Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
the definitions of justice from the republic
justice in the republic
justice in the republic
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: the definitions of justice from the republic
Conflicting Points in Plato's Republic
In his Plato’s Republic Socrates tries to find the values of an ideal city in order to rightly define justice. Although I agree with most of his ideals for the city, there are also many that I disagree with. Some of his ideas that I accept are that women should be able to share the same responsibilities as the men, having women and children in common, , the recognition of honor based on the self rather than heredity, that the best philosophers are useless to the multitudes, and the philosopher / king as a ruler. I disagree with his views on censorship, having assigned positions in society, his views on democracy, and that art cannot be a respectable occupation.
Three of the arguments in the Republic that I agree with stress equality. They include women and men sharing the same responsibilities, having women and children in common, and recognition being based on ability. These would make life less confusing for everyone, and the city would be more efficient as a whole. Another point, which Socrates makes that I agree with, is that the best philosophers are useless to the multitudes. This is because they are the ones that make progress in how society views the world, and not everyone can clearly understand the importance of this. I also agree that the rulers should think like philosophers because after all it is their job to see that the city improves, and that its intentions are just.
I disagree with his views on censorship, having assigned positions in society, his views on democracy, and that art cannot be a respectable occupation. In books II and III Socrates argues that much of epic poetry that contains false statements about the gods and other immoral subjects should be removed from their city. If the education of the citizens were to be censored in this way, they would not properly be able to learn the divisions between the moral and immoral (just and unjust). In this sense the people may wish to explore what is being censored more than if it were not, and subsequently lead to injustice.
Another one of Plato’s ideas that I disagree with is having assigned positions in society. This eliminates the free choice of the citizens, and they will not be as productive doing something that they are forced to do rather than something they choose.
In the book Republic, Plato is on a quest to define Justice as he builds the ideal city. His city is ruled by philosopher kings, the true rulers. Philosophers, in Plato’s opinion, are best fit to rule and judge because of their love of knowledge and wisdom. When arguing philosophers have the experiences of all regimes Plato says, “The philosopher to have tasted the kind of pleasure that comes from the sight of things as they truly are. ‘so far as experiences goes, then,’ I said, ‘he is the one who is in the best position to judge” (325). Plato believes, that because philosophers have all the parts of the soul that other types of rulers contain, plus the ability to be able to see the world for what is, they then have
In Plato’s The Republic, he unravels the definition of justice. Plato believed that a ruler could not be wholly just unless one was in a society that was also just. Plato did not believe in democracy, because it was democracy that killed Socrates, his beloved teacher who was a just man and a philosopher. He believed in Guardians, or philosophers/rulers that ruled the state. One must examine what it means for a state to be just and what it means for a person to be just to truly understand the meaning of justice. According to Socrates, “…if we first tried to observe justice in some larger thing that possessed it, this would make it easier to observe in a single individual. We agreed that this larger thing is a city…(Plato 96).” It is evident, therefore, that the state and the ruler described in The Republic by Plato are clearly parallel to one another.
He talks about what the ideal city would entail asking questions such as, who would rule, who would raise the children, would you favor music or fitness, what justice means and finally what type of government would the state have and who would rule? Some of the answers Socrates discusses seem to contradict his beliefs in earlier works, specifically The Apology and The Crito. One of the largest discrepancies that I see between this work and The Apology is his view on examining life. In The Apology, he says that he would never be able to be alive and not continue to question what he sees and other people, because the unexamined life is not worth living. Yet in The Republic, he argues, in some instances, that people will be specialized in certain fields and that only the rulers will be philosophers. This means that only the rulers will be the ones who are examining and questioning things that are going on, which goes against what he states in The Apology. Most of the citizens in this state would not be examining what is told to them or questioning the world around them because it is not their specialty. Does that mean that their lives are not worth living or does it mean that only philosophers lives are worth living? I don’t think this means that people wouldn’t be capable of questioning things further, but they would be discouraged
Although, Plato’s Republic seems to be a philosophy of long ago, many of his ideas are still relevant in our society in ways we do not even realize. They show that man, left to his own thoughts outside of God, basically comes back to the same point or thought
The idea of the possibility of such model of justice and education, thus in turn the utopia city. Plato's ideal social arrangement would be a city with philosophy-kings, guardians, auxiliaries, and producers or craftsmen. justice of the city is much clearer and more obvious than that of the individual. such a society is nearly impossible as it is built mainly on the foundation of myths and censorship. Despite these being based on noble falsehoods, they are still lies. For instance, the myth of the metals explains why certain people belong to certain class and allows the citizens to be patriotic and harmonious which is beneficial for the City. However, when justice of the city as a whole is looked at, there is no need to demand that every citizen have the same type of justice. "the city we were founding and describing exists in theory, for I don't think it exists anywhere on earth" (592b). Plato himself also agrees, and suggests that such state is
In Plato' "ideal" model of a city; he chose an aristocratic form of government, describing it as the rule of the most strong, wise and intelligent. In his system people are robbed of their basic rights to live as a primitive human being. People had no right to choose what they want to be after they are born; their occupation is chosen for them by the "philosopher king." He chooses one's job after assessing one's talent in a variety of areas. ...
Plato defends himself by explaining that he is thinking what is best for society, and not just for one specific group. If there is an exceptional good person, it is further exceptional for them to identify and further trained because it is what is best for the collective good, and of that exceptionally good must take justice into their own hands. (186). He argues that the guardians are always on the scent for truth, like dogs who are the most philosophical of all animals, so therefore they should rule because in a way they are like philosophers, and Plato believes the philosophers are titled to become rulers. (explain the corruption part on 188.) When Munitiz brings up the how Plato lays out only a program for the ruling class. He counteracts acts that statement and explains that he only wants a city where are the citizens are able to achieve their virtues leading them to their happiness, but for that to happen it requires rulers to be one with city and will never exploit it. He claims this would lead to not only a just city, but justice for
Plato’s idea for a perfect government is to have three different classes to have different roles to help the society. The first group of people is the Producing class and they are responsible for providing materials and food for the city. This is where the farmers, blacksmiths, the fishermen, and other jobs like them. The second group is the Auxiliaries and they are the ones who job is to protect the city from threats, so the soldiers. The final group is the guardians, these are the philosophers and it is there job to not only be knowledgeable but to be just. Plato believes that there are several things that can derail the advancement of society. “Then nothing insane and nothing akin to dissoluteness can be involved in the right of love…Then sexual pleasure must not be involved” (121). Plato believed that sex should only be reserved for special festivals and for creating life, other than that people should keep in line with how a father and son touch each other. Plato did not just regulate what two people did in the privacy in the own home, but he also regulated what people should be learning in school. “At any rate, it ought to end where it has ended; for surely training in the musical crafts ought to end in a passion for beauty” ...
In summary, Plato's comments are incredibly perceptive and relevant: a lot of what he says has been proved true in one way or another throughout history. The transition of our own country from an early 19th century Oligarchy to the Democracy we have today seems to have been predicted by Plato over two thousand years ago. It may also be true that our contemporary politicians are to be ousted by the dissatisfied public, and replaced with a tyrannical dictator. Finally, though not everything Plato says is in concordance with what we can now see for ourselves, his ideas are still relevant in any study of modern politics.
The analyzation and interpretation of Plato’s argument and theory of epistemology Book V to Book VII are what the article consists. Starting off with Book V from Plato’s Republic it introduces the argument of philosopher versus the sight lover. This dialogue of course is narrated by Socrates through Plato’s writing. It starts off with the example that the man ran by doxa (belief) can make up and see countless of beautiful things, but unlike the awakened philosopher, the man cannot grasp beauty itself. Throughout the article, Boylu works to validate Plato’s theory of knowledge and the distinction between episteme (knowledge) and doxa (belief/opinion). The written work challenges yet support the “Two-Worlds Theory” and discusses the analogies
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
...litical figure came close to challenging Socrates' unique philosophical plan. In the Republic, Socrates' ideas of how ignorant a democracy is, is portrayed in the Apology when Socrates' proclamation resulted in death. A democracy is supposed to be about individuality and freedom, however it was contradicted when Socrates was put to death because he had ideas for a better system of ruling. He wanted a ruler to be somebody who would see truth, not shunning certain ideas and keeping others solely because it is not understood. These ideas are portrayed in both excerpts.
In Plato’s The Republic, the primary focus for a significant portion of the text is establishing the ideal state in order to determine the nature of justice and virtue. In doing so, Socrates, who is the primary speaker in the text, determines several requirements for the existence of the ideal state. The third requirement according to Socrates is that philosophers must rule as kings (or kings must adequately philosophize). Until this occurs, “cities will have no rest from evils” (473d). However, there is some objection, or anticipated objection, to Socrates’ requirement. Adeimantus, one of Socrates interlocutors in The Republic, raises the objection that those who actively philosophize into adulthood are made up of a great number of cranks and,
Plato supposed that people exhibit the same features, and perform the same functions that city-states do. Applying the analogy in this way presumes that each of us, like the state, is a complex whole made up of several distinct parts, each of which has its own proper role. But Plato argued that there is evidence of this in our everyday experience. When faced with choices about what to do, we commonly feel the tug of many different impulses drawing us in different directions all at once, and the most natural explanation for this situ...
Wisdom, courage, moderation and justice are four essential virtues the ideal state must be built upon, as explained by Socrates in Plato’s Republic. Throughout the eight books of Socratic dialogue the ideal state and ideas of justice are debated, on both individual and state levels. The guidelines for a perfect state and how it will come about are thoroughly described. Socrates covers every aspect of political life and how it should work stating that “until power and philosophy entirely coincide… cities will have no rest form evils” . In Plato’s Republic Socrates emphasizes the superiority of the philosopher and their abilities to rule as kings above others. He believes that they are best suited to rule as a result of their pure souls and lust for knowledge, the desire for truth over opinions and things that are tangible. The philosopher is best able to fulfill the four essential virtues of the state and thus must be the king. He evokes the idea of a cave, a parallel to the effects of education on the soul and a metaphor for human perceptions, to describe how humans will act and show distinctions between groups of people. This conception of the ideal state has been heavily criticized by his successors, but when applied according to how Plato perceived the state and human capacity, in theory the idea of the philosopher-king is extremely convincing. According to Socrates the soul is made up of three parts, and each person is governed primarily by a different one. Which aspect of the soul occupies a person affects their access to the four virtues deemed ultimate. The appetitive part of the soul is at the bottom of the divided line; it controls the unnecessary desires and is undesirable to be governed by. The spirited element of the s...