Justice In Book 2 Of Plato's Republic

Emily Arvin

Gabriel Gottlieb

Ethics

27 February 2014

Justice

In Book 2 of Plato’s Republic, Glaucon begins by exploring three definitions of good and then revives Thrasymachus’ argument towards Socrates as a way to better understand the meaning of justice. He presents three claims; justice finds its value in people’s want of power to do wrong, people who practice justice do so against their will, and ultimately the unjust man lives a better life than the just man (358c). Given Socrates’ claims about justice in Book 1, he would likely respond that justice is an excellence of the soul and produces no harms; therefore, the just man lives a more profitable life. As a precursor to the challenge, Glaucon presents the three types of good. The

He begins his argument by explaining that these men say, doing wrong is by nature a good and being wronged is an evil (358e). However, “the evil of being wronged outweighs the good of doing wrong” (358e). Essentially, retaliation cannot mask the suffering of being wronged. Therefore, Glaucon states that in order to avoid this crossfire, an agreement must be made not to perform harmful acts and not to be harmed. Glaucon believes that this agreement is, in fact, “the essential nature of justice”(359a). Which basically states that justice is merely a compromise between getting away with doing wrong and being wronged and not being able to retaliate (359a-b). In this, Glaucon is claiming that justice is not a good, in the sense that Socrates believes it is, but “finds its value merely in people’s want of power to do wrong” (359b). If people had power to do wrong, justice would not

The way to examine this, in Glaucon’s view is to contrast the wholly just man with the wholly unjust man (360e). When looking at the unjust man, Glaucon compares him to a “skilled practitioner of a profession” (360e). In a sense, making him able to do what is feasible and avoid what is not feasible (361a). If he is truly unjust, he will be able to do wrong without being caught and appear just on the surface (361b). If he does slip up, he must have the ability to make it right by using persuasion (361b). As for the completely just man, is honorable and wants “not to appear to be good, but to be good” (361b). He must not appear good because he would receive recognition and rewards, and it would not be clear what his motivations were for being just (361c). To avoid this confusion, the man must act with justice but have a terrible reputation for injustice so it is evident he is just for the sake of being just (361c). Through this example, Glaucon claims that the unjust must live a better life than the just, because on the outside they appear just and are praised accordingly