Lies, Stories, and Arguments: Can A Callipolis Exist Without the Noble Lie?
Tonguç SeferoğluDuring the second half of 20th century, Plato’s presentation of a theory of citizenship and government in the Republic has been accused of being totalitarian, racialist, and anti-egalitarian. In particular, the use of a noble lie as a propaganda tool to persuade citizens about a congenital politic and economic hierarchy has rightly been subjected to intense criticism. Although Plato would not be completely acquitted of all the charges against him, linguistic and logical analyses of the epistemic status and persuasive power of the noble lie can furnish one with a deeper comprehension of Plato’s philosophical purpose. I argue that (i) the noble lie is devised to motivate those who are educated to become philosopher-rulers to work for the good of the Callipolis and its citizens and that (ii) Plato did not expect the noble lie to be enough to persuade either the philosopher-rulers or the rest of the citizens about the goodness and advantages of the government of the Callipolis. This story can be used either for having those of the common people who read Plato’s Republic understand his ideal or for persuading the future citizens of Callipolis who are unpersuadable by rational arguments, should that ever come to be. In conclusion, this study seeks to establish Plato’s awareness of the facts that the noble lie does not ensure the foundation or stability of the Callipolis and that the noble lie is thus neither sufficient nor necessary for Plato’s political ideal.
Yalanlar, Hikayeler ve Argümanlar: Asil Yalansız Bir Kallipolis Mümkün Mü?
Tonguç Seferoğlu20. yüzyılın ikinci yarısında Platon’un Devlet’te ortaya koyduğu vatandaşlık ve yönetim teorisi totaliter, ırkçı ve eşitlikçilik karşıtı olmakla suçlanmıştır. Özellikle ulus ve yurttaş kimliği yaratmak için yönetici elitler tarafından kurgulanması öngörülen asil yalan hikayesinin vatandaşları doğuştan gelen politik ve ekonomik bir hiyerarşiye inandırmak için bir propaganda aracı gibi kullanılması haklı olarak yoğun eleştirilere maruz kalmıştır. Platon’u yukarıdaki suçlamalar karşısında tamamen aklamayacak olsa bile, asil yalanın epistemik statüsü ve ikna etme gücü hakkında yapılacak dilsel ve mantıksal analizler bize Platon’un felsefi amacına dair kapsamlı bir resim sunabilir. Bu bağlamda, (i) asil yalanın filozof-yönetici olmak için eğitilecekleri Kallipolis’in ve vatandaşların iyiliği için çalışmaya yönlendirmek için kurgulanmış olduğu; (ii) Platon’un bu yalanla ne kendini tamamıyla gerçekleştirmiş filozof-yöneticilerin ne de halkın geri kalanının Kallipolis’in yönetim biçiminin iyiliği ve yararı konusunda ikna olmasını beklemediği iddia edilecektir. Bu hikâye hem Devlet’i okuyacak sıradan halkın Platon’un idealini anlaması için hem de eğer bir gün Kallipolis kurulacaksa rasyonel argümanları anlayamayacak vatandaşları ikna etmek için kullanılabilir. Sonuç olarak, bu makale Platon’un asil yalanın ideal devletinin ne kuruluşu ne de istikrarlı bir şekilde sürdürülmesi için güvence sağlayamayacağının farkında olduğunu, asil yalanın politik ideali için ne zorunlu ne de gerekli olduğunu göstermeyi hedeflemektedir.
This paper aims to examine epistemologically the noble lie, put forward how serious Plato was concerning the noble lie, and analyze whether the noble lie is sufficient and necessary for the creation of the Callipolis. In this respect, I argued that (i) the noble lie was devised to motivate the educate populace to become philosopher-rulers who work for the good of the Callipolis and its citizens and that (ii) Plato did not expect the noble lie to be sufficient at persuading either the philosopher-rulers or the rest of the citizens about the goodness or advantages of the government of the Callipolis. The noble lie has two basic components: (a) the genetic story (R. 414d1-414e5) and (b) the hierarchical story (R. 415b1-415c7).
According to the genetic story, all citizens are earthborn brothers and sisters, and the life one assumes to be living is just some dreamlike state. The target of this claim involves the first generation of citizens, because later generations would no longer be first-degree relatives. Here, one needs to observe that persuading a child about their family and the rest of society being earthborn brothers and sisters is epistemologically different than convincing people that their life experiences are not real. In the latter case, people should accept that they cannot distinguish the real world from the dream world. This stresses the difficulty of persuading people about the noble lie, because they must acknowledge that cognitive apparatuses such as sense perception, memory, and imagination are neither secure nor reliableThe Hierarchical story claims that the souls of the citizens are made out of the distinct metal alloys of gold, silver, or a mix of bronze and iron. A gold citizen naturally belongs to the ruling class, a silver one to the assistants of rulers, and an admixture of iron and bronze to the class of craftsmen and farmers. This story is clearly in line with the tripartite theory of the soul and the classes of society discussed elsewhere in the Republic. In Book IV (436a-444e), Socrates argues that the human soul is divided into three parts (i.e., rational [λογιστικόν], appetitive [ἐπιθυμητικόν], and spirited [θυμοειδές]) and that these three parts correspond to the three classes of society (i.e., the rulers, the auxiliaries, and the farmers and craftsmen).
For Socrates, two kinds of stories exist: true (ἀληθές) logoi and false (ψεῦδος) logoi. The false stories are muthoi [myths] (R. 377a4) and also involve two sorts of falsehoods: true falsehood (ἀληθῶς ψεῦδος) and not altogether pure falsehood (οὐ πάνυ ἄκρατον ψεῦδος (R. 382b7-c1). Both the gods and humans hate true falsehoods (R. 382c3-4). Although the gods hate the other type of falsehood, those with cognitive competence can use such lies as a drug and make them beneficial by having them approximate the truth as much as possible (ἀφομοιοῦντες τῷ ἀληθεῖ τὸ ψεῦδος ὅτι μάλισταR. 382c10-d3). Socrates presents “those ancient events involving the gods about which we don’t know the truth (R. 382d1-2)” as an example of not altogether pure falsehoods. Also, the noble lie involves that kind of a story and is not altogether a pure falsehood. Such falsehoods do not harm the soul because only imitate the true lies mirrored in the words (R. 382b9-10). Therefore, the philosopher-rulers’ souls are not harmed because they know the story they are telling to be a falsehood that will benefit the state as a result of their good intentions.
Socrates defined the noble lie as a contrivance (R. 414b8, μηχανή). But what roles and meanings could this μηχανή have? The literal meaning of μηχανή is machine. Figuratively, it can also carry the meanings of a scheme or contrivance, as it is used in the famous phrase ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός [Deus ex machina]. In the Republic, Plato aims to convince people of the benefit and goodness of the Callipolis, yet he is aware that many will not easily accept his more rational arguments. In this case, Plato has a shortcut solution (i.e., μηχανή/device) up his sleeve: the noble lie. However, to think that Plato prefers rational arguments for persuading people about the Callipolis being the best kind of government would be a reasonable and just thought. In conclusion, Plato tries to convey a philosophical idea with the noble lie, as he often does. The caution that Socrates shows while discussing the noble lie is quite understandable because he may have felt embarrassed about using such a grand /blatant lie regarding the political structure of the Callipolis. In conclusion, the noble lie does not ensure the stable existence of the Callipolis; therefore, it may only be meant to play a small supporting role in explaining and achieving his political ideal.
