Centering upon the nature of justice – what justice is, its nature, its design as a virtue, and the implications of living justly – Plato establishes a doctrine of ideal governing that serves as the basis of individual character. In defining a just individual as the result of a utopian design of the education and practice of justice, Plato allows for the establishment of socially governing principles that resultantly allow for the outlining of what a just man is. From the initial proposal that the visibility of justice is greater within cities – a question of civic justice that expels the proposal that justice stems from the providing of what one is owed – Plato successfully establishes a continuing analogy of the relation between civic justice and personal justice; “Plato’s political utopia is a metaphorical device for clarifying justice and virtue in the individual soul” (Morrison 233). Central to his claim is the understanding of the plasticity of the human soul that enables tempering in the presence of righteous circumstance. In Plato’s establishment of strict course requirements for all citizens, an account of the building of the world of forms – enabling the premise that knowledge holds fundamental value – he assists in the creation of a manual for the purpose of achieving arête, “or anyone who wants to look at it and make himself its citizen on the strength of what he sees (Plato 592b). In the association of politics with ethics, and philosophy with quantitative knowledge, Plato allows the ordinary to echo the achievement of philosopher-kings in a cycle of the maturation of justice and principle, as even principals of daily lives serve as members within the general society – an idea that is analogous to the concept that such objects mirror the practice of building virtue by achieving proper character, from the illumination of environment and character formed by the philosopher-kings. Subsequently, Plato demonstrates that both the soul and utopia are established with distinct structural certainty in the basis of the tripartite – within the city, the hierarchy of philosopher-kings, soldiers and producers and within the soul as the rational, the spirited and the moderate. This tripartite division serves as the basis of the just city, and in following that the city serves as the result of this human basis, the analogy continues that the soul must contain these same fundamental divisions that in turn serve as the basis of a just man. In order for the function of a just city, the three classes must thrive within individual classifications generating a balance of civic community, which mirrors the necessity of balance within the classifications of the human soul in order for the assumption of just principle. In keeping the regulation of balance within the city and the soul, both necessitate regulation and strict principle that function within collaboration and structure. Thus, the analogous nature of the city and soul serves as the initial building of the function of the just man within the intrinsic divisions, the resultant natural hierarchy of the balance such, and civic community leading to a finding of arête.
In expansion of the three classifications of the divisions of the tripartite soul – appetite (moderation), rationality and spirituality – the divisions of the soul of the just man come into focus. Originally, it was understood that upon the creation of man, Mother Nature imbedded a mixture of gold, silver and bronze into humanity – signifying both their characters and their professions. For instance, those holding greater amounts of gold within their soul were destined for a life as philosopher-kings, while those bearing greater silver were to become the guardians of the acropolis, and those exuding brass served as the craftsmen and economic backbone of society. As each metal levels a distinct quality upon its person – thus creating the balance of power desired within the utopia – it does so through the enabling of various properties of virtue through each respective form. For craftspeople, their enabled virtue was one of appetite that through moderation enabled civic virtue. The soldiers and warriors, were granted the virtue of spirit, that enabled a response of honor and the continued preservation of courage. In terms of the guardians of the utopia, their essence of the virtue of rationality granted both just wisdom and judgment in due knowledge. In order for a man to be just, the ‘metallic composition’ of the tripartite soul must be deemed in balance – each serving as an equal segment of thought, action and nature. Their actions serve as harmonious gathering of the governing of the soul – each ruling their individual segment and preventing the usurpation of the others over the greater portion of the soul. Insomuch, a just man is man is constituted by his use of discretion and control over the tripartite divisions of his soul – enabling a life of balance within the virtues of moderation, spirit and rationality. However, the presence of these virtues, while in balance, do not constitute being just. The establishment of justice within a person calls for the practice and implementation of action in its continued process into becoming habit, as justice is labeled as, “establishing the parts of the soul so that they dominate and are dominated by each other according to nature” (Plato 444d) – the word “establishment” signifying the presence of habit.
In keeping with Plato’s definition of the qualities and behaviors of a just man, Protagoras of Abdera (c. 490-420 BCE), the founder of the Sophist movement and prominent expert of rhetoric, exemplifies this delineation of the character. The main subject of Plato’s dialogue Protagoras, Protagoras belongs to the original, older classification of Sophists – members of which were known principally for knowledge and the adherence to established moral codes rather than for the collection of fees for the distribution of knowledge, and the obstruction of traditional values through cleverness. With such, Protagoras is generally aligned with Pericles, as both served as the main drafters of the constitution for the Athenian colony of Thurii in 444 BCE. Protagoras arguably served as the first philosopher to offer a systematic treatment of ethics and politics – similar in methodology to that used by Plato within The Republic – and also, as one of the period’s principal instructors of rhetoric and oration. Prior to his days as a man devoted to thought and divulging wisdom, Protagoras was prescribed to humble beginnings as a manual laborer – contradictory of the traditional image of a member of civic engagement – and thus disparaged from the participatory nature of government and social responsibility. However, upon discovery of his frugality with the materials of his trade required for bundling, Democritus – a profound thinker in the realm of physics – entailed him to a higher level of education in the emerging Athenian arts of science, language and philosophy. In the development of his own career as an educator, Protagoras established a process of bringing language in its multiple forms to rural areas traditionally home to those of lower class – those in a similar state of his own humble beginnings. This enabling of those within a lower stature to have greater access beyond prior capabilities, “Protagoras challenged this hierarchical system, not only through his own tutelage of the poor, but also by developing governmental policy subsidizing public education for the colony of Thurii” (Silvermintz 8). Likewise, in accordance with his social teachings of the poor, Protagoras was a firm believer in the quest of democratic governance. All the more, Protagoras, though known for collecting exuberant fees in exchange for rhetoric teachings, Protagoras emphasized “the range of ethical behaviors that result from the socialization process substantiates the conviction that ethics is teachable” (Silvermintz 27). Resultantly, Protagoras’ recognition of humble beginnings, the building of knowledge through aiding those of lower stature, and the inclusion that ethical characters stem from a process of socialization, serves as a philosophical determinant of the buildings of a just man in terms of Plato – using his knowledge as a key for self-righteousness and the building of principle within those willing.
Translating to modern society, Judge W. James O’Neill exemplifies such virtues as laid out by Plato through his work, his charisma, and his exuding of principle within his character. As expressed by those closest to him, Jim radiated wit, compassion, humility and kindness to all who he encountered, no matter the walk of life they came from or his reputation for being “no deal O’Neill” – as “he wasn’t about titles. He was just a genuinely warm guy who would always extend his hand and say hello. He always carried dog treats in his pockets” (Family Eulogy 4-5). All the more, Jim extended such ideals beyond the communities and places he had integrated himself into – wanting to impact their understanding beyond social impressions. In raising a new generation of lawyers and judges through mentorship with the Judicial Education Committee, O’Neill “taught those around him to understand the difference between genuine evil and human frailty” – a talent that lead to the awarding of the St. Thomas More Award for the cherishment of “his wit, warmth, generosity, and commitment to the law” (Chapman Cole & Gleason Obituary). Similarly, Justice O’Neill also served as an army lab technician specialist during the Vietnam Crisis – following the path of life that was laid upon him, never losing the understanding that “’This war is wrong, but I’ve got to get through it’” (Just Trying to Get Through 14). Through such understanding of the Justice’s personality, it is no wonder that James viewed the mission of his work to be “to cast his legal work in the context of a life of service for the common good” while in all he did wanting to live by the words of Micah 6:8, “To do justice, And to love mercy, And to walk humbly with your God (Fr. Hession Notes). Through his struggles of war, his relations with humanity and his understanding of the progression of human nature, Jim exemplifies the principles of a just man within the 21st century – one of courage, wisdom regarding one’s place, and compassion for the benefit of civilization.
In comparison of Protagoras and Justice James O’Neill, both men embody the statutes of virtue of human justice – yearning for the advancement of society in the understanding of compassion, behavior and moderation. However, their approaches differ. Protagoras, though encompassing an understanding of the progressive thought of Athenian society, paid no vantage to the nature of deity involvement – a stabilizing factor of Athenian culture. On the other hand, Justice O’Neill continued in the instruction of the principles that guided the perpetuation of justice among the determining population, while also maintaining an understanding that certain unifying aspects of society are better left unadjusted. Further, both Protagoras and Justice O’Neill cared for humanity, however their expectation of receipt varied. Protagoras, though expounding knowledge to those willing to listen, over-indulged within the gifts of those willing to learn at the greatest cost. Conversely, Justice O’Neill never concerned himself with the titles of his craft, but rather the repercussions of his trade and yearning to be figure to others filled with compassion, and humility for all those he encountered. Though mimicking the principles of Plato as established within The Republic, the men do not hold equal, harmonious balance over their soul’s divisions. With such contrasting of the personalities, it is clear that while the definitions and inherent nature of justice remain equivalent, their overall institution has culminated into a more complete and wholesome definition. Incorporating the understanding that a just character must hold within them a balance of appetite, spirit and rational is inherent, but coupled with this is the new understanding that the temperament of the individual must also remain with the presence of outside forces – an attempt at the recognition and remembrance of one’s roots in order for the benefit of others in those same positions. This zenith of stability progression, understanding and remembrance form the basis of the true understanding of the innate ability to remain as a just character.