The Drive Towards Virtue

What stands out in Plato’s framework of the four cardinal virtues—wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice—is their deep interconnection and interchangeability. In Book 4 of the Republic, these virtues contribute to an overarching ideal, a deep-seated yearning within us. What is this desire striving for? A sense of integration, a harmonious simplicity, or a unity of the self amidst its diversity and dynamic nature.

To be just, happy, and free requires us to seek, desire, and cultivate a way of being that not only reflects the forms of these virtues but also unites them into a cohesive whole.

In practical terms, for many of us (myself included), this state is more an aspiration than a permanent achievement. The ideal presence of justice should grow within our character. However, for many, including myself, moral progress often unfolds through sporadic insights, serendipitous encounters, and reflections arising from conflicts.

This journey involves piecing together remnants of childhood moral teachings, integrating wisdom from respected figures, and aspiring to emulate those whose actions and attitudes hint at something greater than we currently comprehend. Over time, we may begin to consciously align our choices and commitments with these moral frameworks, experimenting and experiencing their implications.

Merely wishing to be just does not inherently make someone a just individual. Such desires do not automatically transform other desires into just ones, whether considered in isolation or in their complex interactions. It is possible, as long as one is not entirely unjust, to long for justice and feel its absence within oneself. One might desire justice for various reasons, not all of which align harmoniously with the true essence of justice, which manifests most profoundly when it genuinely influences the matters it touches.

What does it mean for us to desire justice? Is it a longing to be perceived favorably by others, perhaps to soothe feelings of inadequacy or guilt, or to bolster one’s pride? Does justice become a characteristic one possesses?

Alternatively, could it be that the justice we seek is not merely an addition to ourselves but a transformative force that reshapes us, erasing old behaviors and patterns? In this perspective, to desire justice is to wish to be defined by it—to become a vessel for justice, which paradoxically leads to a loss of self. Yet, Plato's Republic illustrates a transformative process where one ultimately gains a deeper sense of self, achieving greater integration of the soul’s components—"becoming one rather than many."

Inner Conflict of the Soul

Plato's examination of the soul suggests an inherent lack of integration within the individual—an entirely reasonable expectation! His method involves identifying distinctions within what initially appears to be a simple unity, such as the soul or personality.

To say "at first glance" is a playful choice of words, as the soul is not a tangible entity. It is straightforward to identify and separate physical body parts, as they occupy distinct spaces. In contrast, psychological matters operate under a different logic, which cannot be simply reversed from the physical. The soul requires alternative methods of exploration and analysis. Socrates, as Plato's voice, prompts a crucial question:

> Whether we accomplish all our tasks with the same part of ourselves or if there are three distinct aspects—learning with one, feeling anger with another, and desiring nourishment and reproduction with yet another.

He does not propose this tripartite division randomly; he previously referenced a “Goldilocks” theory regarding geography, ethnicity, and psychological traits.

• Southern peoples, such as Egyptians and Phoenicians, are driven by the part of the soul linked to trade, agriculture, and craftsmanship, manifesting a love for wealth.
• Northern peoples, such as Thracians and Scythians, are spirited and passionate, prone to warfare and the pursuit of honor.
• In contrast, the Greeks are depicted as genuinely dedicated to philosophy, driven by a love of knowledge.

While Plato idealizes these characterizations—believing many Greeks to lack true virtue—this psychological framework resonates with the cultural context of his time.

Thus, we must consider whether these three parts, corresponding to three core desires that motivate human behavior, are indeed separate entities of the soul. Evidence for such a distinction lies in instances where these parts express conflicting desires or motivations. Recognizing contradictions within one’s thoughts and feelings indicates that different faculties are at play. The presence of conflict, rather than harmony, within the soul allows us to delineate otherwise invisible boundaries.

Conflicting Desires, Actions, and Attitudes

Plato’s exploration teaches us that understanding the soul requires more than detached contemplation; it demands reflection on our experiences and those of others. Engaging in dialogue—what Plato calls dialectic—facilitates this understanding.

What are the components of intention and action? What forms do these take? In other words, what are the foundational concepts of practical reasoning? Plato lists various opposed pairs:

• agreeing (epineuein) and disagreeing (ananeuein)
• striving for (epiesthai) and rejecting (aparneisthai)
• embracing (prosagesthai) and repelling (ap?theisthai)
• choosing for (ethelein) or against (m? ethelein)
• wanting (boulesthai) or not wanting (aboulein)

The goal of this enumeration is not to construct a comprehensive Platonic theory of action—an endeavor likely unattainable through the dialogues. Instead, it highlights the breadth of human orientations toward perceived goods and evils.

This distinction allows us to differentiate various desires. Importantly, while Plato identifies three parts of the soul (rational, spirited, and appetitive), the appetites (epithumiai) are numerous and directed toward diverse objects.

Hunger and thirst represent two distinct drives, while sexual desire adds another. The Republic and beyond present many more desires, including those for wealth, enjoyment, and various pleasures.

These conflicting desires can pull individuals in multiple directions, leading to internal turmoil. However, they also activate cognitive aspects. When we crave something, and it is presented to us, it triggers a response that asserts its perceived goodness and our obligation to pursue it.

What prevents us from indulging in every desire? It cannot solely be another desire. While that happens, we can identify a dominant desire that inhibits others. For example, someone may forgo sexual opportunities out of a greater desire to save money.

In situations where one cannot merely identify another stronger desire, a different conflict arises, revealing the rational, reflective component of the soul. This part engages in calculation, comparison, and reasoning. When functioning effectively, it assesses what is best for the person rather than simply what one wants.

Emotional Responses to Conflicts

The conflict between reason—represented by the desires a person ought to pursue—and appetites varies in intensity. Often, reason prevails, subduing and humbling appetites. In other cases, appetites may overwhelm reason or compel it to serve their interests. Individuals oscillating between these states experience a lack of integration within their personalities.

This conflict can evoke various emotions, including self-directed anger, shame, and a profound sense of wrongdoing beyond mere unfulfilled desires. Plato posits that this indicates the existence of a third soul component—thumos, or the spirited aspect of the soul.

This part is responsible for emotions, including anger, and desires for honor and recognition. It is also where we experience shame. When aligned with reason, or independently pursuing its values, thumos can restrain or overpower appetites. In some later psychological frameworks, thumos is likened to the will, which mediates between reason and appetite.

Plato asserts that children possess both thumos and appetites but lack reason, which develops over time. If thumos engages with moral values—right and wrong, justice and injustice—then individuals, whether rational or not, possess an inherent sense of morality that can conflict with appetitive desires.

What is required for individuals to discern and comprehend the distinct parts of their soul and their proper functions? Only reason, when operating as it should, can facilitate self-reflection and the ability to alter one’s patterns.

Individuals can experience conflicts within their souls through various modalities, reflecting the ongoing struggles of practical life. The absence of integration within personality, intentions, actions, and desires can cause deeper disturbances. However, without the guidance of reason, achieving understanding or genuine resolution remains elusive. Even noble desires, if not informed by reason, cannot lead to the integration of the self.

Thus, we return to the concept of justice. The harmonious arrangement of the soul, which Plato defines as justice, is essential for fostering just behaviors. Progress towards this ideal is contingent upon our desire for it and our understanding of its nature.

Deep within, we indeed crave justice, yearning for wholeness and unity rather than being fragmented. Yet, we also grapple with conflicting desires that may divert us from this goal. Hence, desire must be guided by knowledge, with appetites and spirited inclinations informed by rationality. Over time, as individuals cultivate a clearer understanding of justice, they can align more closely with its principles.

This path, as presented by Plato and the broader Platonic tradition, offers us a profound possibility for self-realization.

I’m Gregory B. Sadler, the president of **ReasonIO*, the editor of Stoicism Today, and a speaker, writer, and producer of popular YouTube videos on classical and contemporary philosophy. I teach at the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design and offer courses to the public through my Study With Sadler online academy. I also produce the Sadler’s Lectures podcast and co-host the Wisdom for Life radio show.*