Thrasymachus 'Argument In Socrates'

Socrates allows Thrasymachus to entertain his ideas in a public setting, but questions his position on the fallibility and infallibility of rulers. Thrasymachus is in favor of the strong ruling as opposed to the weak, while Socrates believes that those with the proper knowledge and capabilities should rule over the general population. Through asking the correct questions, Socrates was able to deconstruct the argument that Thrasymachus believed was untouchable. Thrasymachus could have answered Socrates in a more successful way by putting more thought into his answers, and by treating Socrates with more respect. Due to Thrasymachus’ incapability of completing the aforementioned, Socrates has the stronger argument because he demonstrates that

He argues the fact that most people are “good” in only a few areas of their life, but fail to carry it through the entire way of their life. Thrasymachus also adds that most people only follow the law because they are afraid of the consequences or because they are ignorant. “Injustice is the opposite, it rules those simpleminded-for that is what they really are-just people, and the ones it rules do what is advantageous for the other who is stronger; and they make the one they serve happy, but they do not make themselves the least bit happy.” (pg 21 c) I believe that at this point in the argument, Thrasymachus was actually presenting more sound theory. I agree with him on the fact that most people follow the law in order to escape punishment, and that very few people follow the law because it is something that they enjoy doing. However, it was at the point when Thrasymachus went on to discuss that only strong and intelligent men have the courage to do what is wrong because they are unafraid of the consequences that I stopped agreeing with him. I do not believe that doing right or wrong can be based on the physical appearance or mental stamina. There are brilliant people who follow the law to the letter, and there are those who are weak in stature that disregard the law for the purpose of

He gives examples such as cheating on taxes, robbing funds and cheating people out of their money. “Second, in matters relating to the city, when taxes are to be paid, a just man pays more on an equal amount of property, an unjust one less; but when the city is giving out refunds, a just man gets nothing while an unjust one makes a large profit.” (pg 21 d) Socrates refutes this by telling Thrasymachus that he is wrong on three levels: that the unjust man is smarter than the just, that doing the wrong thing makes someone strong and that doing the wrong thing gives joy to someone. Throughout reasoning through Thrasymachus’ three mistakes Socrates is able to even persuade Thrasymachus that there is fault in Thrasymachus’ argument. Socrates reminds Thrasymachus that even those who practice lawlessness together such as thieves have to trust each other. The thieves must have a sort of justice and code that even they follow in order to keep the peace amongst the thieves. “do you think that a city, an army, a band of robbers or thieves, or any other group with a common unjust purpose would be able to achieve it if its members were unjust to each other?” (pg 31 d) Soon after, Socrates completes his argument against Thrasymachus by describing that man’s virtue is in how he