Preview

Thrasymachus Attack On Justice

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
286 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Thrasymachus Attack On Justice
Following on from Thrasymachus' attack on justice, book 2 begins with Glaucon and Adeimantus drawing agreement to this attack, seeking however, to establish a more robust approach to why morality is unprofitable- distancing thus from the social contract theory. Glaucon divides the notion of the goods into three classes; the first class explores the instrumental kind, where things are only desirable in virtue of the consequences (necessary evil), this evident in his examples of physical training and medical treatment. The second category highlights that things are desirable for its own sake; pursued in his examples of joy and the attainment of the highest class. And lastly, the final category combines both of these kinds. What the general puzzle

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In Machiavelli’s Prince virtu is defined as a man that is characterized by strength, courage, skill, decisiveness, ability, and the ability to do whatever is necessary for the greater good of the state. On the other hand, in Plato’s Republic Thrasymachus believed that justice was best defined as that which is done to benefit the stronger, meaning that in a democracy democratic laws are just and in tyranny, tyrannical laws are just, and this applies to all other forms of government.…

    • 267 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In this paper we will show that Glaucon and Thrasymachus' positions on justice are entirely different. We argue that Thrasymachus despite his slippage and confusion between a traditional and immoralist definition of justice, is really intending to illustrate a political system ruled by a rational-minded and exploitative tyrant. On the other hand Glaucon clearly presents justice as a necessary evil originating out of a social contract constructed by the weak of society. He then challenges Socrates to prove to him that the life of a just man is better than the life of an unjust man.…

    • 1831 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Further on in chapter 2 it discusses that Adeimantus is playing the devil's advocate just like his brother, by stating the reasons why injustice so often appears to be better than justice. He brings up the following points: that the children are poorly taught by parents and educators and also they are poorly represented in poetry and literature. It is said that justice is poorly taught by the parents because even though they tell their children to be just, they defend it only in terms of the good things. Also justice is poorly represented in literature because poets are always complaining about the problems and tribulations of living a just and virtuous life. While on the other hand they are also telling stories about villains who do well and end up unpunished.…

    • 603 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In many societies, including our own, we labeled the meaning of the word “justice” for the sole purpose of maintaining social and political stability and order for the good of many instead of the few. However, what we believe to be just and unjust in regards to what Plato’s Republic explains about what is actually just and unjust are inadvertently blurred from a somewhat conflicting (if not unintended biased) perspective. These concepts of thought originate in a hierarchical group of knowledge: understanding, thought, belief, and imagination (Socrates 511e); most of which we use for measuring the ideal implementation of practical and critical forms of theory. What we portray justice in the United States today mostly consists of both opinionated…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In his ``Rhetoric of Justice'', Aristotle differentiates between two kinds of law: the particular and the universal. The first, he says, is that which an individual community lays down for itself. The second, the universal law, is what Aristotle refers to as ``a natural and universal notion of right and wrong''. Lewis's novel portrays a community which have instituted the first type of law, but there is no adequate sense of community justice being precise and universally correct. Furthermore, Lewis highlights the nature of Artigues' oblivious justice system which innocently supposes man's law to be inextricable from God's will. Though the nature of the social and legal structure ensure the survival and prosperity of Artigues, to the detriment of…

    • 1469 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato’s Republic begins with a debate on the subject of morality. One by one, Cephalus, Polymarchus, and Thrasymachus put forth their definitions of morality and one by one, they come up short. None survive the merciless scrutiny of the author’s mentor, Socrates.…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Republic Study Guide

    • 2098 Words
    • 8 Pages

    - He makes Thrasymachus admit that the view he is advancing promotes injustice as a virtue. In this view, life is seen as a continual competition to get more (more money, more power, etc.), and whoever is most successful in the competition has the…

    • 2098 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    What is justice is a question that has plagued philosophers since the time of Plato when he wrote The Republic to present day. In the book, Plato uses the dialectic, between Socrates and other Athenians like Polemarchus, Cephalus, and Glacuon, to try and find the definition of justice. Through the voice of Glaucon, Plato defines justice as a compromise of sorts between advantage and fear, and injustice as the things that we wouldn’t…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    After that outburst from Thrasymachus showing pride of himself I asked Socrates what was all that about. He tells me that first I have to know who is Thrasymachus, and how he is portrayed in “The Republic” written by Plato. He is portrayed as a sophist and cynic who argues that people are selfish. By this argument that Thrasymachus yelled to us that “justice is in the interest of the strong and the subjects obeying the interest of the strong” he claims that whoever is at the top of the hierarchy is ultimately the one who has the most power, and that the ruler comes up with this rules on a self-interest base. He claims that justice is mostly the interest of the strong, and those who have more authoritarian power are those who rule the justice system and the system in general. As he states “in all states alike “right” has the same meaning, namely what is for the interest of the party established in power, and that is the strongest” (Thrasymachus, 13). Ultimately, each leader makes…

    • 693 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Oedipus Rex is full of people searching for justice. Throughout the play Oedipus acts upon what he believes is justice.…

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Ring Of Unjust Actions

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages

    He argues to Socrates that if a just individual and an unjust individual were both given the opportunity to take part in unjust activities without consequences, the just person and unjust person would come out as equals. Equals in the sense that they would both take part in unjust actions. His overall point is the fact that when an individual is given a chance to act unjustly without consequence, they will take it. Glaucon used the example of the story of the Ring of Gyges. In this story, the ancestor of Gyges the Lydian was a shepherd and hired servant to the, at that time, current King.…

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    QUESTION #1: After having viewed Harvard Justice.org, Episode #9, do you agree with Aristotle’s perspective? For example, when you look around at our American culture, do you think our government is supporting justice for all? For example, is it fair for a university to consider race or ethnicity as a factor in admissions rather than solely on the basis of merit? Explain your thinking.…

    • 1326 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato and Aristotle, arguably the most important philosophers of their time, both made attempts to define justice. Being that Aristotle was a student of Plato, their ideas share many similarities. Both viewed justice as the harmonious interaction of people in a society. However, Plato defined his ideal of justice with more usage of metaphysics, invoking his Form of the Good, while Aristotle took a more practical approach, speaking in terms of money and balance. Although Aristotle's ideal of justice may seem superior, upon further inspection, Plato's ideal of justice is the stronger.…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Ring of Gyges

    • 1010 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Throughout the back-and-forth debate between Socrates and his comrades on the definition of justice, many questions are raised about the integrity and justice of mankind. Does man practice justice because he truly believes in it? Or perhaps because humans fear the consequences of committing injustice? In Book II, Glaucon attempts to tackle the question and points out 3 kinds of justice: the kind that is good in itself, the kind that is good in itself and its results, and the kind that is good in its results but unpleasant. He then further ventures into these ideas of justice by claiming “the best is to do injustice without paying the penalty; the worst is to suffer it without being able to take revenge” (35). Glaucon invokes the legend of the Ring of Gyges to further emphasize his argument.…

    • 1010 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Cruciform Justice

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Justice is defined and thought of in many different ways by different cultures in relation to their values. As discussed by Dr. Gorman, the Roman and American cultures share a similar view of justice, in which when someone is wronged; they hold the belief that one should get revenge. This idea is a sort of eye for an eye mentality to which Ghandi wisely stated, “an eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind”. This quote in its own way somewhat embodies the values and ideas of the Christian community and the beliefs that they share. Dr. Gorman stated that Roman, Corinthian, and American cultures have the view that revenge is the best way to get retribution, while Christians share the view that one should forgive, love, and suffer through the wrong doing that has happened to them. Another interesting point that Dr. Gorman said in his lecture was the Roman, Corinthian, and Christian communities would take their own people, even neighbors, and previous friends to court to have the wrong done to them righted, however, this is not a cruciform justice. The differences between the two values and ideals really struck home with me because I never really thought about how someone would call themselves a Christian but then would turn around and seek revenge with such a lust that would tear apart strong relationships. The cruciform justice that true, devote Christians practice is one that shows a true forgiveness of another’s trespasses. Another important point that Dr. Gorman makes is that justice and righteousness go hand in hand and that to have those two qualities, one must love God and also their neighbors the same. These are the two most important commandments in the bible and they encompass how a good Christian should live their life. It is the difference between living a life that is purely lived for getting into heaven, and one that is fulfilling and full of a good relationship with God and one’s neighbors. These points made…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays