Analysis Of Socrates 'No True Scotsman'

In the mind of Plato’s Socrates, the just city is one which abides by the rules of “The Myth of the Metals”. This lie that the city is founded on not only is unjust, but unrealistic as well as falsely protected through a logical fallacy. Lying to the citizens of the newly found city is just in Socrates's understanding, although the myth is an injustice to every individual in the city. The human psyche does not allow a city’s societal structure to follow one that resembles a commune, while still having an upper class. The “No True Scotsman” fallacy protects the city and the myth from any form of critique. These three main points exhibit the flaws in Socrates's just city. As founder of this new city, Socrates suggests that the citizens be

One can claim that the city failed because it was not run by a true philosopher king because he gave into his id, or perhaps that if a revolt happened from the bronze class, it only occurred because they did not follow the protocol of what was set for them. What the defense fails to recognize is that there are reasons as to why the system fails, and that the definition of what was considered a just city needs to change. For the sake of the argument, if one were to accept the notion that it was because the philosopher king was not a true philosopher, one can beg the question if the city, is entirely possible. Human nature would certainly state that if in order to have a just city you must have a true philosopher king, have the spartan-like guardians who will not revolt, and a bronze working class who are willing to throw away any of their personal desire and freedom for the better of the city, then this idea will always fail. Humans are not perfect and they do give in to their primitive desires, such as power; even those who have left the cave and have dedicated their life to truth can find themselves craving animalistic desires, all because they are human, and that is what the alleged just city doesn’t factor