ipl-logo

Thrasymachus Socrates Analysis

891 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Short note on Socrates

When engaged in conversation with Thrasymachus Socrates uses the “Socratic Method” in a different way then he did with Polemarchus and Glaucon, but this does not take away from the Socratic method. Thrasymachus argues that Justice is not universally beneficial. This is in part due to his role as an immoralist whose belief is that it is better to look out for your own interest then to follow the rules of right or wrong. Justice, he says, is nothing more than the advantage of the stronger (15). This definition is not imposed as an explanation; rather it is a delegitimization of justice. Justice, as Thrasymachus believes, is a convention that is imposed on us, and is not beneficial to adhere to. The Socratic method of inquiry is appropriate in investigating concepts such as justice. This is effectively put to use in book one through …show more content…

In Thrasymachus view, life is seen a competition to acquire more goods, more power, and more money, and whoever acquires the most of these resources has the greatest amount of virtue (16). Socrates then employs the craftsman model to prove that all arts are implemented with an ideal view, which pertains to the benefit of the subject rather than to the benefit of the artisan (24). The doctor employs his medical art for the betterment of the patient; the pilot navigates for the safety of the ship and the sailors (27). This proves that ruling is an art, which is exercised with a view to the subjects’ benefit. Injustice therefore cannot be a virtue because it is contrary to wisdom, and wisdom is understood as a virtue. Injustice is contrary to wisdom because the wise man, the man who is skilled in some art, never seeks to beat out those who possess the same art (29). The mathematician, for instance, is not in competition with other mathematicians. Therefore, wisdom is a virtue and injustice is a good that works together synonymously

Show More
Related
342 Words | 2 Pages

the Republic, Socrates argues that justice ought to be valued both for its own sake and for the sake of its consequences (358a1–3). His interlocutors Glaucon and Adeimantus have reported a number of arguments to the effect that the value of justice lies purely in the rewards and reputation that are the usual consequence of being seen to be just, and have asked Socrates to say what justice is and to show that justice is always intrinsically better than is acting contrary to justice when doing so would win you more non-moral goods. Glaucon presents these arguments as renewing Thrasymachus’ Book 1 position that justice is “another’s good” (358b–c, cf. 343c), which Thrasymachus had associated with the claim that the rulers in any constitution frame

Read More
1406 Words | 6 Pages

In the Republic, Plato gives an extensive theory of justice. Three classes exist, rulers (legislators/deliberates), auxilaries (enforcers), and producers. What God has mixed into one's own soul decides, whether it is gold, silver, or iron/bronze, decides what class one belong's in. Each one of these classes has the potential to best develop a

Read More
1122 Words | 5 Pages

The justice theory states that justice is at the advantage of the stronger; however, there have been cases where even the strongest have been defeated. Take Ovid’s Apollo and Daphne for example, or from a biblical perspective, the Book of Judges, or even Elie Wiesel’s novel Night. These writings each

Read More
436 Words | 2 Pages

In Plato’s Republic, Thrasymachus presented several arguments in favor of the position that “Might makes right.” Presenting his first argument, he stated “Listen, then. I say justice is nothing other than what is advantageous for the stronger.” By the stronger, he meant the people who establish the rules in the country. Thrasymachus explained that any type of government, as it could be democracy or tyranny, has its own rules and the person who doesn’t obey to those rules will be considered unjust and therefore punished.

Read More
1029 Words | 5 Pages

Thrasymachus continues to claim his position but in a modified form of his first argument, after Socrates commented. Being unjust, Thrasymachus thinks, is better than being just because it 's stronger and leads to a more happy life. As before he, he only takes into consideration only the advantages or disadvantages of being just, and he doesn 't discuss what 's justice or how it plays a role in people. Essentially, this definition is an extreme extension of the previous one. The example he gives that a tyrant gets happy through being unjust and controlling draws us back to his first argument saying that ‘ruling being the advantage of the stronger '.

Read More
2106 Words | 9 Pages

Plato contests this view on justice because he believes doing harm to anyone would be an injustice. This theory leads to their conclusion the just man is one who is useful. Thrasymachus refers to justice in an egoistical manner, saying “justice is in the interest of the stronger” (The Republic, Book I). He believes injustice is virtuous and wise and justice is vice and ignorance, but Socrates disagrees with this statement as believes the opposing view. As a result of continual rebuttals against their arguments,

Read More
732 Words | 3 Pages

Bothered by Socrates’ logic, Thrasymachus presents a revised version of his previous argument. Thrasymachus says that injustice is stronger than justice and that it most definitely results in a happier life. The example he uses (of a powerful dictator who is made happy through injustice is a reference to his earlier example that justice is used to the advantage of the stronger). Thrasymachus has not greatly changed the principle of his argument, just using alternate examples.

Read More
1434 Words | 6 Pages

Therefore, since Athens has a part to play in corrupting Socrates’s life as well as his mistaken visual of the truth, Socrates must understand that by obeying the state, he has done injustice to his soul for it will not be in true harmony. Furthermore he will be doing an injustice to the state because Plato would have established that, objectively, Athens laws are unjust and even if Socrates thinks that they are just, it is only because Socrates has been corrupted by

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

Socrates say’s this cannot be true because most of the people in this world make mistakes in judging who the real friends are and who the enemies are. Thrasymachus’s impression of justice is that the stronger person decides what justice is. Thrasymachus definition of justice raises two questions which needed clarification. First question is what exactly

Read More
338 Words | 2 Pages

Capote focuses several of his stories on the south,so naturally the southern gothic is very apparent throughout most of his texts; however, even some of his stories that do not take place in the south are reflections of the southern gothic. What comes with southern gothic is something that is entirely essential to the plot -- the gothic setting. Gothic settings can take many shapes, but as we have seen, they are usually dark, dreary, menacing places filled with dilapidated houses that are generally unwelcoming in one way or another. What the reader can count on coming from these settings is a character who shares qualities of the grotesque.

Read More
763 Words | 4 Pages

In Plato’s The Republic” written in 380 BC, Plato introduces two characters Polemarchus and Thrasymachus who hold two separate opinions on Justice. They both are made to give their own opinions on Justice by Socrates. Both standpoints accurately represent Justice in sirtain situations. The word justice can be represented in many ways because it holds a broad meaning. They are covering two completely different aspects of Justice.

Read More
1177 Words | 5 Pages

Justice is not the conception of the strong, while the weak are ruled by unjust rulers how Thrasymachus thought. Instead the ruler, rules accordingly establishing just laws even if they seem unfair. Rulers are infallible, thus creating just laws because if a ruler were to make an unjust law for the strong that would place the weak at an advantage creating a flaw in the argument. The ruler would want to create laws that are filled wisdom so that nobody would want to choose the life where an unjust men would be more profitable than a just men. In addition, Socrates demonstrates that an unjust men will not be able to live a more virtuous lifestyle than a just men due to the lack of learning that the unjust men has no recollection of, thus the just men will not be able to get the better of another just men.

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
1467 Words | 6 Pages

In Plato’s Republic, Socrates and his peers attempt to define justice. Unlike the definitions that his peers give, Socrates is searching to define justice as a structure, not a set of behaviors. Socrates uses a tripartite city-soul analogy to define justice and show that it is found when there is harmony between the three parts of the city—guardians, auxiliaries, producers—mirrored to the three parts of the soul—reason, spirit, appetite. Although Socrates provides a well-structured account of justice in an attempt to demonstrate that there cannot be social justice—in the city—if people don’t first bring internal justice—in the soul—in themselves, he has a notable contradiction in his premises. In Socrates’ ideal city it is a necessary condition of an auxiliary acting in a just way that he must cause any producers who get out of hand, or

Read More

More about Thrasymachus Socrates Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document