Plato and Philosophy, Essay Example

A case study on the ‘Republic’ where Thrasymachus argues that Justice is whatever is in the interest of the stronger

The issue of justice has been discussed by many scholars. They have come up with different ways to illustrate this concept. Many governments in the world have legal justice systems that try to make sure that justice is done to all its citizens. Despite all this, there has been no clear definition of what justice entails. Most of the scholars have their basis of justice to Socrates argument that justice is in the interest of the stronger. (Plato, 2002) Here, the word stronger implies those who hold power or what the majority hold. Socrates engaged in a lot of arguments in matters of justice in trying to explain what justice meant to him.

In this passage, Thrasymachus argues that Justice is what the strong hold. The argument turns in favor of Socrates at some points. This starts at the point where Glaucon and the entire company join the argument. There is showoff eagerness of Thrasymachus to speak for he thought that he had more wisdom as compared to others. Here the issue of justice being to the interest of the strong exposes itself as he feels that he is stronger than others in this debate. That’s why he insisted that he had to begin giving his side of the argument.

The argument also turns to the favor of Socrates in the point when Thrasymachus is asked it would be right or just for all people to eat beef because polydamas the pancratiast who was stronger than the rest preferred eating beef for his bodily strength. The question here focuses on whether this would be right for others to be forced to eat beef because polydamas preferred it for his own good. This can be related to Socrates argument on whether people follow their rulers because of the power they have or because it is right. (Plato 2006).  This can also be seen where in the argument Thrasymachus explains that people follow their governments despite the fact that   governments make laws which favor their interests. People are even punished for not following those laws. This serves the need of the strong.

The argument take this form as the parties involved try to uncover the truth whether its true that justice is in the hands of the strong. The entire members of the company want to disapprove Thrasymachus view of the same. This is because, as seen in the passage many times he wanted to take the argument on his favor. The others challenges him in the throughout the argument in order to make him have respect to other people’s view. Socrates held that he respected other people’s views as they would help in his quest for the truth.  He also accepted being challenged by others (Plato, 2006).   This is seen in the argument through the passages all the parties engage in a heated argument. They employ the Socratic form of argument in trying to come with a conclusion. As can be seen from this passage they do not come with an agreement but they conclude that the matter needed to be discussed further for an agreement to be reached.

The above argument represents a good illustration of how Socratic form of argumentation has been employed in many forms of arguments to discover the truth. As can be observed, it has a form that engages a lot of questioning (Plato, 2002).  According to Socrates this is the only way truth would be discovered. These were the ideal principles of Socrates form of argument.

References

Plato (2006). The Republic, Read books publishers, pg 10.

Plato. (2002). Protagoras. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pg11.