Philosophy Paper | EssayIvy.com

Running head: PHILOSOPHY PAPER 1

Philosophy Paper

Name:

Institution:

PHILOSOPHY PAPER 2

Plato in the Republic considers the value and the nature of Justice as they appear in

both the society’s structure as a whole and individual human being’s personality. This

naturally leads to human nature discussions, knowledge achievement, the difference between

the reality and appearance, effective education components as well as the foundations of

morality. There are various dialogues with different characters in the Republic who tries to

define the nature of justice. Plato in the Republic criticizes conventional justice theories

presented by Glaucon, Thrasymachus, Polymarchus, and Cephalus and gives us his own

justice theory. According to Plato, who uses Socrates as a fictional spokesman character says

that justice individually is a human virtue making individuals good and self-consistent.

Socially, Socrates terms justice a social consciousness making a society good and internally

harmonious. According to him, justice is some kind of specialization.

In the dialogue between Socrates and Meno, Meno is very eager to know from

Socrates whether Virtue is something that can be taught or results from a habit or whether

one may possess it by nature or some other way. However, Socrates argues that virtue can

never be understood until it is defined first. Meno gives various definitions of virtue to which

Socrates disagrees.

Plato criticizes the views that were propounded by Polemarchus and Cephalus. He

criticizes Cephalus view of justice. Justice according to Cephalus consists paying one’s debts

and speaking the truth. He thus recognizes justice with the right conduct. Socrates, however,

points out that using these simple rules in certain circumstances with no exception could give

devastating results. For instance, getting back the borrowed weapon to a friend with an

unsound mind would be a following the rule instance but not an instance of a just action. This

sort of counter argument presentation shows that justice proposed definition is incorrect as its

application never corresponds with our ordinary justice notion.

PHILOSOPHY PAPER 3

Polemarchus with only a little alteration holds this same view of justice. In an effort

of avoiding such difficulties, he offers a definition refinement and proposes that justice means

giving what is owed to each. As the just act of failing to give back the borrowed weapon

would be of benefit to a friend, this evades the previous counterexample. Plato, however,

criticizes this by pointing out that our enemies’ harsh treatments are only likely to make them

more unjust than they really are (Jowett, 2014). The Polemarchus definition must be mistaken

too as the injustice production could never be an element of the true justice character as the

opposites invariably exclude each other. This justice conception thus regulates the relations

between people who are on individualistic principles and overlooks the society as a whole.

Plato introduces another historical personality Thrasymachus, the sophist who

describes justice as the interest of those who are stronger. This means that might is right.

Everyone acts for themselves and tries getting what they want. The strongest are certain that

they will get what they seek. Government as in a state is the strongest and will get everything

that it tries to get for itself. Justice for Thrasymachus thus means the ruling group’s personal

interest in any state. The ruling party makes laws in its own interest. Anyone violating these

laws that are made by the ruling party receives punishment as the violation of these laws is

treated as justice violation. Socrates, however, is against Thrasymachus definition of justice

and argues that the Government of any kind just like how the physician’s studies and

exercises their powers in the interest of their patients and not their interests, will do what is

good for its people. Thrasymachus goes ahead to support is justice and injustice concepts by

arguing that unjust is superior to a just in intelligence and character, that injustice serves as a

source of strength and that injustice results in happiness.

Socrates, however, attacks Thrasymachus points and sheds some light on the justice’s

nature. According to him, justice implies intelligence and superior character. On the other

hand, injustice translates to a deficiency in both respects. Men who are just are therefore

PHILOSOPHY PAPER 4

superior in intelligence and character and also more effective in action. People who are just

are wiser as they acknowledge the principle of limitation.

Glaucon, on the other hand, argues that people are only moral because they have to be

or because it pays. He describes the society’s historical evolution whereas a necessity justice

had become a shield for those who are weaker. From Glaucon’s perspective, justice is

something unnatural and artificial. It is through this justice artificial rule that the man’s

natural selfishness is chained. According to Plato, justice is a harmonious strength and not a

mere strength.

Plato after disagreeing with Thrasymachus, Polymarchus, Glaucon, and Cephalus

gives his own theory of justice. He, on the one hand, strikes the analogy between the social

organism and on the other hand human organism. Plato argues that true justice, therefore,

consists in the non-interference principle. The state according to him is a perfect whole where

everyone as its element functions for the health of the whole and not for itself. Each element

fulfills its appropriate function. He contends that justice is the soul’s quality in virtue which

people set aside the irrational desire of tasting each pleasure and out of every object gets a

selfish satisfaction and accommodate themselves to the single function discharge for the

general benefit.

In conclusion, I think Socrates makes a better argument on the nature of justice than

his detractors. All the theories propounded by Glaucon, Cephalus and Thrasymachus have a

common element as they treated justice as just something external. No one considered justice

in the place of its habitation or carried it into the soul. Plato goes ahead and proves that

justice never depends upon a convection, chance or even an external force. Justice is internal

and is in the soul of human and thus not artificial but natural. It is the effective harmony of

the whole and not the right of the stronger. Every moral conception revolves around the

whole individual's good as well as social.

PHILOSOPHY PAPER 5

References

Jowett, B. (2014, December 17). The Republic by Plato. Retrieved from

http://classics.mit.edu//Plato/republic.html

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."