More handpicked essays just for you.
Socrates theory of justice
Socrates defnition of justice
What is the popular view of justice, according to glaucon
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In Plato’s, The Republic, Book I, Socrates tries to prove to Thrasymachus “whether just people also live better and are happier than unjust ones” (352d). He argues that everything has a predisposed proficiency at a function, and that this functions are performed well by the peculiar virtue and badly by means of its vice (353a-353d) . The point of this paper is to present Socrates argument and evaluate it to the best of my ability. This argument can be categorized as an inductive generalization. Socrates states that the function of anything is what it alone can do or what it does best.
In an attempt to amass an overall consensus of justice being desirable as a benefit to the health of the soul, and the necessity placed on maintaining its ideals as a virtue (as expressed by Socrates to resolve Thrasymachus 's definition); Glaucon extends his argument of justice to include the concept of the Three Kinds of Goods. As explained, all goods can be divided into three classes: as a mere means such as physical labor, as an end akin to joy, and as both a means and an end comparable to maintaining knowledge (book ii). Although an advocate for the belief that justice is coveted both as a means and an end, Glaucon alludes that most individuals classify justice under the first group: justice is no more than a mere means. He continues to elaborate on the idea that justice is viewed as a necessary evil, and that it is only maintained in order
The general theme of The Republic is the meaning of justice captured by Socrates and Cephalus speaking about the benefits of growing old. The conversation quickly becomes an argument between the two about what justice is. Cephalus is a business man, a pillar of the community, and a man of religion. When speaking about his wealth he seems apathetic about money; this is when Socrates has an epiphany about Cephalus inheriting his money and explains the manner in which one acquires their money as speaks volumes to how intently they appreciate it.
Thrasymachus’s proposed statement that cities are unjust because the stronger rule the weaker to the advantage of the stronger is false because he, in fact, is arguing the opposite: it is just for the stronger to rule the weaker to the advantage of the stronger(Plato). My first argument for why the above statement is false is Thrasymachus’s claim that justice is the advantage of the established rule. This claim supports my reasoning for why the statement is false because an established rule requires strength; therefore, the advantage of the established rule is in fact the advantage of the stronger. An established rule does not come from the weak, as the weak are unable to impose their will upon the strong, which further enhances the idea that
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.
Socrates thought that the discussion on justice had finished when he adequately answered Thrasymachus’argument, but Glaucon is not satisfied with the conclusion and adds his opinion to the conversation. Glaucon states that all goods can be separated into three classes: things people desire simply for its own sake, such as physical training and medical treatment; things people desire both for its own sake and because we get something out of it, such as happiness; the last class is the things we desire people like only because we get something out of it such as, knowledge and health. Glaucon wants Socrates to prove that justice falls in the third class because we want something out of it. Glaucon states that most people place justice in the first
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)
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
In discussing nature and self interest, Socrates rebuts by asserting that genuine justice is its reward. He contends that leading a just life fosters peace and satisfaction, irrespective of incentives or repercussions. Socrates believes that those who uphold justice are nurturing their souls and attuning themselves with the order of the universe. In opposition to Glaucon's perspective on justice as a means to an end, Socrates portrays justice as a
In Book two of Plato’s Republic, there is the continued argument about what a just life is. It is brought up once again when Glaucon, who wasn’t satisfied with Socrates first answer, once again challenges him to argue his opinion on what a just life is but instead of having him recite another definition he poses a challenge. Glaucon inherently asks Socrates to defend justice’s worth and exhibit that justice is innately desirable to injustice, because to Glaucon, justice is not something that people freely participate in, “…even those who practice it do so unwillingly, from an incapacity to do justice..., (Plato 359e1-2)” instead he feels that it is an agreement of sorts between men that ends up being carried out to benefit one’s self. To further
There are a multitude of opinions on human morality including where it derives and the necessity behind why one should be just. In the excerpt from Readings in Moral Philosophy by Jonathan Wolff, the dialogue between the Greek philosopher Plato and a man named Glaucon is described. In this excerpt, Glaucon provides a vast amount of supporting ideas on how man will choose to be unjust because morality is tiresome. These arguments include stating justice and morality are only used as a middle point, an example of a traditional story about a ring of Gyges, and lastly an argument of how a man who appears as just but is truly unjust reaps all the benefits. Thus from the analysis of this excerpt, morality is unnatural for human beings but brings about desirable social goods.
As Book II of The Republic begins, Socrates seems to believe he has ended the argument of defining justice. Glaucon and the brothers, however, present Socrates with a new challenge: to prove that justice is not only an ambition, but also that those who desire justice yearn for it for their own well-being (CITE). Glaucon is adamant that no man lives a just life simply for the purpose of being an honest man with a healthy soul. To prove this point, Glaucon alludes to The Ring of Gyges, a legend in which a shepherd finds a golden ring in a cave that contains magical powers. When the shepherd wore the ring, he discovered that when “he turned the collet inward, he became invisible, when outward, visible” (REP 360a4-5).
Plato’s Republic examines many concepts that make up an ideal state, the biggest being how justice affects the structure of society as well as the human nature of an individual. In Book Two, Glaucon states that the only reason that justice exists is because people are afraid to act on unjust thoughts. He argues that if no one was afraid to act on these thoughts, then no one would be just. Glaucon’s brother Adeimantus adds on to this argument, stating that appearing to be just is better than actually being just. He adds that the unjust person who is able to maintain their reputation of being just will also be happier than the just person.
It is challenging to lead a private life while truly fighting for justice. A man can fight for justice through examining the greatest issues in human nature that Socrates found essential to the private life. However, this knowledge can have the biggest effect when brought into the public life such as through teachings. These two things can then combine to reflect how the state should be changed. Socrates sometimes crossed this line himself, even if unknowingly.
Glaucon gave Socrates three classes: “goods are there not some which we welcome for their own sakes”; “second class of goods are desirable not only in themselves, but also for their results”; the goods, as Glaucon meant, that people like because they got wages form work. Socrates thought the second one is the best, while Glaucon people would choose the third one rather than other. Glaucon debated that justice exists not because it is not a good thing to do, but people scared that, if they do injustice to other people, these people will do the injustice things back, so instead of doing injustice works, people made a kind of agreement to protect themselves. He also said that if someone was not scared of what people did bad to them, no one would be justice. For this, he told a story named Ring of Gyges.
