ipl-logo

How Does Socrates Contribute To The Nature Of Justice

781 Words4 Pages

Plato’s Republic is a book with many important themes, but the nature of justice stands out the most. The Republic’s idea of the perfect city revolves around justice and applies this idea of how people should work, and the parts of the soul. Also, how these two things are helpful or a hindrance.
To find a better understanding of justice, Socrates wants to know what makes a person just and what effects just people would have on society. I think the conversation between Socrates and Cephalus contribute to why justice is difficult to define. The explanation Cephalus gives does not satisfy Socrates’, which makes him want to find out more about justice. This leads to Socrates creation of a Kallipolis. The Kallipolis is the ideal city, with a perfect structure and just people. Socrates chose the city so he could understand justice and apply it to an individual. …show more content…

Applying the concept of justice to a bigger object would have allowed Socrates to get rid of the problems he could not solve when talking about the individual. Also, this helped Socrates to see if making a just city was even possible. It is very hard to come up with a just society; but, his efforts are applauded. However, certain aspects of his ideal city would cause problems in today’s society. Socrates’ idea of how people should be divided and have children in the Kallipolis is something that would cause an uproar. Based on today’s society, having people divided into certain groups would not help justice, but create injustices and hostilities towards one another. This would cause the soul of the people to become unjust and cause one part of the soul to dominate over the

Show More
Related
648 Words | 3 Pages

He held that upright life is the only life worth living. To him, justice was a matter of knowledge and hence, a truth aspect. Meanwhile, he honored and acknowledged his duty to obey the Laws of the state. From Socrates' perspective, Laws are absolute.

Read More
559 Words | 3 Pages

The first concept that I noticed shared by Russell and Socrates was the concept that one had to remove themselves before serious philosophical contemplation could take place. In Russell 's case, he refers to the "Self" and the "Not-Self". With Socrates, as seen in the Apology, confronting his accuser about the corruption of youth, his accuser is silent because he had not given the matter any thought. Socrates awareness of his own ignorance frees him from what Russell would refer to as "Self". I mention this because it serves as a common theme even as both philosophers differ in their messages.

Read More
643 Words | 3 Pages

His statement brings up controversy, making the argument fail to back up its point. Socrates argues that a just soul and a just man will live well, and an unjust one badly. This argument consists of the following: 1. The function of each thing is what it alone can do or what it does better than anything else.

Read More
577 Words | 3 Pages

Would you agree it would be horrible if not sinful to harm something good and innocent like perhaps a mockingbird? In the book To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee Atticus, the narrator’s father, says “Remember it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird” (pg.119) when telling her what she can and can’t shoot with her new air gun. Scout tells us that Atticus never says something is a sin; so why would he say that maybe to teach her it’s bad to harm a good and innocent creature. Atticus’s quote means more than just it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird but that it is wrong to harm or kill something that is innocent and does only good.

Read More
510 Words | 3 Pages

Socrates was put on trial for his intentions that were good. Society thought them out to be bad, but all socrates was trying to do was to improve society as whole. To improve society socrates would question citizens of Athens and make them think about their reality. During Socrates trial they accused him of corrupting the youth. Socrates would never willingly corrupt the youth because he saw the youth as the future.

Read More
732 Words | 3 Pages

Finally, Socrates claims that the unjust man is ignorant, weak and bad. Socrates argument is effective in the way that he does not shatter Thrasymachus’ argument without reason, he is given many examples that change his way of thinking. Thrasymachus is told to put his ‘set in stone’ ideas under different situations, and once he does, he can clearly see that he should not have been so stubborn, as soon as he does so, he can see that his arguments aren’t suited to all situations. By the end of the argument, Thrasymachus isn’t so much debating the definition of justice, as he is defining the required traits to be a ruler of

Read More
1382 Words | 6 Pages

Socrates believes that justice benefits the just, but also benefits the city (other people) too. He is faced with a seemingly simple choice, escape Athens or remain in prison and be sentenced to death. Socrates’ central argument against escaping his circumstances is twofold. First, Socrates argues that “one must never do wrong.” (49b)

Read More
1169 Words | 5 Pages

According to Socrates there are two types of justice, the political justice and the justice of a particular man. As we know, city is bigger than a man. Socrates believes that it is easier to find justice at the political level which means in the city, thus he tries to define a just city from scrap, and will see in which stage justice enters. Also, Socrates tries to find justice in the city before finding justice in the individuals because individuals are not at all self-sufficient. We humans have similar needs such as food, clothing and shelter and in order to accomplish these goals human beings form unions, where each and every individual specializes in a field.

Read More
384 Words | 2 Pages

Republic is a defense of justice- similar to the format of Apology- that is investigating what justice is, and what it means to be a just person and live a good life. Polemarchus asserts that justice is giving people what is owed to them, however after a long discussion, Socrates molds this statement into a series of ambiguous situations that still don’t form a valid definition. He then discusses with Thrasymachus, Glaucon and Adeimantus about what makes a person just and why they live a better life. The conclusion is best described through the analogy of the many headed beast, lion, and human being that grow together inside of a person. This represents the soul- something that others cannot see, and only affects the person it is a part of.

Read More
553 Words | 3 Pages

Seemingly to Socrates, every definition must be questioned. Regarding the substantial topic of justice, it is nearly impossibly to present a clear-cut definition that applies to all situations. In discussions with Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, Socrates could not help but question their attempted definitions for justice. He always found a loophole, some sort of situation where their version of justice could not prevail and could not seem valid.

Read More
1021 Words | 5 Pages

Through becoming a teacher of the young men who followed him in Athens, Socrates effectively began to enter the public life. He was able to influence others through sharing his conclusions of justice, self-examination, and piety, and by asking relentless questions. Socrates effectively showed that an individual can live a private and a public life, even if Socrates was not directly involved in the policy-making in Athens. An individual can combine these two aspects of life in a productive way allowing her/him to live a full existence. These individuals can become teachers, politicians, and activists who use their focus on justice and piety in their private lives to advocate and create laws that promote true justice for the rest of the

Read More
943 Words | 4 Pages

In Book IV of Plato’s Republic, Socrates and his peers come to the conclusion that a city is going to need people who have an understanding of what justice should be. Socrates at the end of Book IV can make the difference between individual, political, and social justice. He knows that individual and political justice is so much in common because they both weigh in heavy on truth, honor, and appetitive soul. That appetitive soul is an element that helps the secure the just community with love and support.

Read More
770 Words | 4 Pages

When it comes to justice, Polemarchus believes that justice is “…helping friends and harming enemies.”. Socrates questions this point of view because according to Polemarchus’ view point, only the people who are close to him and in his circle of friends would be worthy of any kind of Justice. Polemarchus is wrong in this viewpoint because if only the people that you know who are of your similar social status and you interact with on a day to day basis are considered friends, what of those that you do not know? Or what of those who are not of your social status, that you do not interact with? Socrates questions this by asking, “Do you mean by friends those who seem to be good to an individual, or those who are, even if they don't seem to be, and similar with enemies?”.

Read More
607 Words | 3 Pages

Considering how the Piraeus, Athens’ port area, contains individuals hailing from various locations, it would that such a place would be where Socrates encounters different definitions of justice. In Book One of Plato’s The Republic, Socrates challenges Cephalus’ belief that justice is simply being honest and paying back the dues that one owes to the gods and to his fellow men. By providing examples of where it would be unjust to repay one’s debts, Socrates refutes Cephalus’ definition of justice. In these scenarios, paying back those debts would pose a risk of harm to innocent people, which would be unjust since justice does not involve harming others.

Read More
832 Words | 4 Pages

Plato's Republic is centered on one simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? This is something that Socrates addresses both in terms of political communities and the individual person. Plato argues that being just is advantageous to the individual independent of any societal benefits that the individual may incur in virtue of being just. I feel as if Plato’s argument is problematic. There are not enough compelling reasons to make this argument.

Read More

More about How Does Socrates Contribute To The Nature Of Justice

Related Topics

Open Document