Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Socrates view on nature of justice
Socrates view on nature of justice
Socrates view on nature of justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Socrates view on nature of justice
Through out time men have argued over the meaning of justice. Justice can be interpreted into mean things. Socrates believed that the ideal city would have wisdom, courage, and moderation. Socrates also believed that an ideal city must also possess genuine justice, according to his definition of justice. Socrates believed in individualism, that each individual citizen living in his city would get justice. Socrates believed a true sense of justice could not be defined without first being put up into the essence of a city. Socrates ideal city depended on education, specialization, and social structures which are defined by family, behavior, and loyalty to the city. To understand why Socrates believes wisdom, courage, and moderation is needed we must understand the meaning of these words. Wisdom is the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise. Socrates believes that wisdom lies in the hands of the guardians. The guardians have the right to rule the city because of their vast knowledge. If another group of people were to rule in a democracy their wisdom would not transfer throughout the city. Courage is the ability to do something that frightens one. Socrates felt that the courage should be handled by the auxiliaries. These groups of people were responsible for defending the city from invaders, and …show more content…
Justice can be interpreted to mean many different things but without key aspects, it is meaningless. There are many places on earth today that do not have the slightest sense of individual justice. To this day many people are still fighting for their birth rights. They are being oppressed and mistreated but there is no sense of justice. This book gives the reader a lot of information. At the end of the story the reader is enlightened on the meaning of justice and if justice makes people
In his Plato’s Republic Socrates tries to find the values of an ideal city in order to rightly define justice. Although I agree with most of his ideals for the city, there are also many that I disagree with. Some of his ideas that I accept are that women should be able to share the same responsibilities as the men, having women and children in common, , the recognition of honor based on the self rather than heredity, that the best philosophers are useless to the multitudes, and the philosopher / king as a ruler. I disagree with his views on censorship, having assigned positions in society, his views on democracy, and that art cannot be a respectable occupation.
... them to acknowledge the unjust state of affairs that persists in the deteriorating city-state. Socrates believed it was better to die, than to live untrue to oneself, and live unable to practice philosophy, by asking people his questions. Thus, we can see Socrates was a nonconformist in Ancient Greek society, as he laid down his life in the hopes of saving his state, by opening the eyes of the jury to the corruptness and evils of society. Socrates also laid down the framework for a paradigm shift to occur in his city, as his acquired a formidable fan group, or following, of individuals, who, began to preach his philosophy and continue his Socratic method of questioning and teaching. Socrates philosophy is still influential and studied today, thus his ways of thinking about life, truth and knowledge, changed the way western society perceives the world.
In book four of Plato's “The Republic” Socrates defines justice in the individual as analogous to justice in the state. I will explain Socrates' definition of justice in the individual, and then show that Socrates cannot certify that his definition of justice is correct, without asking further questions about justice. I will argue that if we act according to this definition of justice, then we do not know when we are acting just. Since neither the meaning of justice, nor the meaning of good judgement, is contained in the definition, then one can act unjustly while obeying to the definition of justice. If one can act unjustly while obeying this definition, then Socrates' definition of justice is uncertifiable.
It is his companions, Glaucon and Adeimantus, who revitalized Thrasymachus’ claim of justice. Thrasymachus believes that justice is what the people who are in charge say it is and from that point on it is Socrates’ goal to prove him wrong. Socrates believes that justice is desired for itself and works as a benefit. All four characters would agree that justice has a benefit. To accurately prove his point of justice, Socrates has to reference his own version of nature and nurture. He, Socrates, believes that justice is innately born in everyone. No one person is incapable of being just. Justice is tantamount to a skill or talent. Like any skill or talent, justice must be nurtured so that it is at its peak and mastered form. The city that Socrates has built is perfect in his eyes because every denizen has been gifted with a talent, then properly educated on how best to use their talent, and lastly able to apply their just morals in everyday
It takes one person to begin expanding a thought, eventually dilating over a city, gaining power through perceived power. This is why Socrates would be able to eventually benefit everyone, those indifferent to philosophy, criminals, and even those who do not like him. Socrates, through his knowledge of self, was able to understand others. He was emotionally intelligent, and this enabled him to live as a “gadfly,” speaking out of curiosity and asking honest questions. For someone who possesses this emotional intelligence, a conversation with Socrates should not have been an issue-people such as Crito, Nicostratus, and Plato who he calls out during his speech.
Socrates follows by explaining what is taught to each citizen. You are told that you were born with certain laws. Your father and mother brought you to the world in which they live and thus you should respect and obey by their rules. The laws were already there. That means, that your mother and father are as important as the city and you should respect the city as so.
Truth be told there is no real justice in Socrates? ?just city?. Servitude of those within his city is crucial to its function. His citizens are, in every aspect, slaves to the functionality of a city that is not truly their own. True justice can not be achieved through slavery and servitude, that which appears to be justice (and all for the sake of appearances) is all that is achieved. Within Socrates? city there is no room for identity, individuality, equality, or freedom, which are the foundations justice was built upon. These foundations are upheld within a proper democracy. In fact, the closest one can experience justice, on a political level, is through democracy.
Throughout his life, Socrates engaged in critical thinking as a means to uncover the standards of holiness, all the while teaching his apprentices the importance of continual inquiry in accordance with obeying the laws. Socrates primarily focuses on defining that which is holy in The Euthyphro – a critical discussion that acts as a springboard for his philosophical defense of the importance of lifelong curiosity that leads to public inquiry in The Apology. Socrates continues his quest for enlightenment in The Crito, wherein he attempts to explain that while inquiry is necessary, public curiosity has its lawful price, thus those who inquire must both continue to do so and accept the lawful consequences of their inquiry. Each of the above values, holiness, inquiry, and just lawful obedience, interlock under what Socrates describes in The Republic as, “the very cause of knowledge and truth, [it is also] the chief objective in the pursuit of knowledge,” (Sterling & Scott 198) – the good. The good embodies each Socratic pursuit: it acts as an umbrella for all things perceived in what Socrates names, “the intelligible sector,” (Sterling & Scott 199).
During the time period of The Republic, the problems and challenges that each community was faced with were all dealt with in a different way. In the world today, a lot of people care about themselves. For many people, the word justice can mean many different things, but because some only look out for themselves, many of these people do not think about everyone else’s role in the world of society. The struggle for justice is still demonstrated in contemporary culture today. One particular concept from Plato’s The Republic, which relates to contemporary culture is this concept of justice. In the beginning of The Republic, Socrates listeners, Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, ask Socrates whether justice is stronger than injustice, and
...es proves the invalidity of all of these definitions through interrogation, a strategy that students and teachers even today often refer to as Socratic Dialogue. Based on my readings, my definition of justice has also changed. I used to believe that people should get what they deserve, an example being my approval of the death penalty. I admire that Socrates does not value harming others in order to avenge himself, possibly I am a devout Catholic who believes in forgiving others who have hurt me. I believe that Socrates proves himself to be the wisest out of all the men through his arguments of what actions make a just man.
Just as in the modern society to which we live, where everyone feels justice has a different meaning, the society of Plato also struggled with the same problem. In this paper, I will look into the Republic, one of the books of Plato that resides heavily on defining an answer to the meaning of Justice, and try to find an absolute definition. I will also give my opinion on what I personally think justice is. During the time Socrates and his fellow citizens spent looking for a definition, they came across many different examples. Well-known Athenians, such as Polemarchus, bring out their own definitions of what justice is, with examples like Justice is "Doing the right thing, or "Giving everyone his due.
Kephalos defines justice as returning what one has received (Ten Essays, Leo Strauss, page 169). On the other hand, Kaphalos’ son, Polemarchus, states that justice is found in harming one’s enemies and helping ones’ friends (Republic, 332D). The final opinion in the discussion is given by Thrasymachus as he says: “justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger” (Republic, 338C). However, the lack of knowledge to apply their definitions in reality creates a problem for Socrates. For example, Polemarchos’ view on justice requires a person to be able to distinguish between a friend and an enemy (History of political philosophy, Leo Strauss, 36). Socrates then refutes their definitions of justice and states that it is an advantage to be just and a disadvantage to be unjust. According to Socrates’ philosophy, “a just man will harm no man” and the application of justice becomes an art conjoined with philosophy, the medicine of the soul (History of political philosophy, Leo Strauss, 36). Therefore, the use of philosophy in ruling a city is necessary and the end goal of justice cannot be achieved unless the philosophers
Socrates (470-399 BC) was a credited philosopher born in the city of Athens to father Sophroniscus and mother Phaenarete. Despite his world-renowned contributions, he did not leave any written accounts of his life. His story was taught through the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon, along with Aristotle and Aristophanes in various forms of dramatic texts and histories. Among others, Plato wrote many dialogues that quoted Socrates’ exact words. Much of what we know comes from this greatly influenced student. However, Plato being a literary artist, leads many to think that he brightened up Socrates’ teachings as a result of his positive bias. For this reason, much of his history remains uncertain.
In Plato’s “Republic”, Socrates creates an ideal society in his perspective. He contemplates what his idea of ‘justice’ is. According to Socrates, justice is the “…having and doing what is a man’s own, and belongs to him”. (Book 4 pg. 12) Justice is giving to everyone what they deserve. Socrates uses the ‘myth of the metals’ as an example to show how justice can prosper in a society, while also showing a way that democracy can be unjust.
In The Republic, a truly just state contains four cardinal virtues, which can also be found in a just individual. Justice is the fourth cardinal virtue, but can only be reached once three other virtues are achieved. The first cardinal virtue necessary for justice is wisdom. In an individual, wisdom stems from the prevalence of reason in one’s rational mind, which in turn leads to knowledge and a good sense of judgment. When extended to the just state, the members of Socrates’ utopian society who embody wisdom are the ruling class of philosopher kings (Plato, Republic, 428e). In fact, wisdom is so important to Socrates that he believes in a extremely rigid and structured education for these members of society, so as to develop the rational part of their brain (Plato, Republic, 428e). Courage is another virtue necessary for justice, and occurs when an individual’s wisdom is “backed up” by his or her spirit, unflinching in the face of “fears and desires”(Plato, Republic, 429d). Without courage, wisdom and reason will not be the dominant forces is one’s mind. This reasoning certainly applies to the importance of auxiliaries in a perfect society, where the values and beliefs integral to its well being are constantly imparted on public servants through education and training (Plato, Republic,