How Does Socrates Define Justice

Anne Jastrzebski
WR150: The Ethics of Disenchantment
Multi-Source Essay
More than Defining Justice: The Republic’s Push to Modify its Readers’ Way of Thinking
At first glance, Plato’s The Republic seems a tedious exercise in trying to follow one man’s irrational effort to construct a city when he was tasked simply with explaining a single word. However, the republic created by Socrates throughout the duration of the dialogue and the points that come from it are not as unnecessary or superfluous as they initially seem. The Republic is clearly a specifically worded dialogue about philosophy, but not necessarily only for philosophers. The seemingly excessive examples throughout the text are in fact a blueprint allowing for the general public to understand and assume Plato’s logic, ultimately bringing them not just to Socrates’ conclusion about justice as a
balanced tripartite soul, but allowing them to have thought through the process along with Plato.
In order to lead his readers through the thinking of a philosopher, Plato must first show them what a philosopher is not. Through the many definitions of justice proposed by Socrates’ peers, the reader is shown how not to think about the concept. The positions posed by Cephalus, Thrasymachus, and Glaucon are delivered quickly and seemingly with little thought. By contrast, Socrates’ definition of justice requires the creation of an entire city. As he more specifically explains in his allegory regarding the ship of state, there is a fairly sharp contrast between philosophers and the rest of the public, and the societal misunderstanding of the philosopher is a detriment to society. As David Sedley clarifies, “the expert’s understanding of the stars, contrasted with the sailors’ scornful ignorance . . . represents a gulf in communication between philosophers and the rest of society” (Sedley 261). The rashness of the sailors in dismissing the philosopher seems remarkably similar to the quickness with which Socrates’ peers throw out definitions of justice while Socrates, the philosopher, waits and considers each option.
Socrates’ constant use of the Socratic method allows him to simply dismantle every definition thrown at him, gracefully dodging appeals to provide his own definition for a great majority of the initial conversation.
However, although this strategy prevents his peers from delivering a better argument than he can, it also allows Socrates to go quite a while without presenting his own definition of justice. Although this may lead the reader to think the philosopher simply cannot define justice, it quickly becomes clear Socrates was just biding his time before launching into the lengthy process of creating an entire hypothetical city, despite the fact that his peers have charged him only with defining justice in a man. In deciding to create a world that is, as Diskin Clay describes, “the product of an imagination that moves towards daydreaming” (Clay 19), Socrates chooses a path to defining justice that seems inefficient and excessively thorough. However for a philosopher, to whom the answer is often less important than the process by which it is reached, this indirect process may be the best way to outline
justice. It is only after all the fanfare of creating the perfect community for justice to flourish that Socrates is able to describe the work of justice. If he would have simply introduced his idea of a balanced tripartite soul at the beginning when his peers were brazenly sharing their ideas, it is more than likely the reader would have been as dismissive of Socrates as Socrates was of his own friends. However, at this point in the dialogue, the reader has journeyed with Socrates through the creation of an entire city, and is undoubtedly ready to see how justice unfolds within it. As Alasdair MacIntyre explains, “to understand a concept . . . is to grasp its functions, to understand what can and cannot be done with and through it” (MacIntyre 34). Taking the reader through the exceedingly laborious process of building a city from the ground up seems unnecessary. However, in order for the reader to understand his conclusion, it was imperative that Plato take him or her through the process of creating every detail of an environment in which justice is able to develop in order to align their thinking properly.
Although an incredibly long-winded description, Socrates’ argument is ultimately rather simple: justice is a man who has harmony within the three parts of his soul. Desire, spirit, and reason are present within each man, and imbalance between these three characteristics is what leads to injustice. A man who has these sections properly aligned will be just. This is obviously a significant conclusion to be drawn from the text, but more important is the way of thinking the reader has hopefully gained from the process by which that interpretation was drawn. By taking the time to lead a reader through his thinking process, Plato has not just given him or her a definition of justice, but a new way of reasoning that will allow him or her in the future to consider thoughts as heavy as the definition of justice on their own terms.
Socrates’ conclusion about justice is intriguing in its attempt to define a considerably broad subject, but a conclusion about such a subjective topic can hardly be called a conclusion since it will remain debatable. However, The Republic remains an influential dialogue because of its ability to engage and modify the reader’s way of thinking. The creation of an entire city in pursuit of defining a single word is certainly a unique and new way of thinking about such a topic. However ultimately, this method allows for an entirely subjective topic to be broken down to just three parts of a man, proving that a modified way of thinking can be effectively applied to any topic, no matter how difficult.
Works Cited
Clay, Diskin. "Reading the Republic." Platonic Readings. Ed. Charles L. Griswold. New York: Routledge, 1988. 19-33. Print.
MacIntyre, Alasdair C. "Plato: The Republic." A Short History of Ethics. New York: Macmillan, 1966. 33-50. Print.
Plato. The Republic of Plato. Trans. Allan David Bloom. New York: Basic, 1991. Print.
Sedley, David. "Philosophy, the Forms, and the Art of Ruling." The Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1992. 256-81. Print.