Preview

platos theory of justice

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
735 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
platos theory of justice
2) Explain Plato’s theory of Justice
One’s search for the meaning of justice in Plato’s “Republic” would finally lead to two definitions: -Justice is Harmony.
-Justice is Doing one’s own job. Finding these two phrases, however, is hardly enough to get a clear sense of what justice is. Plato offers two main analogies to examine the definition of justice. The division of parts in the soul as well as the parts of the state; We would now examine the structure of the soul. The soul is divided into three parts, the appetitive, spirited and the rational. By the account of the parts of the soul we are shown how a soul has different wills, yet in order for a soul to stay in the just path it must have some sort of hierarchy. Plato describes the spirited part as the courageous ally of the rational part which has the control over the appetitiveve part.
The state is also divided into three types of people, the workers, soldiers and the rulers. It is obvious that that sort of division seems awkward when placed over our own capitalist society. We must keep in mind that in the republic that Plato is describing each individual is directed by vast education and the utmost care towards the work he could do with excellence. The children in the republic are separated from their parents at birth and therefore get the same equal chance of becoming workers or rulers without any prejudice regarding their upbringing or family background, rather, they are evaluated personally, purely according to their natural qualities.
The division of people into pre-determined types in the state is assumed to be done truthfully, according to their natural abilities. To soldiers who cannot understand what possessing wisdom means (because they lack it) or to workers that lack both courage and wisdom, Plato uses the “noble lie”. That is the idea that mother nature creates people out of three materials, gold, silver and bronze when obviously the golden people are fit to rule, the silver are fit

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    What is justice? Today, where it is common for people to only look out for themselves, justice is an extremely important tool. But what exactly is justice? What is right, what is wrong, and who decides that? To find an accurate definition, we as a society should not just focus on one opinion, but the views of many. Similar to how our society is today, the society in The Republic, lived the same, struggling to determine what the correct definition of justice was, and how to pursue the right answer. In the paper, I will be discussing all aspects of Plato’s Republic, including the Philosopher King and his nature, and justice in that time.…

    • 114 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    What is justice is a question that has plagued philosophers since the time of Plato when he wrote The Republic to present day. In the book, Plato uses the dialectic, between Socrates and other Athenians like Polemarchus, Cephalus, and Glacuon, to try and find the definition of justice. Through the voice of Glaucon, Plato defines justice as a compromise of sorts between advantage and fear, and injustice as the things that we wouldn’t…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In his philosophy, Plato places a large emphasis on the importance of the idea of justice. This emphasis can be seen especially in his work ‘The Republic’ where, through his main character Socrates, he attempts to define the nature of justice and to justify this definition. One of the methods used by Socrates to strengthen or rather explain his argument on justice is through his famous city-soul analogy, where a comparison between a just city and a just soul/individual is made. Through this analogy, Socrates attempts to explain the nature of justice, how it is the virtue of the soul and is therefore intrinsically valuable to the individual, but it becomes apparent in the analysis and evaluation of the analogy that there may have been several purposes behind it. Inconsistencies within the analogy itself also raise questions to the validity in Plato’s definition and justification of justice.…

    • 1949 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Socrates meets with some of his friends and begins discussing the meaning of justice and whether the just life is better than the unjust life. First, they contemplate the meaning of justice. Cephalus stated that justice is as simple as telling the truth and returning what you receive, Polemarchus stated that justice is giving each his due, and Thrasymachus stated that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Socrates proves each of them wrong and embarks on a discussion to find out what true justice is, and to find out whether the just man is truly happier than the unjust man, or vice versa.…

    • 627 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In real life, real world some people are born bad and other are born good by nature. In Plato’s idealistic world, with proper training this nature could be turned good. I would have to disagree with Plato’s teaching. Take the white…

    • 474 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He divided the soul into these three parts based on the different classes he has seen in the society. He noted that people were mostly motivated by wants, needs and desires in the society. For instance, a person could thirst for water and that represents the first part of the brain that is appetitive. The rational or rather the logical part of the soul is the one that seeks the truth and seeks to learn from it. It separates the truth from false and makes just decisions based on the truth. Spirited is the part of the body where we get our emotions that are temper or anger. This part aligns with the logical part to resist the desires of appetite. In unjust people it aligns with appetitive to fulfill the desires of the body. The appetitive part of the soul is where we experience the feelings of carnal desire, hunger, thirst and other desires that are against the logical part. Plato associates this part with human reproduction and the love for money (Smith,…

    • 674 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Justice is an important concept that is incorporated in both Plato’s Republic and Hobbes’s Leviathan. Each philosopher has their reasons for choosing the just life. The purpose of the Republic was to explore and identify the true meaning of justice. Plato’s pursuit to find the meaning of justice is based on yearning for greatness in the city and the human soul. In the Leviathan, Hobbes defines justice through the relationship between obligations and self-preservation.…

    • 682 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Plato’s Republic, Book 1, various interlocutors make arguments on the definition of justice. Cephalus proposes the definition of justice as “speaking the truth and paying whatever debts one has incurred” (Plato, 331c). I will prove Cephalus’ argument true by analyzing the structure and his use of examples, discussing possible errors in his reasoning and finally rebutting those who disagree. Justice is knowing right versus wrong and acting on that understanding.…

    • 1397 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Socrates vs Thrasymachus

    • 1668 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Any argument relies upon some fundamental agreement about the issue being discussed. However great the divide in opinion may be, there must exist at least some similarity in the participants’ manner of viewing the issue if a solution is ever to be reached. Book One of Plato’s Republic features a disagreement between Socrates and Thrasymachus about the nature of justice. The disaccord between their views of the subject is extremely pronounced, but there are certain underlying agreements which guide the course of the debate. One way to evaluate the validity of the arguments involved is to examine whether the assumptions at the root of the argument are in accord with this common ground. By my reading of the dialogue, Socrates’ reply to the first part of Thrasymachus’ definition of justice rests safely upon this common ground, whereas his answer to Thrasymachus’ second definition moves away from this mutually acceptable base, and is injured as a result. In exploring this topic, I intend to examine briefly Thrasymachus’ two-part definition of justice. For each of these parts I will evaluate one Socratic response and discuss it from the perspective of the “craftsman analogy” – an analogy which is initially used by common consent, but which Socrates adapts until its original usage almost disappears.…

    • 1668 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “The Republic” by Plato is considered to be a Socratic dialogue finished in 390 BC. In what is considered one of the most valuable pieces of work of Plato tries to answer questions such as: why should people do good things? Or other questions like: are people rewarded for doing bad things? However he also treats other themes as the theory of forms, the immortality of the soul and the roles of the philosopher and of poetry in society. But what we shall explore is how he develops the theme of justice, describe his just state and finally reflect on this just state.…

    • 1592 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Plato Paper

    • 3226 Words
    • 13 Pages

    What is the nature of justice? Looking from Plato’s perspective justice can be broken down to its simplest forms. Plato starts where we start; with forms. Forms are the building blocks that build complex ideas and tell us the nature of those ideas. In this case Plato reveals his ideas on the nature of justice through forms. The nature of justice can be simplified to basic forms and rebuilt for everyone can understand.…

    • 3226 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato Republic

    • 683 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In his book “the Republic”, Plato tried to build up an ideal society. He divided the ideal society into three classes: rulers, guardians, and workers. As long as each class of people lived harmonious and did their responsibilities, the society would become stable and prosperous. How did make people live with harmony? Obviously, the core issue of “the republic” is justice. Justice is a proper, harmonious relationship among the people in the three classes. Plato suggested that three virtues of individual which were wisdom, courage, and moderation would make individual person just. Also, in order to get the justice, Plato used the “Gold lie” to placate unhappiness with one’s place in life.…

    • 683 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Plato used the Greek word "Dikaisyne" for justice which translates to 'morality' or 'righteousness.' Justice is not the right of the stronger but the effective harmony of the whole. Since his time, a common ideal to reflect justice in codified laws has been the purview of a select body of lawmakers appointed by the state.…

    • 1807 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato defines justice in terms of two types, group and individual. Group justice is a type of political justice and Plato identifies political justice as harmony in a structured political body. Plato's ideal society consists of three classifications of people: producers, auxiliaries and guardians. Producers are people such as farmers and craftsmen. Auxiliaries are the warrior class whose job is to protect the city and carry out the orders of the guardians. The guardians are the ruling class, raised from an early age to be virtuous. Plato's ideal of political justice relies on the principle of specialization. Each person in the society must fulfill the role that he is best suited for, his arête, and not the role that he may desire to fill.…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The position Thrasymachus takes on the definition of justice, as well as its importance in society, is one far differing from the opinions of the other interlocutors in the first book of Plato’s Republic. Embracing his role as a Sophist in Athenian society, Thrasymachus sets out to aggressively dispute Socrates’ opinion that justice is a beneficial and valuable aspect of life and the ideal society. Throughout the course of the dialogue, Thrasymachus formulates three major assertions regarding justice. These claims include his opinion that “justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger,” “it is just to obey the rulers,” and “justice is really the good of another […] and harmful to the one who obeys and serves.” Socrates continuously challenges these claims using what is now known as the “Socratic method” of questioning, while Thrasymachus works to defend his views. This paper seeks to argue the implausibility of Thrasymachus’ views through an analysis of his main claims regarding justice, as well as his view that injustice brings greater happiness.…

    • 935 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics