Rabbi Michael Leo Samuel

The image of the shepherd is not always a positive one in the mind of many educated people.

In a televised debate between Rabbi David Wolpe and the well-known atheist Christopher Hitchens that took place in 2008, Hitchens criticized the pastoral metaphors of the Bible, “Shepherds don’t look after sheep because they love them—although I do think some shepherds like their sheep too much. They look after their sheep so they can, first, fleece them and second, turn them into meat. That’s much more like the priesthood as I know it.”

Hitchens is more correct than the rabbi realized. Actually, the ancient Greek cynic Thrasymachus already anticipated Hitchens’ position and views the shepherd metaphor in uncomplimentary terms. Both of these philosophers once engaged in a similar spirited argument.

In favor of the tyrannical state, Thrasymachus accuses Socrates of being naïve about the role of the shepherd as a metaphor for leadership. “You think that shepherds and cowherds seek the good of their sheep and cattle, and fatten them and take care of them looking to something other than their master’s good and their own” (Republic 343b1–4).

Thrasymachus counters that Socrates’ position is untenable. Shepherding does not aim to look out for the welfare of the flock for their own benefit. Quite the contrary—the shepherd exploits the sheep for the benefit of the shepherds and the masters—who originally hired the shepherds in the first place! Clearly, the flock serves a utilitarian purpose for the shepherds and those who oversee them. Thrasymachus argued that the same is also true with respect to the nature of government.

However, Socrates does not compromise his position. Socrates rejects Thrasymachus’ negative attitude and Plato records their conversation:

• You apparently think that he herds his sheep in his quality of shepherd, not regarding what is best for the sheep, but as if he were a banqueter about to be feasted with regard to the good cheer, or again with a view to the sale of them, as if he were a money-maker and not a shepherd. But the art of the shepherd surely is concerned with nothing else than how to provide what is best for that over which it is set, since its own affairs, its own best estate, are surely sufficiently provided for so long as it in nowise fails of being the shepherd’s art. And in like manner I supposed that we just now were constrained to acknowledge that every form of rule—in so far as it is rule—considers what is best for nothing else than that which is governed and cared for by it, alike in political and private rule.[1]

In many ways, the debate between Socrates and Thrasymachus is not limited to the shepherding craft per se. It can apply to any kind of industry or field that involves interacting with the public. How much does profit determine a professional vocation? Are lawyers motivated by a concern for genuine justice? Or, are they interested only in making obscene amounts of money?

How does Thrasymachus respond to these questions?

Ooops! I did not mean to single out the legal profession, which can be a very honorable and fulfilling profession. Indeed, the same question might by be asked about the medical world, or the financial field, religious institutions, charitable institutions, welfare agencies, or virtually any area of human endeavor that serves the interest of the public. Thrasymachus holds that human beings are essentially selfish creatures, motivated solely by pecuniary gain, whereas Socrates believes that idealism and a desire to improve society as a whole is the primary motivation in these various fields of endeavor.

Personally, I prefer Socrates over Thrasymachus, but I personally know a lot of people in the religious communities who practice their faith by the Gospel and Torah of Thrasymachus. Still and all, in the world of politics, Thrasymachus has been more correct than not. Our current government has distinguished itself by its ability to fleece the public. I only wish more politicians lived by a Socratic philosophy of government.

Men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln provided our country with truly pastoral models of leadership. I pray that we will have leaders who will have only the best interests of our country in their hearts. May we be blessed with leaders who respect the rule of law and the dignity of the common citizen.