Glaucon Vs Socrates

Thoughts and points on being moral of Glaucon. On this topic Plato also said that when he thought and completed any work or discussion however it is beginning. But, Glaucon also courage this topic but he did not accept ‘Thrasymachus’ of the topic. Socrates also in this topic, he said justice is better than injustice, but Glaucon is not convinced in this topic he said why it is better give reason to me? Socrates give three reasons to him also which are kinds of goods which are used for human own sake and for others which man do not want to do but he has to do that and also advantageous for him or us. Examples of these are joy, medical treatment and many others. Moral tells us about what is wrong and right for human and it has some points of

Since a mission which is making now for disliking these demands. Now we are not owner of this place for convicting this kind of tale. Both (Socrates and Glaucon) first of all proved that these demands are not correct and these are used only for spreading wrong or outlaw stories and these are also spreading fake or false tales and views. The claims are such as if any person has a ring of Gyges he can start behave roughly and unjustly and he would include all material which are necessary for him like as power hungry and others also there are also many more other claims on this topic (justice and injustice) which are discussed by Socrates. The claims and the views of Socrates and Glaucon are right on own places and some conditions and movements which are used for examples by Socrates and Glaucon in this text and also in this article of Plato (The Immoralist’s Challenge). There is also other topic which are in the discussion and in the same text or article. In the end of speech of Glaucon, he said exhibit or demonstrate not only to unjust which is more preferable for people than just, but it is sensible for all people for doing

But, the second person who is just man. That person is blaspheme and covered with poverty. But, Adeimantus, who is the brother of Glaucon. He is paradoxical with the views of Glaucon. By the claims of Adeimantus the views of Glaucon is broken that art like this anyone do not proud justice and just is not use for human own sake, however, this is used only for the rewards which allows anyone to trap in this life and after this life. The brother of Glaucon repeat the request of his brother (Glaucon) which was this just is use for own sake like enjoyment or living happy, being healthy and used for taking knowledge. But after this Glaucon gave response on the view of his brother (Adeimantus). He said that he should totally explain the view which are paradoxical. With that views we can understand clearly. And should find advantages of just and disadvantages of unjust then he gives his thoughts which are against and clearly for understand. But front of the father both brother said that they want to be unjust. But they don’t proud or want to accept the justice