Does a person truly choose what is right from their innermost desires, or is it the fear of exclusion and punishment that compels them to do the right thing? Can one remain upright and ethical when left alone, or in chaotic environments where control and authority diminish? While the world today provides numerous examples that demonstrate this may not be the case, let us examine, through the lens of Gyges’s ring, whether humans are inherently moral.

The tale of Gyges’s Ring is a philosophical allegory found in Plato’s work, “The Republic.” It narrates the events surrounding Gyges, a shepherd living in the Kingdom of Lydia. One day, while tending his flock in a vast field, Gyges stumbles upon a cave revealed by an earthquake. This cave turns out to be a tomb filled with the corpses of fallen soldiers. Within the tomb, Gyges discovers a ring, and the unique property of this ring is its ability to render its wearer invisible. By putting on the ring, Gyges gains the power to evade societal control and engage in covert actions.

Using the ring’s power, Gyges seduces the queen of his kingdom and embarks on a clandestine affair. The queen, as a result of this relationship, decides to make Gyges the king. Gyges, in turn, ascends to the throne by assassinating the current king, becoming the new ruler of the Kingdom of Lydia. At this juncture, the narrative accentuates themes of justice, power, and human nature.

Plato’s use of this story serves to underscore that justice is not merely dictated by external factors but is also intrinsically tied to an individual’s character and ethical values. When Gyges becomes invisible by donning the ring, he disregards the imperative to adhere to societal and moral norms. The story illustrates how individuals in positions of power can be inclined to malevolence and transgress against the principles of justice. It aligns with Kant’s deontological ethics, suggesting that justice and morality are not ends in themselves but can be manipulated as means to achieve other ends.

For Socrates, justice is about balance, harmony, and each individual performing their prescribed role, without interfering in the duties of others. He posits a tripartite societal structure with rulers representing reason, guardians representing courage, and producers embodying desire. Disruption of this hierarchical structure through the meddling of one class in the affairs of another would result in the downfall of the state. Socrates argues that the greatest wrong is to disturb the balance and harmony, by impinging on the functions of another class. In this perspective, a just society is one where individuals perform their roles as a unified and organized mechanism, akin to the gears in a machine.

Plato, on the other hand, advocates for philosopher-kings who, guided by reason, hold the highest authority in the state. In a parallel manner to Socrates, he emphasizes the importance of harmony and balance within the individual. Plato’s ideal state is one where philosopher-kings govern, ensuring the three classes work in harmony. His vision is distinctly different from both the Athenian democracy of his time and contemporary democracy.

Plato, like Socrates, was critical of Athenian democracy, which led to the execution of Socrates, the wisest man of his time, for allegedly corrupting the youth and encouraging atheism. This significant event in Plato’s life is considered a catalyst for his philosophical development and may have influenced his writing of “The Republic” as a response to the Athenian democracy.

In summary, the story of Gyges’s ring, as contemplated through the lenses of Socrates and Plato, serves as a platform to question the nature of morality, justice, and governance. It highlights the complexities of human nature and the potential for those in power to misuse it, emphasizing the significance of ethics and moral character in the pursuit of justice. It also reflects the divergence between their philosophical approaches and contemporary democratic ideals.