Response To Raphael Demos's Analysis Of Plato

2. Demos’ Rebuttal The year after Sachs published his analysis of Plato’s arguments, Plato expert and Harvard Professor of Philosophy, Raphael Demos, published a response to Sachs’ article. This response has since formed one of the core arguments against Sachs’ determination and his views have been echoed by numerous scholars. What makes Demos’ argument palatable is his emphasis on the uniqueness of Platonic justice and on figuring out Plato’s logic in connecting it with vulgar justice.

Though he agrees with Sachs that Plato’s assumption that Platonically just men “will conform to the canons of vulgar morality” should be scrutinized, Demos does not condemn Plato’s argument straightaway. When in The Republic, Socrates jumps from speaking of normal justice towards others and begins to discuss justice as a personal virtue, Demos makes a point to discuss the technical difference between a fallacy and a lacuna. Demos states that the problem is not the conclusions Plato comes to, but rather the fact that he never stopped to fill in the gaps in his logic

He notes the uniqueness of Plato’s definition of justice and theorizes that in Platonic justice, it is not justice which has been changed, but rather its playing ground has been changed. Plato uses justice to mean harmony within a community, whether this community comprises parts of the soul or citizens within a republic. Demos focuses on the idea of ‘giving each its due’ in order to promote harmony. The failure to give one his due is the cause for injustice. Demos simplifies the solution to Sachs’ dilemma by proving through morality that vulgar justice stems from Platonic justice. He states that because the Platonically just soul can only be healthy through reason, and since “the concern of reason is that the good should be exemplified everywhere,” giving each his due becomes part of one’s self-fulfillment.