Some of the greatest philosophers have advocated that we lie to ourselves, and to others. Why?
A “Noble Lie” is a myth put forth, usually by the elite, in order to keep society from destroying itself. While lies are usually bad for social harmony, if many things rely on something being true, then revealing the lie could do more harm than good. Hence, even though it might be morally wrong, we have to take the “noble” action of deceiving ourselves to keep society going.
So why base society on a lie anyways? Well the three noble lies here all have reasons behind their existence, but the general theme is that they create the best outcomes for people.
These three lies are: natural hierarchies of people (from Plato’s Republic), free will, and religion. Before I begin, while the first lie was created with the direct knowledge of its falsehood, the truth of free will and religion are still hotly debated. I included free will because it is too fundamental to humanity. There is no society which can be built without free will, and therefore whether or not free will is real, we will still have to tell ourselves it is.
Religion was included because, while we can disagree about whether one religion is true or not, we can certainly agree that there are many which are false. And while they aren’t all alike, many religions share beliefs in an afterlife and a supernatural power, and these generic aspects are what is behind this Noble Lie, not the specifics of Christianity or Buddhism or Islam.
The original Noble Lie for a natural hierarchy of people comes from Book III of Plato’s Republic, in which a society is created with hierarchies — leaders, guards, artisans, farmers. Since those in the lower classes could get disgruntled about their position, Plato suggests a myth that everyone is born as a combination of gold, silver, iron, and brass. If everyone accepts that the innate metal of a person is directly linked to their position in society, it mitigates the risk of, for example, a farmer who wants the luxuries of a leader, because their brass is not gold.
Why might this lie be necessary? In Republic, Plato sets out on creating the perfect society, and since he includes the Noble Lie, it means the hierarchy it is meant to defend is necessary and beneficial, even with the lie. As for whether this is true, hierarchies are generally appreciated for providing organization and having the most qualified people on top.
But is it necessary to tell people that they have innate metals? This depends on whether you believe that people will be jealous of those in higher positions, even if these positions are deserved and are also unattainable for the complainers, and if said jealousy could be greatly harmful to society. There is also the concern of whether someone can change. If metals are set from birth, what do we do about people who go through big changes in their teens and twenties?
So what do we learn from this first, and original, Noble Lie? That sometimes, truth and happiness are not always linked. At least for Plato, he believes that the best society requires a bit of lying, and that’s okay.
As for free will, every system we have depends on it. How can you have any political, economic, philosophical, sociological, you name it, belief without believing that we have free will? And a scientific system, even the same that claims that there are only atoms and molecules to determine all actions, bases itself on the Noble Lie of free will. After all, if there is no free will, how can a scientist decide to conduct an experiment? And even if they do it tired and begrudgingly, telling themselves they have no other choice, isn’t that reaction to believe in determinism, an act of free will?
The point is, it is impossible to do anything without believing in free will. As more and more people embrace naturalism (the existence of only natural laws like those in physics), the belief in free will has to be maintained, even if it is irrational. No one can be a true determinist because becoming one is a choice, and if you convince yourself that it is not, isn’t that convincing another action that we choose? And if we clearly can’t fully embrace determinism, we might as well choose to believe in something more exciting than that.
To be clear, we do not actually know if free will is real or not. But if it is not, then we will have to tell ourselves it is regardless.
Religion as a noble lie has been used countless times in history and literature. Of course, the takeaway tends to be that it isn’t quite “noble” to lie about something so important: the afterlife, or a lack thereof.
But are we really better off without religion? A study by the Pew Research Center writes that, in the US, “36% of the actively religious describe themselves as ‘very happy,’ compared with 25% of the inactively religious and 25% of the unaffiliated.” Not only is someone’s own happiness at stake, but how often someone smokes, drinks, participates in charities/clubs, and even votes, are all correlated to whether or not they believe in a religion.
The truth is nihilism is on the rise. While some can find comfort despite a lack of existence after death, it’s still a large pill to swallow. So should we convert ourselves? And if we can’t find it in ourselves to do so, should we at least convince the next generation?
The answer is that we don’t know. And what we can take away from this is that Truth and Peace are not always aligned. Should we lie about people’s souls in order to keep peace with society? Is Free Will a system we must always believe in, even if it’s false? And can we ever find true peace with ourselves without believing in a life after death, or should we prevent hopelessness by following a religion?
Those questions are ones we have to deal with ourselves.
