Preview

Thrasymachus 'And Socrates' Definition Of Justice

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
830 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Thrasymachus 'And Socrates' Definition Of Justice
Philosophy

1) Cephalu’s, Polemarchus and Thrasymachus definition of justice and Socrates objection to those definitions-point by point.

- To Cephalic the definition of justice is being honest, that lying would be considered being unjust. Socrates responds to his definition of Justice by saying that if you owe a madman his weapon in some sense if it belongs to him legally, and yet this would be an unjust act, since you know that he could harm someone with the weapon. So this can’t be justice, justice would be nothing more than honoring legal obligations and being honest.

- To Polemarchus justice is that you owe your friends help and your enemies harm. Cephalic and Polemarchus definition of justice is closely related to one another even
…show more content…
Just behavior works to the advantage of other people, not to the person who behaves justly. He is basically saying that the rational thing to do is to ignore justice entirely. Socrates respond’s by saying that Thrasymachus definition of justice promotes injustice as a virtue; injustice simply cannot be a virtue because it is contrary to wisdom, which is a virtue.

2) Glaucon Theory of Justice: the goods, the origin and nature of justice.

- Glaucon definition of Justice is very interesting; according to him being just is only for the weak and being unjust is for the strong. He gives an example that if a just man is given a ring, which makes him invisible and once in possession of the ring the man can act unjustly with no fear of punishment, the man would through away his morals and ideals of justice do to temptations, and the man would act in a unjustly way. This proves that people are only just because they’re afraid of being punish for being
…show more content…
The justice belonging to the city and state requires that each person must have their own role for which he is best suited and he/she should not change that role and should not interfere in any other business. He also says that human beings have natural gift that should be fulfilled. The just city is a city populated with workers working on there natural gift like doctors, farmers, carpenter, and they are all members of what Socrates call the “producing class”, because it is their duty to produce the goods for the city.

In the just city he says there has to be guardians/warriors in order for peace within the city to be maintain and protected. Warriors have to be developed with the right balance between kindness and toughness. They can’t be criminals nor be ineffective, they are carefully selected with the right balance of knowledge, honor and physical strength. Of course nature is not sufficient enough to produce guardians, so they have to be educated with the right amount of physical training, and in order to soften there heart they need to read poetry and listen to music for the soul. Guardians always have to be honest and must never fear death; they must also never engage in violent laughter. The other class of a just city is the ruler, which are the one dedicated to determine what is good for the city rather than for themselves. The

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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
  • 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
  • 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

    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.…

    • 276 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He firmly believes that it is unnatural for a person to be completely just. Thrasymachus agrees to Socrates statement that " a just person doesn't outdo someone like himself."# For example if a wealthy man and a poor man both spot gold on the street, the wealthy man will take into consideration both of their situations. If he is a just wealthy man he will then let the poor man to proceed with his findings. Thrasymachus is then questioned " will an unjust person also outdo an unjust person or someone who does an unjust action, and will he strive to get the most he can for himself from everyone?"# He responds, "He will." Even though this is Socrates' argument, Thrasymachus agrees to it making it a similar thought in both philosophers'…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Glaucon vs. Socrates

    • 1004 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In Book Two of The Republic, Glaucon tests Socrates view of justice. Socrates believes that “injustice is never more profitable than justice” (31). With this, he describes how the good life is determined by whether you are just or unjust. Socrates explains how justice is observed through the genuine acts of human character; justice is evaluated by how morally right one is. Glaucon however challenges this idea, as he wishes to be shown why being just is desirable. He trusts that we as humans naturally act just because the scare of punishment. Glaucon reasons that if the fear of getting penalized was removed, if punishment was not at all possible, then we would do anything we wanted whenever we wanted to without hesitation.…

    • 1004 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Tharasymachus' has been listening to the discussion and has been eagerly waiting to interupt, he is convinced that he alone has the answer of what justice is. He states that justice "is in the interest of the stronger party" and its a virtue only intended for the weaker members of a society. According to Thrasymachus, the just man leads a good life because he is fearful of the repercussions of his actions and the unjust man is not fearful of these repercussions because he is stronger and more intelligent than the average citizen. These traits will allow him to avoid social comeback for his unjust actions. Furthermore, the more unjust a man is the stronger he becomes. Thrasymachus finally states that since the unjust man is living outside the law, he will lead a happier and more fruitful life because he is free from the social constraints of society.…

    • 397 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

    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.…

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Then the men begin to discuss what is justice, and injustice. The first thing they come across is wisdom. They recognize that it comes from good judgment, which is clearly a kind of knowledge. Therefore, people make good judgments because of knowledge rather than ignorance. If a society ever got to the point of being totally just, the society would no longer have greed, drive for a better life, and it would not have poverty or wealth. The society would just stop. There would be no more invention, growth, or change.…

    • 1333 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Philosopher King

    • 656 Words
    • 3 Pages

    What is Socrates definition of justice – someone who is good and just and does good things…

    • 656 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Romeo and Juliet- Gcse Level

    • 3876 Words
    • 16 Pages

    In Romeo and Juliet we learn how Shakespeare uses vivid language to build character and depth in their roles. Shakespeare was a poet, playwright and an actor with a great love for language. Shakespeare was of great importance when it came down to the moulding and developing of the English language. Shakespeare had such an immense love for language that he created neologisms that we use in everyday life. Some of these neologisms he created include words such as puke, lonely, bedroom, democracy etc. in the play he developed numerous characters that played incredibly believable roles. An example of how Shakespeare made his characters believable was Tybalt, who spoke only forty lines in the entire play. Though he spoke only forty lines the lines he spoke were very descriptive and showed the audience how angry and aggressive yet protective he was. His anger and aggressive nature instantly put Tybalt into a stereotype of an angry young man with a lot of anger and pain.…

    • 3876 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Powerful Essays