Plato and Thrasymachus: Differing Philosophies on Morality

“Remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you…” (The Holy Bible NIV). Plato and Thrasymachus have polar opposite philosophies about morals and justice. Both philosophers deliberated heavily about how individuals should ethically and morally behave. Adopting a moral code achieves harmony in one’s soul and secures over all well-being. Plato was a dominant moral philosopher in the ancient world. In Plato’s time, Athens had been rocked by the Peloponnesian War and political chaos after its defeat by Sparta (Bagnall, 2006, pp. 29-38). Perchance these events influenced Plato to search for answers that would bring harmony and clarity. It is important to note that Plato’s idea of justice is more in line with the New Testament’s interpretation of justice. The Greek word “dikaiosune” or righteousness, is what the bible translates to mean justice. Plato’s belief was that the root of justice or moral conduct, relied heavily on another worldly belief. “That process is the recollection of the things

Thrasymachus was a rhetorician whose orator skill were praised by Dionysus of Halicarnassus as “pure, subtle, and able, to speak either with terseness or with an abundance of words” (Guthrie, 1969, p. 167). Thrasymachus believed, as most Sophists do, that justice was a hindrance to an individual’s genuine interest: wealth, power, and pleasure. Thrasymachus conveys that justice is the interest and advantage of the stronger or “might makes right” (Plato, The Republic, 380 B.C, pp. 338d-339a). Thrasymachus felt that conventional morality be worn as a garment to conceal the egoist and self-centered motives underneath. Justice is nothing more than convention that serves the interests of lawmakers and if one wants justice, gaining power instead of appealing to an absolute standard of morality is the way. It is here that Plato’s theory and Thrasymachus’s demurring seemingly reach an