Peace: LESSONS LEARNED from the Apocryphon of James

Skeptics abound nowadays. People like to show their wit by being skeptical about everything. In fact, there has been a resurgence of questioning our very existence and attributing it to a computer simulation. René Descartes, in his Principles of Philosophy (1644), wrote:

“If you would be a real seeker of truth, it is necessary that at least once in your life you doubt as far as possible, all things.”

This quote sums up perfectly the overall sentiment of skepticism, but a skeptic internalizes it as their default point of view. I would like to argue in this post that trying to maintain integrity in life is inherently more satisfying than having a skeptical one. However, I want to first make a disclaimer:

I agree with Descartes that, even if it is painful, “a real seeker of truth” will need to examine every belief, cultural practice, and (figuratively) unveil to themselves whether their home is built on a sound foundation or not, maybe values will need to be adjusted after the process, but it will allow your house to be stronger in the end. Obviously, people need to be realistically skeptical about the things they hear or read, otherwise they will be utterly gullible. And everyone needs to be able to decipher between fact, opinion, and biases. Plus, skepticism (questioning everything) is essential for scientific inquiry which leads to discovery and innovation.

Putting aside the inherent values I initially proposed for skepticism in my disclaimer, I will now demonstrate how integrity is better for human satisfaction.

I will use a classical definition of integrity, employing the etymological meaning. The word integrity comes from the Latin root: integer. In math class, when we talk about integers, we know we are referring to whole numbers; so it is with humans, a person with integrity is whole or compete. In other words, their values and desires align with their actions; they are not divided or fragmented by internal conflict. A man without integrity is much like a hypocrite: What they say and do, do not agree with what they actually believe. A man with integrity is honest to himself and to society. Besides having the trust of the people around you, what value does integrity have for an individual? I believe one of the blessings of integrity is peace of mind.

The Apocryphon of James: “Become full and leave no space within you empty”
In 1945, Codex I was discovered buried among the Coptic Gnostic Library. The second of the five tractates found in this codex is, what scholars are now calling, “The Apocryphon of James.” “The Apocryphon of James” is an epistle that recounts an appearance to the Twelve Apostles 555 days after Jesus’ resurrection. It seems as if they were in the process of writing down the sayings of Jesus when Jesus appears to them.

The disciples ask him, “Have you gone and departed from us?”

And Jesus said: “No, but I shall go to the place from which I have come. If you desire to come with me, come.”

They all answered and said: “If you bid us, we’ll come.”

He said: “Truly I say to you, no one ever will enter the Kingdom of Heaven if I bid him, but rather because you yourselves are full. Let me have James and Peter, in order that I may fill them.” And when he called these two, he took them aside, and commanded the rest to busy themselves with that with which they had been busy.

The Savior said: “You have received mercy. Do you not desire, then, to be filled? … Therefore I say to you, become full and leave no place within you empty… Therefore become full of the spirit but be diminished of reason.”

Other supporting examples
This excerpt about commanding his disciples to be full reminds me of some other examples in the scriptures:

Jesus asked a Samaritan woman for some water from the well. She was taken aback by the fact that he, a Jew, was willing to interact with her. He responded by saying, If you had known who you were talking to, you would have asked me to give you living water. ‘You do not have anything to draw water with, and the well is deep. How are you going to give me living water?’ she questioned him. He then told her:

Whosoever drinketh of this water [from the well] shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

John 4:13-14 

Then, the story about how Jesus fed 5,000 people with five loaves of bread and two fish is famous. In that same chapter, some Jews requested a sign from Jesus because Moses brought down manna from heaven and feed the Children of Israel while they dwelled in the wilderness; so, if he is the Messiah, he should do likewise. Jesus responded by saying:

I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 

John 6:35

In the Book of Mormon, there is a story about the resurrected Lord visiting a faithful congregation in ancient America. He taught them to take bread and wine in memory of his body and his blood which he gave for them. Soon thereafter, he reappeared to them, but this time he provided the bread and wine miraculously. This bread and wine that Jesus provided must have been extraordinary, maybe this bread and wine was a physical manifestation of the metaphysical bread of life and living water because the Lord said:

He that eateth this bread eateth of my body to his soul; and he that drinketh of this wine drinketh of my blood to his soul; and his soul shall never hunger nor thirst, but shall be filled” (3 Nephi 20:8).

Then the book recounts that everyone that partook was filled with the Spirit (3 Nephi 20:9). All of these examples, in my mind, support the same concept. Jesus Christ’s purpose was to direct his disciples to feel whole, without lack.

At the beginning of the Gospel of John, Jesus is referred to as “the word made flesh” (John 1:14). When early Christians speak of the word, they speak of the Law of God (i.e.: the Torah). They believed that the Messiah should fulfill all of the Torah, and they considered Jesus of Nazareth to be that person. Jesus invited everyone to follow him (e.g.: Matt 16:24). We, too, should try to live “by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God” (Deut. 8:3, D&C 84:44).

Skepticism looks for gaps, it searches for darkness. The chronic skeptic (and his older brother, the nihilist) feed themselves on the unknowable; therefore, their soul will always be empty. To the skeptic, this principle may be naïve. However, there was a point in my life when I questioned everything. I would reflect—the best I could—on my reasons for certain thoughts, beliefs, biases, and the cultural norms that were ingrained in me since birth. I studied philosophy, world religions, and the prevailing cosmological theories in science for a number of years hoping for a more complete understanding of the world or a truth I had never known. I realized that all of the possible perspectives in life at some point lead to a place where one needs to accept various assumptions for the path to make any sense. The person will need to buy into a certain ideology—take a leap of faith per se. Furthermore, once someone seeks to find satisfaction in the accumulation of wealth, prestige, honor, respect, power, materialism or pleasure, they will find there is no end. There may be happy moments, but they will unlikely never be satisfied unless they consciously set a measurable goal to end their quest. Additionally, one only can begin to find satisfaction when they become aware and mindful of the experiences they have, rather than constantly looking to the next thing. Nevertheless, Jesus is offering us a relief from physical needs and desires by following him.

“The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness.”

Matt 6:22-23

Christ offered his followers peace, not as the world defines it, but in a spiritual way (John 14:27). The key to peace seems to be fixing one’s eyes on the Light Eternal, “feasting upon the word of Christ” (2 Nephi 32:3), and “meditating therein day and night” (Joshua 1:8). Jesus Christ frees us from guilt while allowing to still contemplate perfection, holiness, and the divine. Paul reinforces this concept:

“Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.”

Philippians 4:8

I share this lesson as a testimony from personal experience. I pray that we fill our lives with light and “leave no space empty,” so we all can have peace. Godspeed!

Barnstone, Willis, editor. “The Apocryphon of James.” The Other Bible. Harper Collins Publishers, 2005, pp. 345-346.

LESSONS LEARNED from Aristole: The Golden Middle Way to Perfection


At the end of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus commands his disciples to “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” (Matt 5:48).

What does that mean for us? 

Anyone who has read Jesus the Christ by James Talmage knows that each chapter concludes with endnotes containing additional information on a given topic. The final endnote of the chapter about the Sermon on the Mount (Chapter 17) has the title: Relative Perfection. There he expounds on the mandate to be perfect as follows:

Our Lord’s admonition to men to become perfect, even as the Father is perfect cannot rationally be construed otherwise than as implying the possibility of such achievement. Plainly, however, man cannot become perfect in mortality in the sense in which God is perfect as a supremely glorified Being. It is possible, though, for a man to be perfect in his sphere in a sense analogous to that in which superior intelligences are perfect in their several spheres; yet the relative perfection of the lower is infinitely inferior to that of the higher. (pg. 248)

He, later, gives an example of college students. A freshman may have perfect grades, but his perfection is not the same as a senior who has 100% and will soon graduate from college. This may explain why the Old Testament calls Noah “perfect in his generation” (Gen. 6:9, KJV). Relative perfection makes sense when one considers the immensity of eternity, the sheer variety of life situations and experiences, and the consequences of free will toward perfection in each individual’s “sphere” (or capacity), whether they be mortal or immortal. I would like to carry Talmage’s example of grades and the school a step further. There is no doubt that God has a better educational system than any university; for, in this world, a teacher is subject to bias, may not teach a subject according to the needs the students, and their exam may not have been written well or may not reflect adequately what was actually learned in the class. Surely, God’s educational system is student-center. He will tutor each student that comes for guidance. The student will be able to go at his/her own pace and, to keep things fair, He assesses each person according to their own potential. Therefore, a definition of perfection is self-actualization in the truest sense of the word—by finding within that which I AM.

The Golden Mean

Let’s quote Wikipedia as a segue to the lesson:

In ancient Greek philosophy, especially that of Aristotle, the golden mean or golden middle way or Goldilocks Theory is the desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency. For example, in the Aristotelian view, courage is a virtue, but if taken to excess would manifest as recklessness, and, in deficiency, cowardice.

Much of an individual’s character can be defined by where s/he lays on the spectrum between two extremes. For example, are you stingy or wasteful with your resources? The perfect balance would be generosity. Do you take severe risks? or do you never take any risks? Are you overbearing in your interactions with others? or are you never assertive at all? Do you lead your life considering only yourself? or do live as a slave to others? Do you expect too much? or do you not expect anything at all? Are you productive or idle? Are you quick to anger, or are you inanimate? Are you considerate or inconsiderate? Are you too light-minded, or too serious? Are you concerned only with castigating or with mercy? In fine, are you temperate in all things?

It is difficult to think of every character trait with an opposite. In fact, I do not think that in most cases this is possible. What one needs to reflect on is: How kind am I? How much love do I have toward others? How much knowledge or wisdom do I have? How much integrity do I have? Am I virtuous? Among all the good things we could spend our time on, am I spending my time on the right thing, at the right time, for the right amount of time? This is different every day. It is a constant struggle between you and God.

Plato, Aristotle’s mentor, quoted Socrates in his Apology as saying: The unexamined life is not worth living (38a5-6). In the same vein, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics discusses what it means to live a good and happy life. He states that there are three types of living: the life of pleasure and enjoyment, the political life or seeking honor and prestige, and a life of contemplation (1095b). He then goes on to say that his lectures would focus on the Life of Contemplation because it is the only path to the good happy life (1096a). The Life of Contemplation should entail pondering things of heaven and Earth, as well as introspection. Aristotle teaches that “the mean [between two extremes in character is] relative to us, that amount which is neither too much nor too little, and this is not one and the same for everybody” (1106a20). To determine one’s mean between two extremes in their character, s/he needs to know their character tendencies. There are two ways to become aware of one’s character: 1) by asking a friend or a loved one about their perception your character, or 2) by the use of introspection. Now, even if someone were to give you their most honest opinion about your character, but you don’t take time to reflect on it yourself, it does you no good, because you will never be conscious of your character—let alone be able to internalize it. When you are aware of where you stand on the spectrum of each desired virtue, you can make a judgment call on how close you are to hitting the Golden Mean in your life.


If we are interested in becoming perfect as God commands—how it uniquely pertains to each of us—we need to seek out the Golden Mean in our character. This is only possible through a life of contemplation, especially introspection. Through introspection, we can acquire moderation. Because, as the Second Epistle of Peter says, “[given] all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ” (vs. 5-8).


Relevant quote from Aristotle’s Nicomachaen Ethics:

In the same way then an expert in any art avoids excess and deficiency, and seeks and adopts the mean—the mean that is not of the thing but is relative to us. If therefore the way in which every art or science performs its work well is by looking to the mean and applying that as a standard to its productions hence the common remark about a perfect work, that you could not take from it nor add to it—meaning that excess and deficiency destroy perfection, while adherence to the mean preserves it) —if then, as we say, good craftmen look to the mean as they work, and if virtue, like nature, is more accurate and better than any form of art, it will follow that virtue has the quality of hitting the mean. I refer to moral virtue, for this is concerned with emotions and actions, in which one can have excess or deficiency or a due mean. [1106b1]


LESSONS LEARNED from Nietzsche: amor fati and a Happy Life

Anyone who doesn’t live under a rock knows that most are unhappy with themselves and life. There are many who want to improve their appearance, whether it be physical, social or otherwise. Some want more tranquillity in life; others want more health. Some desire more power, prestige, or wealth. Some parents want children home for Christmas. Some children can wait to get out of their parent’s house. The reasons for dissatisfaction in life could go on and on.

Happiness is the Purpose
In the first part of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he sought to identify, what he called, the “ultimate good.” The ultimate good is that which all human activities and products seeks to achieve—he defines it as eudaimonia (1096a). The word eudaimonia is usually translated from Greek as “happiness.” So, for Aristotle, the ends of all human activity has happiness as its goal.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, we believe that God has revealed guidelines, or “commandments”, meant to lead us toward godliness. If we prove ourselves obedient enough, we will find joy with Heavenly Father forever; this is sometimes called: the Plan of Happiness (e.g.: Alma 42:8). Is this plan only for us to be happy after we have passed through mortality? I think not…

  1.  Nephi, one of the first prophets to immigrate from Jerusalem to the American continent, wrote that his community “lived after the manner of happiness” (2 Nephi 5:27).
  2. Another American prophet, Samuel, prophesied of the coming of Jesus Christ and called the people to repent. He proclaimed to them: Ye have procrastinated the day of your salvation…Ye have sought for happiness in doing iniquity, which is contrary to the nature of that righteousness which is in our great and Eternal Head [God] (Helaman 13:38).
  3. The beloved prophet-king Benjamin taught his people before he died:

And moreover, I would desire that ye should consider on the blessed and happy state of those that keep the commandments of God. For behold, they are blessed in all things, both temporal and spiritual; and if they hold out faithful to the end they are received into heaven, that thereby they may dwell with God in a state of never-ending happiness. O remember, remember that these things are true; for the Lord God hath spoken it. (Mosiah 2:41)

Clearly, from the LDS perspective, the gospel is meant to bring happiness in mortality as well as in eternity.  I believe that all peoples can agree that being happy during our life is best. The question is: How can we avoid dissatisfaction with this life?

Amor fati and the Plan of Happiness
The German philosopher, Freidrich Nietzsche, talks about amor fati; in Latin, that means ‘love of fate’ or ‘love of one’s fate.’ Nietzsche says “amor fati [is] that one wants nothing to be different, not forward, not backward, not in all eternity” (Ecce Homo, section 10). He writes:

I want to learn more and more to see as beautiful what is necessary in things; then I shall be one of those who makes things beautiful. Amor fati: let that be my love henceforth! I do not want to wage war against what is ugly. I do not want to accuse; I do not even want to accuse those who accuse. Looking away shall be my only negation. And all in all and on the whole: some day I wish to be only a Yes-sayer. (The Gay Science, section 276)

For me, amor fati means to see everything from an eternal perspective. In Church of Jesus Chruch of Latter-day Saints, sometimes you will hear people talk about seeing things from an eternal perspective. The phrase is meant to remind people that our time in this life is infinitesimally short compared to eternity and that our trials will seem small and insignificant. Additionally, we understand that, as eternal beings (D&C 93:33), there is a possibility to progress eternally—eternal progression.

In conjunction with the LDS concepts of eternal perspective, eternal progression, and the plan of happiness; I think, Nietzsche’s amor fati can be a source of contentment with who you are, your situation, all the events and decisions of your life (even your mistakes) because “all these things shall give thee experience” (D&C 122:7). If we are to believe that everything we learn and experience service us as knowledge (D&C 130:18-19) and make us stronger (Ether 12:27) in the long run, why should we not be happy with the person we are becoming?

Amor fati gives everyone permission to cast aside the guilt that society and cultures have placed on us for not being perfect or having the ideal life. Instead of looking around you or letting culture place burdens on you, look toward God and His grace, and/or forward to who you are meant to be—an excellent human being. Those who practice amor fati will embrace their past as a stepping block to fulfill their potential—”a rope over an abyss” (Thus Spoke Zarathustra, section 4). They will take satisfaction in, and love, who they are.  They accept the present as necessary and make the best of it. They shamelessly learn from their mistakes. Through introspection, they will see that if they were to take any event out of their life, they would not be who they are. They would not change a thing about their life because they love it. They would do it all again because they are happy with the results.

Amor fati is not easy, but it is essential for us to be happy in this life.

LESSONS LEARNED from Plato: A Model For Self-mastery

Nowadays, more than ever, everyone fights for our attention. Consider the fact that the market determines the value of tech-companies by how many clicks we give them—how much of our attention they occupy. Self-mastery is essential so that we can avoid getting sucked in and put time into things that we value most. Especially, since there are only 24 hours in a day, and we spend about two-thirds of them working or sleeping. Do we spend the time we do have power over with people and activities we care most about? In Book 9 of The Republic of Plato, Socrates shares an excellent allegory suitable for anyone who wants to gain self-mastery.

The Republic, like many of Plato’s writings, contains dialogues between Socrates and other people philosophizing about various topics. In this work, Plato focuses on the concept of justice as it applies to cities and within individuals. In Book 4, he demonstrates how the soul has three parts: calculating, spirited, and desiring (436a-441c). The calculating part is in charge of making decisions, reasoning and thinking. The spirited part energizes the body to take action; it houses emotions and convictions. The desiring part has to do with bodily needs, such as hunger or fatigue. Plato describes Socrates as using the soul-city analogy to compare different governments throughout The Republic (e.g. 441d-442d).  This article is not meant to go into how Plato compares the soul to governing types, so the information provided will suffice.

The Allegory of the Many-headed Beast, paraphrased:
Socrates asks Glaucon to imagine a colorful beast with many heads. Some of the heads are of tame animals and others of savage ones. Then, there is also an image of a lion and man. They are all molded together in one, and put into a human body; so that, from the outside, no one knows which creature is being feed—which is the strongest of all. Socrates says unjust people are those who feed all the different beasts and starves the man. He says, we do justice to our lives when the human being takes charge and, like a farmer, nourishes the tame animals and uses the lion to hinder the growth of the savage beasts. (Original text below.)

The many-colored, many-headed beast are the many desires within human beings. The lion symbolizes the spirited part of the soul. The man represents the calculating, decision-making mind. According to Socrates, one is just if the “man” is the dominate force within us; that means, we put knowledge and reason over our personal ambitions, desires, or biases. If we were to reflect on injustices we have witnessed in our life, we would see that they were the result of partial information or not being able to understand all the possible perspectives. That concept, in and of itself, is a lesson to be slow to judge and quick to try to understand.

Returning to our intent to gain self-mastery, I will propose some steps to put the human being in charge of the little beasts within us:

  1. Self-awareness
  2. Assess values
  3. Create plans for adjustments
  4. Implement
  5. Reassess regularly

Self-awareness — Many times we are unaware of our behavior or our use of time. Try keeping track of how much time you spend on activities for a c0uple of days; this may reveal where you tend to lose time. One way to become aware of imperfect behavior is to humbly ask a loved one about them. It is important to keep an open mind and not get defensive. If you do not know how to react or are having a negative emotional reaction, it is better so say: ‘Thank you for your honesty. I will think about what you have suggested.’ Humility is the key to self-improvement. We should be able to pinpoint our shortcoming or there can be no improvement.

Assess values — After we are aware of how we spend our time and are more conscious of our behavior, we need to assess if they align with what we value. You may need to take inventory of what you value most. Do you value time with family, a hobby, or some other activity? Jesus said: Where your treasure is, there will be your heart be also (Matt 6:21). I would add: Where your time is spent, there will be your treasure. Of course, we should all sleep the recommended 7-8 hours, get the chores done and “make a living.” The question is: how much are you actually living? Maybe you found that you spend too much time wandering the internet or watching TV, but you value family time or have always wanted to get active in the community; your actions do not agree with your values and it may (consciously or unconsciously) cause internal turmoil. With sincere introspection, you will meet at the crossroads of the self and cultural practices. There could be values you inherited from family, society, or religion that have been deeply ingrained but are not really a part of your core values. We need to harmonize our true values with our action because it can be a source of satisfaction in our lives. If we put reason in charge, we are no longer feeding the beasts of compulsive living.

Create plans for adjustments — “If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail.” (Benjamin Franklin) When are you going to take action? New habits and skills are developed through repetition. It is best to couple a desired behavior with a practice already a part of our daily routine, otherwise it will never become a new habit. For example: ‘Everyday after dinner, I will give my undivided attention to a family member for 15 minutes.’ Or, ‘An hour before I go to bed, I will make time to study and read.’ Do not over schedule yourself. Leave time for flexibility and spontaneity. But do not uncouple the new behavior, it should become automatic—it will become a part of you.

Implement — If we are talking about a physical action, we have already covered it. Now do it!  However, if we are talking about a character trait, Plato might suggest really contemplating the idea until you get to the essence of it. In The Republic, Socrates takes the audience through an exploration of the meaning of justice. In the end, Socrates arrives to an eternal, spiritual concept for the individual rather than a societal application. We can find the truth about anything by reading about it in books and taking time to ponder it. Your new understanding should fuel new actions and, like I said before, become a part of you.

Reassess — For better or worse, we are creatures of habit. If we do not practice a life of contemplation on a regular basis, we will be prone to fall into old habits. Maybe you will need to schedule in your calendar or phone a reminder to reasses your progress. Also, reassessments could be an opportunity go through steps 1-4 again. The process of gaining self-mastery should be freeing, not a burden. Human beings naturally find it rewarding to put our heart, body, and mind in harmony; so don’t give up, it is worth it.

Most cultures and religions speak of a soul or a spirit that gives life to the body; although, those who do not believe can still use this analogy symbolically to their benefit. However, because that is what I am familiar with, I will take the liberty to draw connections between LDS doctrine and Plato’s belief of the soul.

The Bible teaches that “the body without spirit is dead” (James 2:26, KJV). The body (or the flesh) has its own tendencies. In a letter to the early Christians in Galata from Paul, he wrote:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: o the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (Gal. 5:19-21)

The manifestations of the flesh, as listed by Paul, could easily be desires of a “many-colored, many-headed beast.”

LDS doctrine holds that “the spirit and the body are the soul of man” (D&C 88:15). Therefore, in terms of vocabulary, the tri-part nature of the soul can be soul described by Plato can be reaffirmed by modern revelation. The Doctrine and Covenants (a collection of prophetic revelations), speaks of two parts of the spirit, one intelligent and the other material (D&C 131:7-8); both are eternal (D&C 93:33). The intelligent part of the spirit is responsible for making decisions (D&C 93:30).

The Allegory of the Many-headed Beast, original English text:

Socrates: “By molding an image of the soul in speech so that the man who says these things will see just what he has been saying.”
Glaucon: “What sort of image?”
“One of those natures such as the tales say used to come into being in olden times—the Chimæra,Scylla, and certain others, a throng of them, which are said to have many ideas grown naturally together in one.”
“Yes,” he said, “they do tell such things.”
“Well then, mold a single idea for a many-colored, many-headed beast that has a ring of heads of tame and savage beasts and can change them and make all of them grow from itself.”
“That’s a job for a clevar molder,” he said. “But, nevertheless, since speech is more easily molded than wax and the like, consider it as molded.”
“Now, then, mold another single idea for lion, and a single one for a human being. Let the first be by far the greatest, and the second, second in size.”
“That’s easier,” he said, “and the molding is done.”
“Well, then, join them—they are three—in one, so that in some way they grow naturally together with each other.”
“They are joined,” he said.
“Then mold about them on the outside an image of one—that of the human being—so that to the man who’s not able to see what’s inside, but sees only the outer shell, it looks like one animal, a human being.”
“The outer mold is in place,” he said.
“Then let’s say to the one who says that it’s profitable for this human being to do injustice, and that it’s not advantageous for him to do just things, that he’s affirming nothing other than that it is profitable for him to feast and make strong thr manifold beast and the lion and what’s connected to the lion, while starving th human being and making him weak so that he can be drawn wherever either of the others leads and doesn’t habituate them to one another or make them friends but lets them bite and fight and devour each other.”
“That,” he said, “is exactly what would be meant by the man who praises doing injustice.”
“On the other hand, wouldn’t the one who says the just things are profitable affirm that it is necessary to do and say those things from the human being within must be in control of the human being and take charge of the many-headed beast — like the farmer, nourshing and cultivating the tame heads, while hindering the growth of the savage ones — making them friends with each other and himself, and so rear them?”
“That is exactly what in turn is meant by the just man who praises the just.”
“In every respect, surely, the man who lauds the just things would speak the truth and the man who lauds the unjust ones would lie. For, considering pleasure, good reputation, and benefit, the praiser of the just tells the truth, while the blamer says nothing healthy and blames without knowing who he blames.”

(588b-589c, translated by Allan Bloom)

I, originally, had no intention to write a self-help article, but that is what it turned out to be. I felt that the insight I learned from the allegory, left in the abstract, would be of little use to anyone, so I added some personal advise as to how it could be applied. I hope it was helpful and you enjoyed reading it. Best wishes, TH