Thrasymachus Justice And Injustice Analysis
The Strong Prevail
Through out Book One of Platos Republic. Thrasymachus' theory revolutionized the entire perception of justice and injustice. He puts forth that justice is an unnatural way of living while injustice is natural and is categorized in self-interest. Through his beliefs he speaks of injustice being the best. He also portrays that perfect injustice parallels with the most excellent human being. Thrasymachus significantly differentiated between the two viewpoints of what justice and injustice is. After the argumentation with Socrates and the rest of the men, he was finally able to express his own opinion. Thrasymachus believed that justice was in simple terms "the advantage of the stronger"#. To prove this point Thrasymachus used the ruling party of a city as an example. He believes that leaders have the advantage because they generate laws that benefit themselves. Thrasymachus proceeds by saying that "they declare what they have made-what is to their own advantage- to be just for their subjects, and they punish anyone who goes against this as lawless and unjust.#" This statement declares that the …show more content…
He firmly believes that it is unnatural for a person to be completely just. Thrasymachus agrees to Socrates statement that " a just person doesn't outdo someone like himself."# For example if a wealthy man and a poor man both spot gold on the street, the wealthy man will take into consideration both of their situations. If he is a just wealthy man he will then let the poor man to proceed with his findings. Thrasymachus is then questioned " will an unjust person also outdo an unjust person or someone who does an unjust action, and will he strive to get the most he can for himself from everyone?"# He responds, "He will." Even though this is Socrates' argument, Thrasymachus agrees to it making it a similar thought in both philosophers'
Through out Book One of Platos Republic. Thrasymachus' theory revolutionized the entire perception of justice and injustice. He puts forth that justice is an unnatural way of living while injustice is natural and is categorized in self-interest. Through his beliefs he speaks of injustice being the best. He also portrays that perfect injustice parallels with the most excellent human being. Thrasymachus significantly differentiated between the two viewpoints of what justice and injustice is. After the argumentation with Socrates and the rest of the men, he was finally able to express his own opinion. Thrasymachus believed that justice was in simple terms "the advantage of the stronger"#. To prove this point Thrasymachus used the ruling party of a city as an example. He believes that leaders have the advantage because they generate laws that benefit themselves. Thrasymachus proceeds by saying that "they declare what they have made-what is to their own advantage- to be just for their subjects, and they punish anyone who goes against this as lawless and unjust.#" This statement declares that the …show more content…
He firmly believes that it is unnatural for a person to be completely just. Thrasymachus agrees to Socrates statement that " a just person doesn't outdo someone like himself."# For example if a wealthy man and a poor man both spot gold on the street, the wealthy man will take into consideration both of their situations. If he is a just wealthy man he will then let the poor man to proceed with his findings. Thrasymachus is then questioned " will an unjust person also outdo an unjust person or someone who does an unjust action, and will he strive to get the most he can for himself from everyone?"# He responds, "He will." Even though this is Socrates' argument, Thrasymachus agrees to it making it a similar thought in both philosophers'