'm pretty just. Can I come along again? You sure could.

We'd have a wonderful time. I would not buy that horse, but... Yeah, exactly. So Socrates is like, so it seems like justice is only good when you don't need to do anything else.

Like, in times of health and peace and not need to buy horses, that's the only time that justice is useful? Okay, maybe. Yeah, sure. So that's an extra complication.

And then he also says, so what if you are mistaken about who your friends are, right? What if you think this guy's friend and he's actually sort of a dirtbag, right? And you do good to him, but you're actually doing good to your enemies. Yeah, like someone who doesn't give you your guns back.

Yeah, seriously, it's okay. Yeah, for sure. He's probably a dirtbag. I hate you.

I definitely have his guns and I'm keeping him. And you're going to give him back? Yeah, so here, I'll read you a quote. So let's see the consequence.

Many a man who is ignorant of human nature has friends who are bad friends. In that case, he ought to do harm to them. And he has good enemies whom he ought to benefit. But if so, we should be saying the opposite of that, if you are, say, I'm a thief, right?

Are my friends good men? No, well, if they're silly thieves as well. They're not good men. Yeah, they're not good men.

Are they my enemies? No, they're your friends when you said that. But they bring you vice. Like, they're letting me live in this life as a thief.

I mean, this is what your mom says. You think they're your friends. Exactly. You think they're your friends, but I am mistaken because they're doing harm to me.

They're letting me live in a vicious life. So that's the problem, right? We want to do an extra problem there. And he also says, well, what about doing harm to your enemies?

That seems right. Should we injure anyone? No. And he says, okay.

It's a fun little thought experiment. He says, when horses are injured, are they improved or deteriorated? Deteriorated, yeah. Yeah, for sure, right?

That is to say, the good qualities of horses are lost, not the qualities of dogs, right? We don't lose dog qualities from the horse. We lose horse qualities from the horse. Correct, correct.

Yeah, and dogs are deteriorated in the good qualities of dogs and not of horses, right? You hurt a dog, it loses its dogness. How could it be otherwise, Socrates? Yeah.

This is so he's referencing that in the book, a lot of people that listen are like, oh, it can't be different. Of course, of course. Why, yes, Socrates. I can see no other way.

Yeah, fantastic. I certainly don't disagree. And then he says, now, so if you injure a man, what kind of qualities does he lose? Manly qualities, yeah.

And what quality is that? Justice, no. Well, that's what he says, right? You injure a man, he's going to lose the quality that's unique to men.

So therefore, he loses justice and will act unjustly? Is that the point? Yeah, so his point is, like, have you ever known any other art, the art of justice, to injure itself, right? If the art of painting, like, does its job, and then, ah, painting itself is hurt, like, making it worse.

So how can hurting your enemies be justice if it lowers the amount of justice in the world by acting? Exactly, yeah. Justice is kind of hurting itself, and it's this huge, big mess, and it doesn't work. And so we clearly should not render harm, so that doesn't work, and it's a problem.

So they're kind of stuck. And at this point, and this is one of my favorite things about book one, Thrasymachus pipes in. Do you remember Thrasymachus? I do remember Thrasymachus.

What's he about? Is Thrasymachus the one that's, um, uh, so I was confused with Glaucon. Glaucon is a favorable one, the one that loves Socrates. Thrasymachus is kind of like, thinks Socrates is a punk, and he comes in, and he asserts, like, just terrible things.

Justice is nothing else in the interest of the stronger. That's right. What are you looking at? Are you cheating?

Are you reading it? No, every episode, I pull up the Wikipedia page. Oh, what are you doing? You punk store.

You're cheating, now I'm going to ask a question, and you're like, well, here's the answer. So Thrasymachus pipes up, and he's like, he's just about had it for this whole conversation. He's like, man, I flippin' hate Socrates, and I really want to read it just to show you how entertaining all of this is. I won't read the whole thing, but I'll talk about, I'll do maybe what he says at first.

What folly, Socrates, has taken possession of you all? And why do you knock under to one another? I don't know what that phrase means, but, you know, maybe it's a lot. I say that if you want really to know what justice is, you should not only ask, but answer.

You should not seek honor to yourself in the reputation of an opponent, but have your own answer. For there's many a one who can ask and not answer. And now I will not have you say that justice is duty, or advantage, or profit, or gain, or interest. For this sort of nonsense will not do for me.

I must have clearness and accuracy. And then the narration says, I was panicked-stricken at his words, and could not look at him without trembling. Indeed, I believe that if I had not fixed my eye upon him, I should have been struck dumb. But when I saw his fury rising, I looked at him first, and was therefore able to reply to him.

And so he kind of talked about the knocking under thing. There are a lot of, in these platonic dialogues, some character just, like, has it with Socrates' questions, and, like, flips out and says similar things. He's just like, say what do you think? Yeah, he's like, Socrates is super annoying.

He really is. And I think he would say that about himself, right? He says he's a gap. Which is why I don't, like, Socratic dialogues should be taught in middle school, because every single middle schooler loves Socrates, because they are Socrates.

I was actually going to point out that Thersimachus reminds me of every snarky kid in every ninth grade class I've ever had. He's like, well, not about this, you're doing this, not this. And he just, you know, wants to make me look like a fool. And he might sometimes, because I might be.

And so he says, Socrates is like, so you asked me to define justice, but you told me, like, five things that I couldn't say it was. That's like asking me to say what is 12, but I'm not allowed to say it's three times four, or two times six, or any of those. And the guy's like, those aren't at all alike. Like, what about an analogy?

You're an idiot. And he's like, I'm not kidding. Socrates is being a punk right now. Yeah.

He's like, well, those cases aren't at all alike. And Socrates is like, look, if you want me to find the right answer, it might be one of those. You have to leave those open. Fair.

Anyways, he eventually says, justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger. This is Thersimachus. This is Thersimachus. And he kind of elucidates, because Socrates is like, what?

You mean, like, eating beef? It's like a giant beefy guy. So you're saying that this other guy that eats a whole lot of beef, we should eat beef, too, because he's really strong? I know.

It's so annoying. It's fascinating, though. Just to think about beef? No, just to think about even the ancient world, the idea of eating meat is associated with strength.

We talk about one really hefty guy. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And he says, so this hefty guy eats a lot of meat you should do? So, like, for me and you, Arnold uses growth hormones.

Therefore, that is justice. It means you're getting growth hormones. And he's like, clearly not. That's not what I'm talking about.

So here's the view in extent. And the different forms of government make laws democratical, aristocratical, tyrannical, with a view to their several interests. And these laws, which are made by them for their own interests, are the justice which they deliver to their subjects. And him who transgresses them, they punish as a breaker of the law and unjust.

So he's saying it's a relative thing. The people in power want to stay in power, and they want to develop some sort of system and perpetuate that system. And so they call what is healthy to the system just and what is unhealthy to the system unjust. And that is all that justice is.

Yes, he says, and that is what I mean when I say that in all states there is the same principle of justice, which is the interest of the government. And as the government must be supposed to have power, the only reasonable conclusion is that everywhere there is one principle of justice, which is the interest of the stronger. So who makes the laws? Government makes the laws.

The man. And the man is clearly out for himself. So clearly that is what justice is. Only the strong, right?

They succeed. There's nothing new. We must rip this system. Ren the vow of the system.

Ren the vow of the system. Yeah, so Therese KMFDM reference, by the way, listener. You don't know who that is. Google it.

What do I think about that? Do they say how old Therese KMFDM is? You think he seems young? He's called you.

Yeah, he's like carbon and energy symbol. Oh, he's trying to hear Red Nomechonsky for the first time. Yeah, yeah. He wants to carry the system down and thinks the system is better.

He's back to his small town for being in college this summer. He read one book in college and becomes edgy about it. Yeah, yeah, that's the system it is. You guys ever heard of Alice Shrugs?

So yeah, that is what I think of the system it is. He's my brand new favorite character. How do you guys feel about his concept? It's dumb.

It's cynical. It is cynical, yes. So in saying that there is one single justice, but that justice is like corruption, essentially. It's a cynical statement.

It allows him to not have to ask questions or learn about justice. He can just say, whatever is the norm here is bad because it is established only by power. But he seems to think it's great. Being powerful is awesome, so might as well be powerful and have your definition of justice to be justice.

Sure, but it is an immoral stance to say that it's only for the sake of power, that there's no actual good inside of justice. If it's true, all it sets up in this world is conflict. It's power circles between different ideas of justice. Right.

So you're saying it's like the evolutionary theory of justice. Yeah, or the very Nietzsche in world of power. What you need to be doing is getting your own power base and being able to survive, get your tribe, that kind of thing. So yeah, like I said, it's cynical.

It's just force. Yeah, it's just force. So of course, Plato has ways to poke holes in it, right? Plato, or sorry, Socrates.

Socrates pokes holes with more logical means. He says, okay, so the government's always going to make perfect laws. No. Always in their interest?

No. Has the government ever made a law that is not in its own interest? Yeah, they can do stupid things. Okay.

Or if the government can pass laws about regulating itself. I mean, there's also that... Like keeping interest rates perpetually low for generations. No, that was entirely different from the government.

Oh, that's fair. You're right. That's actually kind of crazy when you think about it. Anyway, let's keep going.

So he says, well, what if the interest of the stronger in that case would be to disobey the law they have given? So clearly your definition is a little bit goopy, right? If true justice would be to disobey the laws instead of obeying the laws that the stronger has given. Well, this is the problem when you have it be relative.

Everything, like the more it plays itself out, then it just comes down to each man is a decider or a creator of justice for him and herself. And so there's no justice. And so there's no justice or everything's justice or whatever. So for some of the cases, it's like, all right, fine.

I see they can make laws that don't really, you know, are in their own interest. But in that case, I would say that they are an imperfect ruler, right? They're not being strong in that moment. And so it's not the interest of the strong.

In that case, it's the interest of the weak. And then Socrates says, what do you appeal to to say that they're imperfect? No. Actually, Socrates kind of takes his left turn.

Socrates says, okay, all right, so fine. Maybe he's not strong when he makes laws against himself. It's not for your interest. Well, I get paid.

Well, that's a separate thing completely. The art of the physician, who is it? Oh, the actual thing that you were practicing. You're not a good physician at the end of it.

You feel great. Yeah, exactly. You are not necessarily like the art of being a physician, but the art of medicine is concerned with healing the patient, right? The art of the captain, right, is his sailors, right?

He wants to make sure that the sailors are doing their thing and the boat goes well. And he's always concerned with his subjects, not himself. What if you're out of a ruler? It's the same with the subjects, right?

You're saying the ruler should be concerned for, like, happy healthy subjects. Yeah, so his interest isn't in himself. His interest is firmly in the subjects. Is it not?

Is it always? No. It should be for the people he rules over that time. Yeah, he's saying that's what it should be.

Okay. Yeah. So, you disagree, like, it should be. That's what ruling is.

That shows the trust. Like, you are a perfect ruler. You are perfectly concerned only with your subjects rather than yourself. So your interest is in your subjects, right?

Well, your interest is in a healthy system. Yeah. I mean, you are also part of it. You're part of it, too.

So, like, his system benefits you. But that doesn't matter. Okay. How do you think Percynical replies to this?

That's a great ideal that rulers actually only care about power. Another cynical statement. So basically he says, and he goes on to describe how the just, right, you and I, when we go to the marketplace, we're probably going to come out the worst, other than an unjust man. Right?

Why? Because he's going to steal from us. Oh, okay. Right?