When
does a person have enough to live a good life? Is it by possessing the simple
basics of life: sufficient food, water, air, clothing and shelter? Without
these things, we suffer and die, but, taken together, are they sufficient to
live well and thrive as a human being?
In
Plato’s “Republic”, Socrates describes as healthy a society in which everyone
shares the work according to ability and the modest sustenance it provides. The
people are not greedy or envious, taking joy or sadness in the successes or
failures of their collective enterprises. In the evenings, they sit on the
grass, eat off leaves and drink from gourds. They have no fancy spices, but
honey for sweetness, and wine and conversation for their entertainment. In this
way, they live at peace with themselves, protected from covetous invaders by
their collective ‘poverty.’ They have nothing that anyone would wish to
steal.
This
bucolic vision is interrupted by one of Socrates’ interlocutors, Plato’s
brother, Glaucon, who angrily denounces the society Socrates describes as a
‘City of Pigs,’ unfit for proper men who refuse to countenance a world without
war, plunder, call-girls, fancy upholstery, fine sauces and luxury imports from
around the world. Glaucon’s world is one of great ambitions, great
architecture, literature and even philosophy, for when has philosophy ever
developed in the woods? In his view, we
need civilization, culture, the distinction of noble and base, rich and poor,
the superior and the inferior. Yes, there is strife, but we are made to strive,
and without striving we will never reach our true potential. Socrates calls the
city that Glaucon describes a “Fevered City.”
Who
has the right of this, and who decides when enough is enough? Outside of extreme
hunger and poverty, it seems that the judgment that one does not have enough of
anything is subjective. When Kierkegaard proclaimed that ‘Truth is
Subjectivity’, I believe this is the sort of case he had in mind. No one can
tell you that that you do not have enough wealth, beauty, success or renown.
Only you can say what is sufficient for you to live in a way that you judge
fitting for yourself.
This
is a gray area. With the exception of clean air and potable water, both of
which are directly necessary for life, the value of the other things are what
you want them to be. What, in your own mind, can you not do without? Only you
can decide. For example, if you receive only 500 calories a day, you do not
have enough to eat, period. But does a person ever have insufficient Beluga
Caviar, prime rib, or expensive champagne? When the tap water is potable, does
anyone truly thirst if they do not drink bottled water?
Or
consider clothes. When, and on what basis, do I judge that I have enough or the
right kind of clothes? Actually, I have more clothes than I absolutely need,
and some of them I hardly ever wear. My judgment is that I have more than
enough clothes, so I do not think much about them. However, a different person
with different sartorial interests might judge that he or she never has enough
clothes, or at least not fashionable enough clothes.
The
same goes for shelter. Enough shelter, objectively speaking, is any enclosed
space that provides sufficient protection from the elements and is large enough
to lie down. In California, estate agents ask you how much house you want to
buy. So you have a choice between more or less house, and what is ‘enough’
house? If you ask the people living in McMansions by the Sea, they will say
that any house under 4000 square feet is not enough house. If you ask the poor
immigrants living ten to an apartment what would be enough house, I think they
might answer differently.
So,
what ought we to conclude about whether we have enough of what we need to live
a good life? If we go with the grasping world, nothing ever will be enough.
Philosophically considered, there is an imbalance living continuingly in want
of things that have no direct bearing on one’s well being.
In
Plato’s story, Socrates acquiesces to Glaucon’s wishes. He builds the Republic
to keep the fevered city from succumbing to its own excesses and attachments to
unworthy values. He reminds the company, however, that the truly healthy and
happy way to live is the one he described in his rustic idyll of the simple
life.
No comments:
Post a Comment