Thrasymachus, Socrates, and Justice

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By rudydockery
Words 1505
Pages 7
From book one of the Republic of Plato we find various renditions of what specifically justice is. Socrates begins the conversation of justice with an elder statesman by the name of
Cephalus and furthers the discussion with the son of Cephalus, Polemarchus. Socrates is seemingly “toying” with or having fun at the disposal of Polemarchus by challenging his argument and every point and he identifies various inconsistencies in the stories of both men regarding justice. By now the story turns to Thrasymachus which is where this paper begins. I will attempt to dissect Thrasymachus’ s argument and demonstrate where Socrates finds his argument lacking.
During the course of book we hear various meanings from various characters regarding the true meaning of justice; Thrasymachus seems to take the view of a pessimist regarding the topic. Both Cephalus and Polemarchus are rather defeated in their arguments with Socrates and are unable to adequately provide Socrates with a satisfactory answer regarding what justice is.
Thrasymachus enters the conversation and is seemingly annoyed or upset about the discourse between Socrates and Polemarchus. Moreover, Thrasymachus reverses the question to Socrates by demanding to know what his version of justice is. Thrasymachus seems to be frustrated with the audacity of Socrates of questioning everyone without providing and real answers himself.
Thrasymachus then asserts his view of justice and in so doing, questions whether or not being a just person in a civilization is of any value whatsoever by the argument he presents against the
“just” life.

Thrasymachus has a view of justice that it is the advantage of the stronger. He is

essentially asserting that different levels of government which rule or whatever entity is in

power, are the makers of the law and consequently ensure the…...

Similar Documents


...youth will be making the decisions later on down the road after all of the elders die off. This is the reason why the citizens are very concerned about Socrates. The elders believe that Socrates is going to be the reason why the youth will be corrupted. But Socrates does not see how he could be the reason for the corruption of the youth because he always claims to not have any knowledge of anything. In Plato’s The Euthyphro, Socrates has a conversation with Euthyphro about what piety and impiety is. Socrates wanted Euthyphro to be his teacher and teach him everything he knows because he claims that he knows all there is to be known about what piety and impiety is. Therefore, Euthyphro teaches him everything that he knows about what it means to be pious and impious. After he starts to explain everything to him Socrates is not satisfied with any of his definitions that he has proposed to him, so Socrates starts to question him even more, and ask for a better definition. This back and forth conversation goes on for a while, and from Socrates questioning Euthyphro so much, Euthyphro himself starts to question everything that he knows about what it means to be pious and impious. Euthyphro was going to prosecute his very own father for unintentionally killed Euthyphro’s slave that killed one of his father’s slaves. After Socrates questioned him so many different times about what it means to be pious impious it seems that Euthyphro has come to the understanding of how......

Words: 1072 - Pages: 5


...In Book II of the Plato’s Republic, Glaucon and Adeimantus challenge Socrates’ claim that justice belongs in the class of goods which are valued for their own sake as well as for the sake of what comes from them (Rep. 357 b- 358 a). Unconvinced by Socrates’ refutation of Thrasymachus, Glaucon renews Thrasymachus’ argument that the life of the unjust person is better than that of the just person. As part of his case, Glaucon states what he claims most people consider the nature of justice to be and what its origins are. He proceeds to present a version of the social contract theory: They say that to do injustice is naturally good and to suffer injustice bad, but that the badness of suffering it so far exceeds the goodness of doing it that those who have done and suffered injustice and tasted both, but who lack the power to do it and avoid suffering it, decide that it is profitable to come to an agreement with each other neither to do injustice nor to suffer it. As a result, they begin to make laws and covenants, and what the law commands they call lawful and just. This, they say, is the origin and essence of justice. It is intermediate between the best and the worst. The best is to do injustice without paying the penalty; the worst is to suffer it without being able to take revenge. Justice is a mean between these two extremes. People value it not because it is a good but because they are too weak to do injustice with impunity. Someone who has the power to do......

Words: 4725 - Pages: 19


...Taking Socrates meaning into account, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” How might that apply to our lives and culture today? When I reflect on the Socrates statement I believe it follows logical implication with a persons assumption or consequence. Free speech is what our culture is today I would like to know that when a person tells me something he or she is speaking the truth, as a child of God I know his word is true because he said it is. Each person views life differently than the other unless you follow Jesus Christ and his ways, which are set firm in his word. According to Mark B. Woodhouse his book “A Preface to Philosophy”. He stated two beliefs logically imply each other when the truth of one requires the truth of the other. Do I believe Socrates statement the “Unexamined life is not worth living” is true? I personally go both ways with his statement I agree we should examine life especially if were a Christian for example if there are sins in our life that needs to be taken care of so we can move forward from the bondage that sin can have in our life, we should do that so our heart is pure before God and he will forgive us of our sins. As God said in 1John 4:1-6 we should test the spirit first before making any decision, so we can make the right choice, which will have a positive outcome. Word Count 325 words with intro and 251 without...

Words: 260 - Pages: 2


...At the age of seventy, Socrates found himself at the law court defending himself on the charges brought against him by Meletus. Meletus is accusing Socrates of not believing in the gods in whom the Athenians believed but in some other spirits (24b). In the long run, justice was not served on the part of Socrates even though he did whatever he could to defend himself. According to the verdict, Socrates was guilty of the charge including some other charges and was sentenced to death. I do not agree with this verdict and believe that Socrates was innocent of this charge. The reasons for my belief is that Meletus contradicted himself during the cross-examination at the law court and Socrates had a good explanation to refute the charge, making it clear that he did believed in the Athenian gods. First and foremost, Meletus accused Socrates of believing in some other supernatural spirits but not the Athenian gods. When Socrates questioned him to clarify whether he did or did not believe in gods at all during the cross-examination, Meletus answered saying “this is what I mean, that you do not believe in gods at all” (26c). How can Meletus make a point and completely refute it within a fraction of seconds, and how is it possible for a man to be an atheist and believe in other forms of spirits at the same time? Socrates himself even realized that Meletus was contradicting himself and he seems to win victory over him. The inconsistency of Meletus’ charges should have signaled the 501......

Words: 648 - Pages: 3


...the Crito, Socrates makes some surprisingly strong claims about the moral authority of the state, which might even seem to be inconsistent both with another fundamental claim he makes in the Crito and with certain claims he makes in the Apology. I shall argue that although these claims seem to be in some tension with each other, the crucial claims about the authority of the state in the Crito can plausibly be interpreted in such a way as to remove any real inconsistency with the other claims. The first, rather striking claim about the moral authority of the state occurs at 51b of the Crito. Socrates argues that, because of the state's role as a provider of security, education, and various important social institutions (such as marriage), the citizens of the state are its "offspring and servants"; and from this he concludes that citizens are subordinate to the state and its laws to such an extent that if a citizen ever disagrees with the state's laws or orders, he "must either persuade it or obey its orders," even if the latter amounts to suffering death. The implication for his own case is clear: Socrates had tried to persuade the court of his innocence and of the injustice of his execution (as detailed in the Apology), but he had failed; therefore, he argues, he must now obey the court and accept his death sentence--even though he still thinks that he is in the right on this matter. The second, closely related claim, comes only a few paragraphs later, in 51e and 52.......

Words: 1569 - Pages: 7


...Socrates argues that evils are "hurtful to the possessor", and therefore make people miserable. Since no one wants to be miserable, then clearly no one wants to do evil. Therefore it follow that no one wants to do evil. I think this is false logic. First, I don't think the premise is true. Some people think that doing "evil" will make them happy, or at least, that the happiness that comes from it will more than compensate for any unhappiness that comes from it. For example, think of a dictator who intentionally takes resources that are meant to be for the people of his country and directs them to his own personal gain. Perhaps he feels bad for at least some of the people, or maybe he doesn't. But the truth is that the monetary gains that he gets from that are more important to him than "feeling good" about doing the right thing. Another example might be individuals who invest in stocks of companies that have policy they don't agree with: maybe oil companies that pollute the environment or cigarette companies. The individuals might know that there are socially responsible funds they could choose instead, but the gains they get are more important to them than not doing evil. In some cases, people might feel that they make up for it in other parts of their lives. For example, I don't invest in "socially responsible" funds because I feel that it would be an unwise financial decision. On the other hand: I recycle, and encourage others to do the same; eat only 'oceanwise' fish;......

Words: 439 - Pages: 2

Reflection on Justice

...of justice is and how it relates to us in the real world. My personal impression of justice was doing what was expected of you by society and suffering the consequences for committing injustice. But this issue is far more complex than as we found out in reading The Republic Of Plato. In the republic, Plato speaks though his teacher Socrates and sets out to try and find the answers to two questions; what is justice and why should we be just? Looking at the Republic as a work on justice, we first have to ask ourselves why does justice have to be defended. Thrasymachus makes it clear that justices is not considered to be universally beneficial. For as long as their has been ethical thought, there has been people who have this idea that it is better to look after ones own interest then to follow rules of right and wrong. The Greeks concept of justices came from poets that would link ideas and thoughts into stories relating to the gods. In their eyes Zeus rewarded those who are good and punishes those who are bad. Not many agreed with this idea because they could see unjust men flourishing and people of Athens. Leading the controversial argument on justice were people called Sophists and their idea of justice, as we discussed in class, was we should be unjust if it is beneficial. In the Republic on page 15 Thrasymachus gives his opinion on justices stating, “I say that the just is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger”. What exactly does Thrasymachus mean by justice is......

Words: 304 - Pages: 2


...THESIS STATEMENT Socrates was accused of corrupting the youth of Athens and sentenced to die for his beliefs. He accepted this punishment because he truly thought what he believed was right. PURPOSE STATEMENT By conducting research and examining various sources, The trail of Socrates proved to be an important part in history, impacting the development of Western Philosophy and allowing the beliefs of Socrates to live on to this day. INTRODUCTION “The death of Socrates has had a huge and almost continuous impact on western culture” (Wilson 1). Socrates life, trial, and death are all important parts of history. Socrates was a philosopher in Athens who believed in using reason to explain different aspects of life. During his lifetime, he not only tried to help develop his own mind and understanding of life, but also those around him. He often tried to teach the adolescence and get them to use their minds. Socrates enjoyed teaching children because their minds were still open and they were willing to learn. However, his views varied from most of other people around him. He was put on trial because others did not care for his methods. He was eventually executed. Socrates had the courage to be different and marked the beginning of Western Philosophy. His trial was one of the first of its kind and it is the first recorded trial in which someone was sentenced to death as a result of their beliefs. “Plato tells us that Socrates compared himself to a gadfly, whose......

Words: 1873 - Pages: 8


...Met Museum Essay for Socrates I told my friends the most important thing to know about Socrates is that he is a man who never stops asking questions. It’s very annoying but we can learn a lot by focus on his style of thinking. He keeps asking question because he will never accept a fact at face value and holding it as truth. It’s actually good that he attempts to ask questions to get different perspectives and considers all approaches. Then I provided them with the examples from “The Republic Book I”. In the book, Socrates wants to find the definition for justice and the just life. He first test the definition with Cephalus to see if that’s a satisfy definition, if not, he will have to keep question until he gets the right definition. Cephalus’s definition of just is that as long as we always tell the truth and always pay back what is owed, we are doing the right thing. Socrates then asks if your definition is right, what if a friend of yours asks you to hold on to a weapon for him and then comes back one day in a state of rage asks for it back, will you give him the weapon back? Cephalus then realizes that can’t be the right definition. Then he continues on testing the definition with Polemarchus but Socrates, in his way of thinking, always questions against Polemarchus. Meanwhile, Thrasymachus can’t stand Socrates and accuses that Socrates never gives his own definition of justice but keep questioning others. Thrasymachus’s definition of justice is nothing more than......

Words: 821 - Pages: 4


...Phil 100 Prof. Michael Rosenthal 22 April 2015 Paper 1 Topic 2 Socrates, accused of making the worse into the stronger argument, corrupting the young and not believing in the same Gods the city believes in (24b), was found guilty and sentenced to death. After being sentenced and awaiting his penalty, his friend, Crito, visited Socrates. While awaiting his death, Crito attempted to convince Socrates that he should flee from Athens and escape his death sentence. Why might Crito try to convince Socrates to break the law and escape from Athens? Crito explained to Socrates that if Socrates were to die, not only would Crito be deprived of a friend, but Crito’s reputation would be harmed as well. Crito believed that if he were to allow Socrates to die, people would think that Crito valued money more than his own friends (Socrates dying would indicate that Crito did not spend money in order to save him) (43d). Crito’s concern for his reputation and the thoughts of the majority prompted Socrates to raise a question, “why should we care so much for what the majority think?” (43d). Crito responded by saying it is important to show concern for the opinion of the majority, “…one must also pay attention to the opinion of the majority,” (44d). Crito believed that paying mind to the opinion of the majority is important because “…the majority can inflict not the least but pretty well the greatest evils if one is slandered among them,” (44d). In other words, the majority has the......

Words: 1549 - Pages: 7


...Socratic Method: “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Socrates (469—399bc) Plato (427—347bc) Each of the main Platonic dialogues emphasizes one philosophical theme—for example, the nature of truth, beauty, justice, virtue, courage, piety, or friendship. The typical Platonic dialogue of the early period can be divided into three segments: In the first segment, Socrates meets a young man who claims to know something about one of the aforementioned “big” topics. Socrates flatters the young man and compliments himself on his luck at having found someone who actually knows something that he, Socrates, has been seeking for fifty years. Socrates begs the young man to impart his wisdom to him. When the young man does so, Socrates acts deeply impressed. The young man’s head begins to swell. The second segment of the dialogue begins when Socrates seems to notice some apparently minor problem with the formulation of the youth’s argument. The young man thinks that a simple cosmetic job can cover the blemish, but Socrates’ objection becomes the small thread that, when pulled, unravels the garment. The young man finds himself tangled up in contradictions and paradoxes. The third segment of the dialogue begins when both Socrates and his partner have admitted ignorance. The young man doesn’t know what “X” is (virtue, beauty, truth, etc.), and Socrates does not know either. At this point, Socrates will say to his dispairing companion something like this: “Look...

Words: 564 - Pages: 3


...Reasons for Socrates to Resist the Death Penalty: Name: Course: Date: Introduction: Socrates was a well renowned Athenian philosopher many years before his trial. He is actually considered a great founder in western philosophy. He was a very distinctive and typical individual with extraordinary teachings. It is believed that his teachings were very different from those of other philosophers in Greece since his ideas differed with the rightful societal beliefs. This resulted to hatred from the people. According to him, a useless life is one that is not examined. He put a lot of emphasis on the obedience of the state likening it to the obedience a son would have for his father. He was common for taking children through lectures of coming up with arguments to justify the reason for beating his father. Socrates was later accused of corrupting youth groups and godlessness. He was then convicted to death by taking poison which he obeyed as a way of following his teaching on obedience to the law. If Confucius would have believed in a life after death, he would probably have agreed with Socrates to have the law obeyed and kill himself. Socrates, in his day of execution explains that soul is the main form of an individual. Soul does not die and is eternal and does not change. Just the same way it brings life, so must it not die despite the death of the body. Soul is therefore termed as immortal. He feels that dying does not destroy who he really is since in real sense, he will not be......

Words: 1962 - Pages: 8

The Republic Book One - Justice

...Defining Justice How do Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus respectively define “justice”? On what grounds does Socrates refute them? In the first book of Plato’s Republic three possible definitions of the term “justice” are brought up by Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus which Socrates is able to refute. Though Socrates presents no personal opinion himself he is able to question each explanation given to him by the others. The book begins with a discussion between Socrates and Cephalus where the question of justice is initially brought up. What makes Cephalus different from the other characters is that he does not offer his own opinion but that of traditional Greek beliefs. He simply states that justice is achieved by giving back what one has taken from another and by being an honest man. Although Cephalus does not boast about his fortunes, it becomes apparent that he is very economically-oriented and he possesses a very black and white view that justice is something that can be paid off. From this Socrates then questions how that can always be right. He provides an example of if one friend took weapons from another who was mentally unstable and they demanded them back. Would it be just for the mentally stable friend to simply return them even if he knew dangerous consequences could follow because the person was legally entitled to the weapons? Cephalus agrees that this would indeed contradict his definition of justice. From this Cephalus’ son......

Words: 1228 - Pages: 5


...Journal #1 March 30, 2013 Socrates The idea of Socrates being a skillful speaker with speaking the truth demonstrates a distinct contrast in today’s society. As time progresses the truth is watered down and filtered through lies. Socrates’ truth would encompass a conflict of great proportions due to the fact that in today’s society, people are not at all ready for the truth, nor do they understand it. Considering entities in society such as media, marketing, advertising, branding, political speeches, and packaging of political candidates; the list can be drawn up of how each of these no longer harper even a minute portion of truth. When media is considered, you must think of the news, reality television, and documentaries. The news is given to the people after it goes through the filtering of the gatekeepers. Society is told what the gatekeepers want them to hear. Socrates would not have adhered to the code of verbal conduct the gatekeepers of today would have offered to him. When reality television and documentaries are considered it becomes even clearer that the masses are fed sugar coated and often highly exploitive lies. Editing is a master of disguise often hiding seamlessly in the arrangement of scenarios that are not chronological in happenings. Documentaries are merely the concoction of filmmakers that are trying to tell a story from their viewpoint. Their motives are to get their biased opinion to the masses in a way that prompts them to see their side.......

Words: 1516 - Pages: 7


...of morality came up when Socrates and Cephalus were having a conversation about money. Cephalus says someone who has led a bad life will have nightmares and a person who leads a good life will not have such dreams and will be happy. Cephalus says being true and giving things back is morality. Socrates gives an example were you can do something good by not gibing something back. His example was if you borrow a weapon from a friend, and he is sane at the time and at the time you should give it back your friend is insane then you shouldn’t give it back so you can protect him from doing harm which is also good. Cephalus agreed that Socrates was correct that this was doing something good so Socrates said if that is the case than the definition of morality isn’t to tell the truth and give back whatever one has borrowed. Polemarchus interjected saying that morality is to tell the truth and to give back whatever one has borrowed if you believe Simonides. Polemarchus says what Simonides was trying to say was friends owe friends good deeds not bad ones. Socrates responds by saying, what Simonides meant was we give back to people what is appropriate for them, or owed to them. Polemarchus said to be consistent with what I said earlier it has to be the art of giving benefit and harm to friends and enemies respectively. Socrates makes a point that morality only seems to be useful when something is not being used, for example when money needs to be saved. Socrates asks if a moral......

Words: 546 - Pages: 3