One conversation between the parties was that of how a truly just state would look like and Socrates answers by declaring that a state might find justice when the overall happiness of the state has priority of desire to ones selfish ambitions. Socrates also says in reason people want to do what their desire bids them achieve and be trained in such a way that they would not care about anything but what their position in that society would have them do (The Republic, 376c-377e). This leads on to Socrates being asked to describe in detail how the laws of such a state would be where justice is to be found. Socrates says that for him to explain such a place to them would cause such humor to the group because his ideas are quite contrary to the ideas of people in the society in which they live(The Republic 450d-452e). He explains that three ideas that would push could be implemented that could make up a society that may contain justice. One is the common education of men and women another is women and children held in common the third is the idea that philosophers should rule as kings.…
In many societies, including our own, we labeled the meaning of the word “justice” for the sole purpose of maintaining social and political stability and order for the good of many instead of the few. However, what we believe to be just and unjust in regards to what Plato’s Republic explains about what is actually just and unjust are inadvertently blurred from a somewhat conflicting (if not unintended biased) perspective. These concepts of thought originate in a hierarchical group of knowledge: understanding, thought, belief, and imagination (Socrates 511e); most of which we use for measuring the ideal implementation of practical and critical forms of theory. What we portray justice in the United States today mostly consists of both opinionated…
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.…
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…
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.…
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…
In his philosophy, Plato places a large emphasis on the importance of the idea of justice. This emphasis can be seen especially in his work ‘The Republic’ where, through his main character Socrates, he attempts to define the nature of justice and to justify this definition. One of the methods used by Socrates to strengthen or rather explain his argument on justice is through his famous city-soul analogy, where a comparison between a just city and a just soul/individual is made. Through this analogy, Socrates attempts to explain the nature of justice, how it is the virtue of the soul and is therefore intrinsically valuable to the individual, but it becomes apparent in the analysis and evaluation of the analogy that there may have been several purposes behind it. Inconsistencies within the analogy itself also raise questions to the validity in Plato’s definition and justification of justice.…
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.…
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,…
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…
This is a very essential point that can be also considered in the short dialogue, Crito. For Socrates, integrity, institutions and laws are the most precious possessions of mankind so that a true guardian must respect and obey the rules of the city. In the dialogue, though Crito tries to persuade him to escape from the prison, Socrates argues that this action would be wrong because if he escapes from the prison, he will conflict with his whole life’s work. Socrates says that “the most important thing is not life, but the good life” [Crito, p.51, 48b] which shows us, he will dedicated his life to the goodness and justice. Then he cites that in any circumstance “wrongdoing and injustice is in every way harmful and shameful to the wrongdoer” [Crito, p.52, 49b], so although Athenians unjustly accused Socrates, as he is a true philosopher, he will not break the rules and escape and do a wrong, unjust movement. In addition, Socrates explains to Crito that the law has already given him a long and successful life [Crito, p.54, 51d – e] and attests to the fact that he actually owes the city…
The virtue in individuals does not always bring prosperity to the state on the whole. Not everyone is sensitive to the good of the others. Socrates' republic is, in this sense, utopic. Socrates states, "Anyone who intends to practise his craft well never does or orders but his best for himself " (Plato, 23). This belief does not match the modern experience nor does it match the experience of a Greek citizen in Ancient Greece. In reverse, Thrasymachus believes that justice is a means for the strong to exercise advantage. In a sense Thrasymachus associates the strenght of a citizen with his authority and position in the society. He famously states, "Justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger" (Plato, 14). Justice is a tool for the established order to preserve itself. The strong citizen with a sizeable authority makes use of justice in a manner to assert his private interests. Under the shadow of justice, he can easily practise injustice and impose it as justice to the others. Thats why the strong is in a position to employ justice and injustice at their own interest. For instance, since a ruler makes laws in a position to twist justice for his own benefit. Therefore, his prior concern is to preserve and enhance his own authority. In order to do that, he ignores the welfare of his subjects. He does not act always within a moral…
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.…
What is a good life in Socrates’ perspective? In order to get his point across, Socrates first phrases the question of what is more shameful - doing what is unjust or suffering what is unjust. For him, doing what is unjust is more shameful than suffering it. Even Polus, another philosophical figure that often clashed views with Socrates, ended up agreeing with him. However, Callicles did not. Callicles counter-argues that what Socrates is saying is only true “by law” and not “by nature.” Of course…
In Plato's Republic, the protagonist Socrates provides three proofs that a just life is more satisfying than an unjust life. Of the three proofs, The third is the focus of our attention today. It states that “ when the entire soul follows the philosophophic part, there is no civil war in it, each part of it does its own work exclusively and is just, and in a particular it enjoys its own pleasures, the best and truest pleasures possible for it... but when one of the other parts gains control, it won't be able to secure its own pleasure and will compel the other parts to pursue an alien and untrue pleasure” 586e-587a. I believe that the third proof is meant to distinguish between genuine pleasure and the relief of pain.…