Thrasymachus Definition Of Justice In Plato's Republic

569 Words3 Pages
In Book 1 of Plato’s Republic, Thrasymachus has a conversation with Socrates where they try to define justice. Thrasymachus is frustrated with Socrates because he does not define justice clearly, but instead pokes holes in other people’s theories. Both Thrasymachus and Socrates have different definitions of justice, but Socrates’ definition is not explicitly stated. It is important to consider Thrasymachus’ beliefs to understand Plato’s overall argument about justice. In this paper, I will examine Thrasymachus’ argument and look at its significance when considering Plato’s overall beliefs about justice. Thrasymachus argues that justice is the advantage or interest of the stronger. Thrasymachus’ strongest argument for his claim is that people who commit injustice do so because they are afraid of…show more content…
He thinks that injustice is a “stronger, freer, and more lordly thing than justice.” (p.44) To support his claim that justice is the interest of the stronger, Thrasymachus argues that each body of authority makes laws that fit its best interests. He says that these laws put the body of authority on the side of justice. Socrates destroys Thrasymachus’ argument when he asks if human beings always know what is best for them. In other words, if a child decides to eat chocolate three times a day, is the decision made keeping his best interests in mind? Thrasymachus backs up the rest of his argument by bringing up the consequences of a just and unjust man being in a partnership. He says that if a just man pays more property tax than the unjust man, the former will receive nothing, whereas the latter will make gains. (pg. 43) Thrasymachus’ evidence is materialistic and

More about Thrasymachus Definition Of Justice In Plato's Republic

Open Document