Richard DeVivo Prof. Fott 25 November 2014 PSC 200-1005 In the Eyes of Justice of Socrates and Polemarchus In The Republic on Plato translated by Alan Bloom, Socrates and Polemarchus talk about justice between the three classes. The first class is the guardians who serve as rulers. The guardians must be just and have to be a philosopher. These people have to base all their decisions based of reason and not desire. The next class is the warriors, which is the middle tier who have courage and spirit
Teaching with Principle (How Socrates is Intriguing in Republic 1 & 2) Socrates has been known to be a teacher who will have his students question their own ideas and beliefs just through a few simple questions. In Plato’s work, Republic, Socrates shows this skill very blatantly. Especially in books one and two, Socrates has the men around him questioning and discussing very thoughtful topics. As stated in Learning Considered Within a Cultural Context, “Socrates valued private and public questioning
justice. Socrates’ attitude of curiosity – intrigued to know what Polemarchus, Cephalus and Thrasymachus really believe – unveils through his questioning misconceptions in the definitions and arguments presented by them. And despite the eventual vigorous adversative arguments in a heated debate with Thrasymachus, at the end, the discussion of RI reaches no definite conclusion regarding justice. The interlocutors –including Socrates – are baffled with the result of the conversation. Socrates argues
In “The Republic of Plato,” Socrates seems to be having a conversation with other citizens to find out what the definition of justice is; however, he disproves what they have to say and begins to define it how he wishes. The first victim was Cephalus. He proposed the idea that justice is, “Paying your debts and telling the truth.” This appeared to be a valid response, for he explained that if you tell the truth you are being an honorable person, and if your debts to the gods or to another person
In Book 1 of ‘The Republic’ by Plato, Thrasymachus puts forth a new definition of what justice is after both Cephalus’ and Polemarchus’ definitions were successively countered by Socrates. Socrates, as is expected, counters Thrasymachus’ argument. While Thrasymachus argues the traditional sophist view to do away with justice seeing as it hinders one’s opportunities, Socrates poses as the opposition and counters all of his opponent’s arguments. According to Thrasymachus, justice is “the advantage
and truthful. Thus ‘justice’ is not just a disembodied idea; it is a code of action, which is often enforced by social expectations. Socrates continues his argument with Polemarchus who associates ‘justice’ with what is proper and in one’s best interest. So what happens if there is a conflict of interest? Plato further problematizes the point by enabling Socrates to argue with Thrasymachus about how justice is always in the advantage of the strong: “a man of great power always gets the better deal
2015 When one considers the literary pieces of Plato’s Republic and Machiavelli’s The Prince, the themes of lies and deception are prominently discussed throughout, specifically pertaining to their role in politics. Not only are they strongly present within these pieces, but they also are still current themes within our political realms today. Therefore, one begins to question their necessity and permissibility. By referring to The Republic and The Prince, one can recognize that political lies
Hodge Political Philosophy Dr. Douchant 29 September 2014 Plato Exam The Republic of Plato is a series of books that are set up together describing some of the dialogues that took place between Socrates and his friends. The journey and pattern of the dialogue follows the pattern of the Socratic method. An interlocutor brings up a topic and sets a definition of the idea. Socrates asks questions, and modifies the definition. Socrates pulls apart each definition by reductio ad absurdom, reduces them to
Socrates on Justice From Crito to Polemarchus to Thrasymachus, there is constant questioning of what the definition of justice truly is and the relationship it has with the law. Although all roads point to the idea that there is no absolute way to define justice, Socrates had strong opinions on what justice meant according to him. Plato led readers to believe that Socrates found the act of being “just,” as virtuous, the most rewarding way to live. Socrates also believed that laws were meant to be