I am interested in the relationship between
justice as a means and as an end because those aspects separately and their
standing with respect to one another are integrally—that is to say
inseparably—involved in how we think about ethics generally and in specific
cases.
For instance, recent, disturbing race-related violence by police officers toward certain citizens in the United States and then the assassination of 5 Dallas officers and the wounding of many other police and civilians raised complicated questions about what is right, fair, and valuable in itself, about the nature and extent of contemporary prejudices, and about the use of violence in service of conceptions of justice. Similarly, the recent decision by the U.S. Justice Department and its Federal Bureau of Investigation not to indict Hillary Clinton despite the overwhelming evidence of her violations of standard federal security procedure strikes many observers as unjust. This is so not only because the decision seems to contravene obvious desert (the FBI does not doubt what she did), but also because, notwithstanding Director Comey’s (knowingly erroneous) denial that positive intention is required for a violation of the law, it raises questions about whether some supposedly greater purpose like social and political harmony in an election year outweighs the upholding of the law for its own sake or even as a deterrent to future security mismanagement. Is justice, we might wonder, something good in itself and to be pursued for that reason, or because of the ranked purposes that it may serve?
United States citizens in 2016 are not the
first persons or society to entertain these questions. The ancient Greeks anticipated contemporary
Anglophones in this as in many areas, particularly Plato. It may be timely and to our profit then to
ask this: Is justice in his Republic an intrinsic and an instrumental
good, as Socrates promises to prove to his interlocutors? Or does
he only show that it is an instrumental good, in which case Glaucon's
ventrilloquism for Thrasymachus (i.e., voicing the latter’s position for the
sake of argument) is more on the mark?
In what follows I wish to explore this important
question about justice as an instrumental and a final good through the lens of Plato’s
Republic. Socrates contends that justice is both
intrinsic and instrumental. How does he
argue for that conclusion? How might this help contemporary societies
understand both justice and the proper relation and pursuit of various ethical,
social, and political goods?