Thrasymachus Contradictions During Socrates

There's a dramatic shift in the dialogue when thrasymachus enters at 336b. Thrasymachus is an interlocker unlike any other. In the socratic dialogues, he is not respectful, he's obnoxious, and he's not interested in taking part in this common project of conversation governed by reason to try to arrive at the truth about the definition of justice. Instead he dismissed the entire conversation as a waste of time. The definition of justice, says Thrasymachus, is obvious to anybody who thinks of it for more than a few minutes and socrates is just showing off his rhetorical skill in front of his friends by pretending otherwise. Justice, says Thrasymachus is obviously just the advantage of the stronger. That's all it ever has been and it ever will be. Socrates obviously disagrees with this definition and he will set forth his own account soon enough. Much of the rest of the book Republic will be occupied with giving an extended response to Thrasymachus’ point of view. But first Socrates exposes the contradictions in Thrasymachus’ view. Socrates thought that a false view will always

In the course of this speech he also makes the claim that a just person always gets less than an unjust person. In other words it is always to our advantage to do the unjust thing if we can because being just or playing or playing by the rules doesn't get you ahead in life. Note here that Thrasymachus uses his words carelessly. Earlier he had said that justice was the advantage of the stronger, but now he seems to be praising injustice and being advantageous. Socrates tries to force Thrasymachus to take more care with what he is saying. Moving slowly through an argument will lead us to the truth. While careless speeches will lead us astray into