Thrasymachus And Justice

244 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: plato essay on the republic

In Republic by Plato also defines the meaning of Justice but shows why we use justice in the wrong concept. Thrasymachus is a young, ambitious politician. In Book I of Republic Thrasymachus began with stating his position by declaring, “justice is nothing else than that, which is advantageous to the stronger,” (lines 338 c). When debating with Socrates, his theory is that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Meaning that there is no such thing as just and unjust, if I’m the strongest or in power I am right, and if you’re weak, you’re wrong. Additionally, nobody wants to be just, people only care about their benefit. Comparing to Cephalous reasoning of justice to pay back what you owe, or pay back your debt. Thrasymachus exposes Cephalous

Show More
Related

  • Justice in Plato´s The Republic

    565 Words  | 2 Pages

    In book four of Plato's “The Republic” Socrates defines justice in the individual as analogous to justice in the state. I will explain Socrates' definition of justice in the individual, and then show that Socrates cannot certify that his definition of justice is correct, without asking further questions about justice. I will argue that if we act according to this definition of justice, then we do not know when we are acting just. Since neither the meaning of justice, nor the meaning of good judgement, is contained in the definition, then one can act unjustly while obeying to the definition of justice. If one can act unjustly while obeying this definition, then Socrates' definition of justice is uncertifiable.

    Read More

  • Thucydides: Fear, Honor, And Interest

    273 Words  | 1 Pages

    Thucydides was right to claim that all wars can be explained by Fear, Honor, and Interest. All Wars are related to the three characteristics as stated by Dr. Nation (Dr. Nation video). The Athenians thought process was that the weak would be ruled by the strong and that was the nature of conflict (Strassler p. 43). Looking at the Peloponnesian war itself will illustrate how fear, honor and interest were involved with how this war developed. The initial unnamed Athenian that made that statement was probably using it to deter war with Sparta when it mostly incited the war (Dr. Nation Video). The Athenians wanted to maintain and sustain their city state but also expand it. They were expanding through their alliances and this is what invoked the

    Read More

  • Justice In The Eumenides

    864 Words  | 2 Pages

    In ancient Greece, retributive justice served as both a strict societal code and an expectation of the cosmos. In The Eumenides by Aeschylus, the Furies serve as the defenders of this justice, which is explored in depth during the Furies’ monologue as they pursue Orestes for his matricide. In order to fully understand this passage, the reader must first grasp the Furies’ sense of justice. The Furies require Orestes’ retribution for his matricide. Unlike the contemporary view of justice, their perception dictates strict punishment for the act without consideration of both sides of the argument. Throughout the Furies’ monologue, the beings disclose both their interpretation of justice and the drive they feel to protect that view.

    Read More

  • The Concept Of Justice In Plato's Republic

    1333 Words  | 3 Pages

    Kephalos defines justice as returning what one has received (Ten Essays, Leo Strauss, page 169). On the other hand, Kaphalos’ son, Polemarchus, states that justice is found in harming one’s enemies and helping ones’ friends (Republic, 332D). The final opinion in the discussion is given by Thrasymachus as he says: “justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger” (Republic, 338C). However, the lack of knowledge to apply their definitions in reality creates a problem for Socrates. For example, Polemarchos’ view on justice requires a person to be able to distinguish between a friend and an enemy (History of political philosophy, Leo Strauss, 36). Socrates then refutes their definitions of justice and states that it is an advantage to be just and a disadvantage to be unjust. According to Socrates’ philosophy, “a just man will harm no man” and the application of justice becomes an art conjoined with philosophy, the medicine of the soul (History of political philosophy, Leo Strauss, 36). Therefore, the use of philosophy in ruling a city is necessary and the end goal of justice cannot be achieved unless the philosophers

    Read More

  • Justice Exemplified by Plato and Thucydides

    618 Words  | 2 Pages

    Plato's Book I of The Republics presents three fundamental views on justice which are exemplified in Thucydides' On Justice, Power and Human Nature. Justice is illustrated as speaking the paying one's debts, helping one's friends and harming one's enemies, and the advantage of the stronger.

    Read More

  • Glaucon's Challenge and Plato's Theory of Justice in Plato's Republic

    1807 Words  | 4 Pages

    Plato’s Republic focuses on one particular question: is it better to be just or unjust? Thrasymachus introduces this question in book I by suggesting that justice is established as an advantage to the stronger, who may act unjustly, so that the weak will “act justly” by serving in their interests. Therefore, he claims that justice is “stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice” (Plato, Republic 344c). Plato begins to argue that injustice is never more profitable to a person than justice and Thrasymachus withdraws from the argument, granting Plato’s response. Glaucon, however, is not satisfied and proposes a challenge to Plato to prove that justice is intrinsically valuable and that living a just life is always superior. This paper will explain Glaucon’s challenge to Plato regarding the value of justice, followed by Plato’s response in which he argues that his theory of justice, explained by three parts of the soul, proves the intrinsic value of justice and that a just life is preeminent. Finally, it will be shown that Plato’s response succeeds in answering Glaucon’s challenge.

    Read More

  • Justice In Plato's The Republic

    1072 Words  | 3 Pages

    Also, that justice is a certain type of specialization, meaning that performing a particular task that is a person’s own, not of someone else’s. Plato (2007), Polemarchus argues with Socrates in book I that, “Justice was to do good to a friend and harm to an enemy” (335b p.13). Plato (2007) he then responds, “It is not the function of the just man to harm either his friends or anyone else, but of his opposite the unjust man” (335d p.14). His views of justice are related to contemporary culture, because when someone does something that they are supposed to do, they receive credit or a reward for it, but if the opposite of that is performed, by not doing the particular task that is asked, they are then rewarded but with punishments. Also, that justice is doing the right thing in a society. Justice of contemporary culture does not diverge from the views offered in The Republic and Socrates views are adequate, because if a task is not performed the way it needs to be, and is supposed to be a person should not be rewarded for it. Additionally, that an individual should be just not

    Read More

  • Thrasymachus and Socrates

    771 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Plato’s The Republic, we, the readers, are presented with two characters that have opposing views on a simple, yet elusive question: what is justice? In this paper, I will explain Thrasymachus’ definition of justice, as well as Socrates’s rebuttals and differences in opinion. In addition, I will comment on the different arguments made by both Socrates and Thrasymachus, and offer critical commentary and examples to illustrate my agreement or disagreement with the particular argument at hand.

    Read More

  • Definition Of Justice In Book 1 Of The Republic

    703 Words  | 2 Pages

    Cephalus is the first to give a definition of justice which is, living up to your legal obligations and being honest. At first I thought this definition was somewhat accurate because if everyone did their legal obligations everything would be fine. Socrates refutes this definition by using the example of a madman. Basically, what happens if you would owe a madman a weapon, but him having it is unjust and causes others harm. At this point it would almost be better to be dishonest. I found myself switching my opinion on this definition after Socrates gave this example.

    Read More

  • Justice vs Revenge

    1309 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hourani, George. Thrasymachus' Definition of Justice in Plato's Republic. 2. 7. Focus Publishing, 1962. eBook. .

    Read More

  • Justice in Plato's The Republic

    961 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Plato's Response to Thrasymachus' Immoralist View of Justice

    1494 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Book 1 of the ‘Republic’, Socrates, in answer to the question ‘What is Justice?’ is presented with a real and dangerous alternative to what he thinks to be the truth about Justice. Julia Annas believes Thrasymachus thinks Justice and Injustice do have a real existence that is independent of human institutions; and that Thrasymachus makes a decided commitment to Injustice. She calls this view ‘Immoralism’: “the immoralist holds that there is an important question about justice, to be answered by showing that injustice is better.” This essay identifies this ‘Immoral’ view before understanding if and how Plato can respond to it. How does Plato attempt to refute Thrasymachus’s argument? Is he successful?

    Read More

  • Analysis of Thrasymachus' Argument in The Republic

    651 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thrasymachus has just stated, "Justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger", and is now, at the request of Socrates, clarifying his statement.

    Read More

  • The Republic of Plato

    1279 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Book one of the Republic of Plato, several definitions of justice versus injustice are explored. Cephalus, Polemarchus, Glaucon and Thracymicus all share their opinions and ideas on what actions they believe to be just, while Socrates questions various aspects of the definitions. In book one, Socrates is challenged by Thracymicus, who believes that injustice is advantageous, but eventually convinces him that his definition is invalid. Cephalus speaks about honesty and issues of legality, Polemarchus explores ideas regarding giving to one what is owed, Glaucon views justice as actions committed for their consequences, and Socrates argues that justice does not involve harming anybody. Through the interrogations and arguments he has with four other men, and the similarity of his ideas of justice to the word God, Socrates proves that a just man commits acts for the benefits of others, and inflicts harm on nobody.

    Read More

  • Thrasymachus Definition Of Justice Essay

    523 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thrasymachus defines justice as the advantage of the stronger. “I say justice is nothing other than what is advantageous for the stronger” (338c). Thrasymachus explains how rulers are the most powerful people in the city, who make the laws, which are just therefore making the rulers the stronger. He explains that rulers make laws that will benefit themselves; whether this means they make laws that are just depends on the type of ruler. “democracy makes democratic ones, tyranny tyrannical ones…” (338 10e), he is saying that if one is democratic their laws will be fair and just but if not they will make unfair rules and therefore be unjust. Thrasymachus explains that the reason he thinks that justice is the advantage for the stronger is because the people who rule cities have more power than everyone else and therefore determine what the rules are and what is just.

    Read More

More about Thrasymachus And Justice

Open Document