Preview

Glaucon's Definition of Justice from Plato's Republic. Also, courage is examined in a similar context.

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
276 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Glaucon's Definition of Justice from Plato's Republic. Also, courage is examined in a similar context.
A Definition of Justice

In this paragraph Glaucon, who has taken up the argument from Thrasymachus, makes his definition of justice. He states that justice is a compromise of sorts between advantage and fear. People understand that being unjust is often to their advantage; however, they also fear being the victim of injustice. If they could act unjustly without suffering the consequences they would. This partially explains Thrasymachus? earlier definition of justice as the advantage of the strong. No reason exists for a person who can act unjustly to their own benefit without being the subject of injustice themselves not to. Justice is therefore a reciprocal agreement between peoples too weak to be immune from injustice not to be unjust and is a contract not willingly entered. Glaucon presents this definition as a culmination of previous argument and as an explanation he feels will be suitable to Socrates.

The Republic: Courage

In this paragraph Socrates describes the affect of the selection process for soldiers (also True Guardians). He states that, just as wool must be properly selected before being dyed if the end product is to have any value, so must soldiers be chosen before being inoculated to the laws and ideals of the city. Soldiers so chosen will absorb and retain the information far better than if no selection process were involved. Socrates then goes on to say that soldiers well chosen would be unwavering in their beliefs, immune to the temptations of fear or pleasure. Immunity to such outside forces would make the soldiers courageous and thus the city would be courageous. Therefore courage is the ability to hold steadfast to a belief even through

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    What is justice? Today, where it is common for people to only look out for themselves, justice is an extremely important tool. But what exactly is justice? What is right, what is wrong, and who decides that? To find an accurate definition, we as a society should not just focus on one opinion, but the views of many. Similar to how our society is today, the society in The Republic, lived the same, struggling to determine what the correct definition of justice was, and how to pursue the right answer. In the paper, I will be discussing all aspects of Plato’s Republic, including the Philosopher King and his nature, and justice in that time.…

    • 114 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Looking up in the Merriam Webster dictionary justice is defined as "the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments". The fact that the word itself is being used for its definition explains how ambiguous the concept of justice can get. It is because of the very same reason that some time between the years of 470 to 399 BC a very well-known argument took place in Piraeus. The mentioned years are the time period that Socrates lived, the argument evolves mainly on the concept of justice and the goal is to come to an operational account for it. Throughout this argument lots of accounts are given by different participants, which all get opposed by Socrates. Two of these contributors are Thrasymachus and Glaucon. The former argues that "justice is the advantage of the stronger" while the latter argues that justice is not something practiced for its own sake (intrinsic good) but something one engages in out of fear of its consequences (extrinsic good). As seen in book one and two of Republic, Plato's…

    • 1372 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In this paper we will show that Glaucon and Thrasymachus' positions on justice are entirely different. We argue that Thrasymachus despite his slippage and confusion between a traditional and immoralist definition of justice, is really intending to illustrate a political system ruled by a rational-minded and exploitative tyrant. On the other hand Glaucon clearly presents justice as a necessary evil originating out of a social contract constructed by the weak of society. He then challenges Socrates to prove to him that the life of a just man is better than the life of an unjust man.…

    • 1831 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    If a man was not subjected to law or punishment would he choose to do what is considered just? In Plato’s The Republic, Glaucon, one of Socrates’ students, states a common view on justice. Justice is simply a lesser evil when compared to the two extremes which are suffering injustice without power to retaliate and doing injustice without suffering consequences. According to Glaucon, all men are inherently unjust, and only do what is just when forced to do so by law. This view of justice can be seen throughout history when leaders, like Nero, do unjust actions for their own personal gain simply because they are free from any consequences.…

    • 462 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Republic Study Guide

    • 2098 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Thrasymachus: Justice is defined as might makes right. The advantage of the strong. He is saying that it does not pay to be just. Just behavior works to the advantage of other people, not to the person who behaves justly. Thrasymachus assumes here that justice is the unnatural restraint on our natural desire to have more. Justice is a convention imposed on us, and it does not benefit us to adhere to it. The rational thing to do is ignore justice entirely.…

    • 2098 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    What is justice is a question that has plagued philosophers since the time of Plato when he wrote The Republic to present day. In the book, Plato uses the dialectic, between Socrates and other Athenians like Polemarchus, Cephalus, and Glacuon, to try and find the definition of justice. Through the voice of Glaucon, Plato defines justice as a compromise of sorts between advantage and fear, and injustice as the things that we wouldn’t…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Socrates meets with some of his friends and begins discussing the meaning of justice and whether the just life is better than the unjust life. First, they contemplate the meaning of justice. Cephalus stated that justice is as simple as telling the truth and returning what you receive, Polemarchus stated that justice is giving each his due, and Thrasymachus stated that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Socrates proves each of them wrong and embarks on a discussion to find out what true justice is, and to find out whether the just man is truly happier than the unjust man, or vice versa.…

    • 627 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When Socrates is asked to defend justice on its own, but not for the reputation that it brings, he suggests that justice should be found in the city before starting to use the analogy of finding it in an individual. He then uses an example of a just city that aims at satisfying the basic human wants. Some citizens enter into political welfare as no one is independent. Nevertheless,…

    • 879 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He must do this regardless of the opinion of the majority or possible consequences for himself; he must act only in accordance to the opinion of the few wise, knowledgeable men who understand what is justice, and the laws of the State. Unfortunately, in all of the dialogues the author of this essay has read5, Socrates never clearly explains what ‘the laws’ really are — they remain a sort of abstraction, a divine essence of justice. However, this does not invalidate our definition of a champion of…

    • 698 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato’s theory of justice is about equality and that one deserves punishment if they do commit an unjust action. During the Crito, Socrates tries to correct a lot of points that Crito is trying to argue with him about, what it means to be justice. To be justice, means a human being that does good based on the laws that are emplaced according to the state. Good people according to Socrates are only worth considering. People that do good are considered moral people, and have opinions that should be regarded because their inputs are considered to be ethically correct. Being a human of ethical virtues means that they must not do wrong. Anything that is immoral, is considered immoral. We as humans may not intervene in activities that deem to be…

    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Virtue, rather than being a teachable piece of knowledge, seems to be an innate understanding. Every person in the world, save perhaps psychopaths and sociopaths, naturally has a strong moral compass. An example that proves this idea is the innocence of children. I have never witnessed a child perform an action with solely malicious intent. Children always have some outside motivation for any hateful actions they perform, so they never do it only to hurt someone. At this point you might think that, yes, children do not do anything with only malicious purposes, but the fact remains that they continue to perform such actions. This is true, but honestly, how have children learned to do such hateful things? No child would consider cursing at anyone if they were angry, but since they observe others performing these actions, the children begin to develop the idea in their minds that doing so must relieve their suffering. It seems, then, that humans learn harmful…

    • 341 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Why Is Socrates Unjust

    • 330 Words
    • 2 Pages

    1. What is the difference between a. and a. Both Socrates and Glaucon ultimately agree that it is better to be actually just and seemingly unjust than it is to be actually unjust but seemingly just. Their reasons for holding this position are because people just have control over themselves. They are able to maintain dominion over their desires, to avoid self indulgence in evil desires, and to choose good things. This is something the unjust person loses no matter how just he may seem.…

    • 330 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    What Was Socrates Failure

    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In producing a counter argument to Thrasymachus' claim that justice is the advantage of the stronger, Socrates bases his argument enourmously on sentimentality and prejudice. He assumes that the virtues which are supposedly functioning in the realm of ideas can also work propably in the World. For example, in Socrates' view, a doctor does not seek his own advantage, but the advantage of his patients. Yet, this view reflects the perfect ideal of a doctor in Socrates' belief of ideas in a dream world. With a modern perspective, one can fairly see that Socrates' refutation has some complexities which clash severely with the real experiences of the Ancient Greek. Socrates' image of the doctor ignores the inherent human desire…

    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thrasymachus Vs Socrates

    • 626 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thrasymachus argues for the view that justice is the advantage of the powerful – that it is “simply the interest of the stronger” (Plato’s The Republic, translated by Richard W. Sterling and William C. Scott, page 35). Laws, he says, are specifically “designed to serve the interests of the ruling class” (36). Of course, the ruling class is the strongest class, so it follows that the laws serve the advantage of the strong. The citizens under the ruling class serve “interests [of their strong unjust ruler] and his happiness at the expense of their own” (41). Thrasymachus concludes that “the dynamics of justice, then, consistently operate to advantage the ruler but never the subjects” (41).…

    • 626 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Socrates once again challenges Laches’ theory of courage being “wise endurance of the soul.” Socrates says that foolish endurance would be more valiant because when an individual is willing to put himself in an uncertain situation while being uncertain of the outcome speaks a lot about ones courage and overall character. Socrates then provides an example in order to challenge Laches’ theory. A soldier who goes forth and rides on horseback without proper knowledge as to how to ride or fight on horseback is braver than a simple cavalryman. Since going into battle is clearly dangerous altogether, it is more courageous to go forth and push on without knowing how to fight properly on horseback if it will be more beneficial to his side when loss…

    • 195 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays

Related Topics