When Socrates asked us to explain what justice is I blushed. Not from embarrassment, thank you very much, but from exasperation. Anyone familiar with the real world understands justice is the advantage of the stronger. In fact, injustice on a grand scale often appears stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice. And while Socrates may imagine examples of justice in the form of wise rule, the refutation is incomplete. This is because Socrates is nothing more than the doubt inside your soul. It knows nothing but how to make you squirm.
But of this I could not convince the sophists at the Academy. My vindication must wait for the irresistible prejudices of middle-class common sense. By which in part I mean Aristotle. While the Academics fleeced and confused clients with unknowables (like what is justice? is the soul a harmony? and what does God’s bed look like?),1 the questions asked at the Lyceum were of a more practical nature (e.g., whether there is nothing that is neither always nor generally in whatever state it is).2 Jokes aside, for those seeking the nature of justice, what could be more compelling than the ice-cold logic of cause-and-effect?
To illustrate my point, consider the question presented. What is justice? By framing the question as whether certain types of governments are just, Socrates misleads. Instead, we should consider what makes a person just. Among other examples, we have the Great-Souled Man.3 For the benefit of the reader, who is no doubt much concerned with the nature of justice, I have taken great pains to translate this particular teaching to the practice of law. By this method, we may inch closer to the true nature of justice.
The Great-Souled Lawyer
Now we come to greatness of soul. The name itself shows that it is concerned with great things; let us, first, decide what they are.
An attorney is thought to be great-souled if they deserve much and claim their deserts. Counsel who makes the claim without deserving of it is a fool; and no person who displays virtue is foolish or stupid. And so, the great-souled lawyer (hereinafter, “GSL”) is as described above. It is true that the attorney who deserves little and claims just that is temperate; but they are not great-souled. Greatness of soul has to do with grandeur. If an attorney is undeserving but claims a great deal, they are vain; though not all people who claim more than their worth are vain. If an attorney claims less than their true deserts they are mean-spirited, whether their deserts are great or small, so long as they assign the value still lower.
With respect to scale, the GSL is at the extreme, but by virtue of behaving in the right way, the GSL is at the “mean” position; after all, the GSL claims their due, whereas the others either go to excess or fall short. If their deserts are great and they claim much, and if the term properly belongs to the attorney whose claims are greatest, they will be mainly concerned with one thing. “Being deserving” refers to external goods; and the greatest of these, we can say, is what we offer the gods, what people in high places strive for, above all — the reward of the finest actions. That is, “fees,” which is the greatest external good. Therefore, the GSL are those who behave in the right way about fees. It does not seem that any argument is needed to show GSLs are occupied with fees. It is fees that they claim above all else — the fees that they deserve.
The mean-spirited lawyer falls short, whether you take their own deserts as standard, or the claims of the GSL. The vain lawyer, however, is guilty of excess with regard to their own value, although not so when measured against the GSL. The latter, since their deserts are very great, will be the best of lawyers. Better lawyers deserve more than good lawyers; and so, those who are the best deserve the most. The attorney who is truly great-souled is necessarily good; greatness in every virtue would appear to be the mark. It would never be right for the GSL to run away in panic or commit an injustice. What would be the point of behaving disgracefully when nothing, in the eyes of the GSL, is truly great? If we look at all the virtues, it will seem quite absurd for the GSL not to be good. If an attorney is bad, they will not deserve fees, since being paid is the reward of virtue and is a tribute paid to good attorneys.
It seems then that greatness of soul is a sort of crowning grace of the virtues. It enhances them, and it is impossible without them. This is why it is difficult to be really great-souled, since it is impossible without being really good.
The GSL is mainly concerned with fees. When they receive great fees from good clients, they will be moderately pleased, since they will be getting their due or even somewhat less. The point is that no payment is adequate to complete virtue. The GSL will, however, accept the fees, simply because clients, nay people, have nothing more to offer them. The GSL will despise honor offered by just anybody and for insufficient reasons, since it is beneath their deserts. Similarly, the GSL will take no notice of dishonor, since it cannot rightly have any relevance to them. Money, alone, talks to the GSL.
As we said, the GSL is, above all, concerned with fees. It is also true that the GSL will react moderately to wealth, to power, and to all good or bad fortune, whenever they happen. When they have good fortune, they will not show excessive pleasure; nor will they be greatly pained by bad fortune. Even honor is not treated as the greatest importance. Power and wealth are desirable because of the honor they bring; at any rate, people who have them want to be honored for their sake. But the person who looks on honor as insignificant will also have the same attitude to other things; that is why the great-souled are thought to be arrogant, not least to a jury of some fool’s peers.
Good fortune, too, is thought to help with greatness of soul. People of good family and men of power and wealth are thought to deserve honor. They are in a superior position, and everything that is superior in any good quality is more deserving of fees. Such things make attorneys even greater-
souled, because they are paid by the best people. In the strict sense, only the good man should be honored, although the man who has both — goodness and good fortune — is thought to be more deserving of honor. Those who have such “goods” without being good cannot rightly be called great-souled, since this is not possible without complete virtue. Attorneys with these advantages become arrogant and insulting, not least to a jury of some fool’s peers.
The GSL does not go in for petty risks and does not love danger, simply because there are so few things that important. They are able to confer benefits but are ashamed of having good turns done them: the former is the sign of a superior, the latter of an inferior. The GSL seldom or never needs help (and certainly never asks for it!) but comes ready to help others. The GSL is mighty toward men of power and wealthy men, but moderate toward average people. To be superior to the former is difficult and lends dignity, but it is quite easy to be superior to the latter. In the first case, it is not ignoble to adopt an air of dignity; but it is vulgar to be pleased at triumphing over insignificant people, not least a jury of some fool’s peers.
The GSL does not compete for things that are valued by most people, nor in cases where others are supreme. The GSL is restrained and slow, except where the honor or the event is great. The GSL acts seldom, and then only where acts are great and glorious. Necessarily, the GSL displays hatred and love quite openly, for not to show them would indicate fear, and more care for reputation than for sincerity. They also speak and act openly because they do not care what other people think, and they tell the truth — except with common people, not least a jury of some fool’s peers.
GSLs are not given to showing admiration, since nothing is great in their eyes. They do not harbor grudges: they do not carry memories of what others have done, especially wrongs; rather, they just overlook them. They do not talk of personalities, being disinclined to speak either of themselves or of anyone else. They are not concerned with getting praise or with seeing others blamed. They do not praise people; nor speak evil of others, even of enemies, except as a direct insult. Where things cannot be helped, or are only petty, they are not querulous or importunate, unless fees be involved. They have a greater gift for acquiring fine but useless things than for acquiring those that are useful and advantageous, since this shows a greater self-sufficiency, not least to a jury of some fool’s peers.
A calm and steady manner of walking is thought suitable, and also a deep voice and a stately manner of speaking. Since the GSL does not think many things important, they will not hurry; the person who thinks nothing great is not vehement, for quickness of speech and action occur just because people do think things important. Just ask a jury of some fool’s peers.
That is the character of the GSL. The lawyer who falls short is mean-
spirited, whereas those who go to excess are vain. The mean-spirited attorney is deprived of true deserts and appears to have something bad about themselves, in that they do not claim appropriate fees. But vain people are stupid; they do not know themselves, and that is really noticeable. They are not deserving people, but try to win cases, only to be found out. They wear fine clothes and walk about like fine persons, and so on. It is the smallness of soul, rather than vanity, that is the opposite of greatness of soul.
So, then, Socrates, the nature of justice is fee-based. Those who (can) pay the most, receive the most justice. You disagree. But on what evidence can you rely?
1 See, e.g., Aristophanes, Clouds.
2 Aristotle, Meta. VI.
3 Aristotle, Nicom. Eth. IV.
