8.5: The Oligarchic Soul

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 94561

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

See 553a-555b. Socrates imagines the oligarchic man coming to be when his timocratic father, a lover of honor, is falsely accused, tried, convicted, and stripped of his property. The son, feeling the bite of poverty and suffering a general disillusionment with the pursuit of honor, gives himself over to money-making. Seeking material security, the appetitive part takes command of the soul and subordinates the other parts. The spirited part has its competitive energies turned to the arena of the marketplace, and the rational part is reduced to contemplating the equivalent of Franklin’s maxims, the Wall Street Journal, and Fortune magazine. Socrates explains that it is really only a portion of the appetitive part that rules in the oligarchic person, the “necessary appetites.” By this he means those desires we are compelled by nature to satisfy that are beneficial to our health and “useful where work is concerned.” (See 558d-559d.) Our desire for nourishing food is an example. As oligarchic people see it, health is a good investment, and so they eat well, exercise regularly, and don’t smoke. If they are like Cephalus and believe the gods can help arrange a desirable afterlife, then they take part in the appropriate liturgies. One thing Socrates is willing to say for oligarchic people is that they are generally trustworthy, this being good for business. Justice, of a certain conventional sort, pays. But when injustice can be done with impunity – when, say, an opportunity for undetectable tax evasion happens to present itself – then oligarchic people cannot be counted on (to do the right thing). Also, as Socrates wryly observes, although they are basically thrifty and conservative, most of them give in to their “dronish,” unnecessary appetites “when they have other people’s money to spend.”

Can a person with an oligarchic soul be happy (possess eudaimonia)? As the Republic draws to a close, one should recall the challenge Socrates is trying to meet. He is to prove that justice is desirable for its own sake, so desirable, in fact, that it is more desirable to be a just man, falsely accused and facing the prospect of being tortured to death, than an unjust man, believed to be just and therefore honored. How bad is the oligarchic life? How good, by comparison, is the aristocratic?
The oligarchic person has “dronish,” unnecessary appetitive desires, but these, as a rule, are kept well in check. Would Socrates consider such a person temperate (possessing sophrosune)?
Why does Socrates think the oligarchic soul is less just than thetimocratic?
In distinguishing necessary from unnecessary appetites is Socrates suggesting that the appetitive part of the soul is really more than one part? How might Socrates go about arguing that this is not the case?