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.…
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.…
The tyrant, who is also the most unjust man, is the least happy, but the aristocrat, the most just man, is the most happy, which shows that it pays to be just. In turn, Socrates comes up with his own definition of justice where, just like the ideal society, the just man has to balance the rational part of his soul, the spirited part of his soul, and the appetitive part of his soul. The problem, though, is that with this definition, the hoi polloi of America is…
What is the purpose of the city-soul analogy and does it help us understand the nature of justice?…
As far back as one looks, society has wrestled with the concept of a Law being unjust or just. Numerous influential people from history such as Plato, Thoreau, and King all have different views on what determines a law to be just, or unjust. Plato describes this as, if one was to see a law an unjust and goes again that law or breaks it then they shall face any consequences given. On the other hand, Thoreau sees as though every individual has the right to determine if a law is Just or unjust. Leaving the individual, the right to resist. While King takes this idea and states, that each person does have the right to resist, but no change can be made by a single person. Instead it takes a mass movement and multiple people collectively coming together…
Dr. Martin Luther king once said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (Ali B. Ali-Dinar; Ph.D.) Justice! What is justice? The quality of being just; guided by truth reason, justice and fairness. The portrayal of justice is an eternal controversy that has developed over time from ancient civilizations to modern democracies, Not only portrayed overtime but though mediums of media and lit, earlier in the development of literature justice was depicted to be carried out in a more hero fashion meaning a person coming into a conflicting situation and solving the conflict or bring justice to light under his or her conditions therefore adopting a heroes attributes and overall distinction in the public eye as an enforcer of justice…
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.…
It is my objective in this paper, to illustrate the claims made by Thrasymachus, in The Republic, as argument to Socrates' views on what justice is. I will then evaluate the claims, "justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger" (338c), and that "a just man always gets less than an unjust one" (343d), in an effort to see how Thrasymachus uses these statements to provoke an argument. Despite the contradictory nature of these statements, I will attempt to show, through the analyzing of Thrasymachus' speech, that they are actually related. Thrasymachus uses these statements to create an overall picture of his idea of justice to the people in an effort to get Socrates to retract his statements on what justice is. After analyzing these arguments, I will deduce that Thrasymachus' argument is not plausible.…
Justice is a concept that has changed and developed throughout history. The foundation of the modern justice system in the western world began in Athens just over two thousand years ago. Many philosophers had their own conceptions about what justice truly is, however, Plato proved to be the most influential. Before Plato, many men shared Polemarchus’ belief that justice meant giving good to friends and evil to enemies. In his book, The Republic, Plato sets out to define the true definition of justice. Plato states that justice is when men to put aside irrational desires for the greater good of society. If civilization were to follow Polemarchus’ view of justice, society would become anarchy. People would punish those that have wronged them…
The relationship between justice and the law is one that has been debated for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Many theorists have attempted to explain the exact characteristics of this relationship in order to outline a system of just law. However, this relationship is far too intricate for any one theory to dominate the field. The values used to formulate a system of just law are often times based upon personal preference, unseen biases, or self-motivation. Law is such an intrinsic facet to so many different aspects of life that finding a theory of justice capable of covering the entirety of law is impossible. The fact is that, man has neither the impartialness nor the capability of creating such a complete theory. Without a complete theory for application we are forced into using elements from several theories to debate even the most minuet topics of just law. The issue that arises when using several theories at once is the inherent contradictions that can be found when comparing and contrasting them. Every theory has a theorem which is used to outline its most basic principles. With the vast number of theories it is only rational that contradictions occur.…
Socrates was a man of distinction and a man with strong ideas on how to make a more perfect society. Although a lot of his ideas conflict with his ability to be just or unjust it does not in his mind. Being just or unjust is a major topic in the book and there are many different ways of being both. Socrates used the terms, not necessarily the way we would normally use the term today, but parts of his depiction made sense. He said a lot of different things could be considered unjust. For example not doing what you were Destined to do or what you are best at is considered unjust in his mind.…
“The real question is whether the man has been justly slain. If justly, then your duty is to let the matter alone; but if unjustly, then even if the murderer is under the same roof with you and eats at the same table, proceed against him” (Plato 3). This quote from The Trial and Death of Socrates demonstrates acts in themselves are neither unjust nor just, and the perception by the person deciding whether the act is unjust or just, is the determining factor in the matter. In this case, Euthyphro, the man who said this, originally believes the act of murder is unjust, and believes he should in fact proceed against his father, even though in most perceptions it is considered impious; and although Socrates it is considered impious, Euthyphro’s…
In the words of Abraham Lincoln in his House Divided Speech, “A house divided against itself cannot stand” (Basler, n.d.). While this is speaking in regards to slavery in the 1800’s, it also relates to establish what is just an unjust when considering the whole of the country. In life, we consistently see humans who live in collaboration that have differing beliefs. Our beliefs are centered on our emotions. Since our laws are based on beliefs and emotions, sometimes the waters will become muddy in that we as a population have different principles.…
As previously discussed from our lectures, Plato's idea of justice was concerned with an internal equality between the members of the classes present within the polis. This focused more on individualism in that one must only be concerned with his/her business and not minding other's problems. The justice that occurs in their society depends on the class to whom one belongs. However, Aristotle, his student, was more for all-encompassing justice aiming for the ultimate goal of the constitution.…
Lastly, one of the many well-known philosophers in history, is Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC), who believed in more of a natural institution. Aristotle was heavily influenced by Plato, but disagreed with some aspects of his philosophy. However, Aristotle agreed with Plato’s theory, in which humans are political animals, but what sets humans different from animals, is that humans can reason. Hence, this forces people to live according to their reason rather than their passions. The downside of this ideology, is that the thoughts on a particular topic one would have, would be significantly different from other people, thus there reasoning on what is just and unjust can also be different. As a result, if a leader cannot distinguish the wrong in an unjust act, society would not be able to protect people from evil individuals, resulting in a dangerous society to live in. Moving on, Aristotle thought humans fall into one of three…