The Noble Lies We Tell

There has been a lot of discussion over what Plato describes as a 'Noble Lie'. In order to maintain a stable society, he argues, and to have each part be content in its own purpose, the noble lie of the metal content in one’s must be told. This was the first reference to a noble lie. On Wednesday it was brought up whether ‘The American Dream’ was a noble lie. The discussion had an unclear definition of the American Dream in which there is a distinction needed to be made. While I do not personally know exactly what others meant, I would definitely argue that one noble lie in particular exists in America: the lie of distributive justice, and that isn’t necessarily what The American Dream entails.
Aristotle describes distributive justice many times, but the general idea is that, '(w)hat is just is what is proportionate, and what is unjust is what is counterproportionate.' (pg. 79). It relies on equality, 'for the people involved' (pg. 78). Under this idea of justice, any person who does just things will receive good and just things/actions back and the opposite for unjust people. People began giving this idea of justice the title 'American Dream', however I think this in an inaccurate portrayal of the actual noble lie involved in distributive justice. Americans definitely have a naive sense of 'karma' (which is an idea very similar to distributive justice), in that there is a sometimes unspoken belief of 'what one puts out into the world, they will get back'. (Or in Aristotelian terms, if one does just actions, just actions will be returned i.e. distributive justice).
The key distinction between the American Dream and the noble lie of distributive justice is that the idea of the dream is that if someone puts hard work into his or her life, typically in terms of career or education, they will see results; whereas with distributive justice, it relies on all people involved acting justly or else one just person will be subject to unjust actions performed by others. Due to other peoples' actions being unreliable, distributive justice cannot be constant in a society. Quite simply: Sometimes just people have unjust things done to them by others. The noble lie of good things being returned to a good person is quite impossible to always be true.

It makes sense a society would not want to dispel this particular noble lie. If people are under the impression that they will be rewarded for their good deeds, they are more likely to continue in a just way of life. That is not to say all people only do good actions for a self-involved reason, but it will definitely cause more people to act justly. This is yet another thing reliance on chance: the chance another person will act justly vs. unjustly. If someone puts work into his or her career, yes they are more likely to advance. At the same time, if someone is nice to everyone on the street or courageous in battle, that does not mean he or she will receive pleasantries from strangers or similar attitude in his or her battalion.