Noble lie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In politics a Noble lie is a myth or untruth, often, but not invariably of a religious nature, knowingly told by an 'elite' to maintain social harmony, particularly the social position of that elite. The noble lie is a concept originated by Plato as described in The Republic. However, the concept has far greater scope and has been used by many commentators to talk about much more modern issues in politics. A noble lie, although it may benefit all parties, is different from a white lie since a white lie does not cause discord if uncovered whereas noble lies are usually of a nature such that they would do so.
Contents |
[edit] Plato's republic
 |
This article does not cite any references or sources. (April 2008) Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. |
In the fictional account of Plato's republic, he talks of a stratified society, where it is believed that there are different types of metal put into the inhabitants' 'blood' by the Gods.
Rulers have gold, auxiliaries have silver, farmers have bronze. Most children of rulers have gold, but some will have silver or bronze and would be demoted to lower classes, whereas some farmers or auxiliaries would be born with gold and promoted.
Plato claimed that even though this would be false, that if the people believed it, then an orderly society would result. This is his noble lie.
Plato preferred this to the concept of democracy which he called mob rule.[citation needed]
The republic also seemed to say that different lies should apply to the governors for example:
The noble lie will inform them that they are better than those they serve and it is, therefore, their responsibility to guard and protect those lesser than themselves. We will instill in them a distaste for power or privilege, they will rule because they believe it right, not because they desire it. . .
[edit] Modern views on noble lies
[edit] Karl Popper
Karl Popper accused Plato of trying to base religion on a noble lie as well. In The Open Society and Its Enemies, Popper remarks, “It is hard to understand why those of Plato’s commentators who praise him for fighting against the subversive conventionalism of the Sophists, and for establishing a spiritual naturalism ultimately based on religion, fail to censure him for making a convention, or rather an invention, the ultimate basis of religion.” Religion for Plato is a noble lie, at least if we assume that Plato meant all of this sincerely, not cynically. Popper finds Plato's conception of religion to have been very influential in subsequent thought.[1]
[edit] Leo Strauss
Strauss noted that thinkers of the first rank, going back to Plato, had raised the problem of whether good and effective politicians could be completely truthful and still achieve the necessary ends of their society. By implication, Strauss asks his readers to consider whether it is true that noble lies have no role at all to play in uniting and guiding the polis. Are myths needed to give people meaning and purpose and to ensure a stable society? Or can men dedicated to relentlessly examining, in Nietzsche's language, those "deadly truths," flourish freely? Thus, is there a limit to the political, and what can be known absolutely? In The City and Man, Strauss discusses the myths outlined in Plato's Republic that are required for all governments. These include a belief that the state's land belongs to it even though it was likely acquired illegitimately and that citizenship is rooted in something more than the accidents of birth. Seymour Hersh observes that Strauss endorsed noble lies: myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.[2][3]
Shadia Drury says that Strauss believed that dissembling and deception "is the peculiar justice of the wise", and while Plato believed that his Noble lie was based on a moral good, "Strauss thinks that the superiority of the ruling philosophers is an intellectual superiority and not a moral one (Natural Right and History, p. 151)." and then as she puts it: "Strauss is the only interpreter who gives a sinister reading to Plato, and then celebrates him."[4]
[edit] Irving Kristol
"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn't work."[3][5]
It has been suggested that Kristol's and other neoconservatives' support of creationism/Intelligent design is an example of that in action.[3]
[edit] Shadia Drury
"Strauss's disciples have inherited a superiority complex as well as a persecution complex. They are convinced that they are the superior few who know the truth and are entitled to rule. But they are afraid to speak the truth openly, lest they are persecuted by the vulgar many who do not wish to be ruled by them. This explains why they are eager to misrepresent the nature of Strauss's thought. They are afraid to reveal that Strauss was a critic of liberalism and democracy, lest he be regarded as an enemy of America. So, they wrap him in the American flag and pretend that he is a champion of liberal democracy for political reasons - their own quest for power. The result is that they run roughshod over truth as well as democracy."[6]
[edit] Sea of Faith
"The Sea of Faith Network (SoF) aims to explore and promote religious faith as a human creation"
Although arguably not an organisation based on the noble lie, many of their members are believed to be from various church groups that no longer believe, but continue to espouse the beliefs as a form of what they believe to be positive social control and continue to hold positions in many religious organizations.
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ http://www.positiveliberty.com/2007/07/open-society-vi-on-religion-as-a-noble-lie.html
- ^ Seymour M. Hersh, "Selective Intelligence", The New Yorker, May 12, 2003, accessed June 1, 2007.
- ^ a b c Brian Doherty, "Origin of the Specious: Why Do Neoconservatives Doubt Darwin?", Reason Online, July 1997, accessed February 16, 2007.
- ^ Noble lies and perpetual war: Leo Strauss, the neocons, and Iraq | openDemocracy
- ^ Atheism Central for Secondary Schools - the noble lie
- ^ The Noble Lie- Shadia Drury
