Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato theory of justice
Plato theory of justice
Plato theory of justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Ring of Gyges is from Plato’s Republic, in this book Plato is in dialogue with Claucon. The men are discussing justice; Glaucon says that people really don’t want to be good people, but we have to be due to justice. Glaucon also says that justice is rooted in people being weak. Glaucon is not on the side of the victim, he believes that the person who did the injustice in the first place is more of a victim than the actual victim. Gyges was a shepherd and was under the service of the King of Lydia. One day as he was tending to his flock there was an earthquake, and it made an opening in the earth at the place where he was feeding his flock. He decided to descend into the opening and upon entering he sees a hollow brazen horse. He decides
to look in and sees what appears to be a dead body with gold ring. He took from the ring from the finger of the dead and ascended back up to the field. It was customary that the shepherds gathered monthly and give a report about the flocks to the king. Gyges attended the assembly with the ring on his finger, and as he was sitting among the other shepherds he turns the ring inside his hand, and he instantly became invisible. The shepherds then began to talk about him as if he was not there. He was surprised at this, and again touching the ring he turned it outwards a reappeared. He soon realized the power he had and he seduced the queen, and with her help conspired against the King and killed him and he took over the kingdom The ring and its power tempted Gyges to seduce the queen and kill the king. I agree with the subject matter of the myth. The ring is like a cloak of invisibility. Gyges realized what power he has and uses this to his own personal gain. He can be viewed as a person who abused his power of the ring and became unjust and immoral. Gyges uses the ring by doing that it takes away all the consequences of his actions. The ring also corrupts Gyges because he takes the king's wife and then kills the king, ultimately giving him power and rule over the land. The ring distorts, Gyges morally, he was a shepherd, who conspired against the king and killed him for his own gain. The ring acts as a resource allowing him Gyges to do as he feels and he gets away without any consequences. A real example at the ring of Gyges would be criminals who commit witness tampering. Criminals will do anything to stay out of jail, especially organized crime members. These people who are involved with organized crime have an arm that extends far beyond the eye can see. In order to stay out of jail, they would use any means necessary. Take John Gotti Sr also know as the “Teflon Don”, he was called the Teflon don because no matter how many times he was tired he was always found innocent because a witness would “disappear.” No charge could stick to because of the power he had and the power he had. The power he had was striking fear into witnesses or worse killing them. This power is comparable to the ring of Gyges because Gyges lived without any consequences, as did John Gotti Sr
A twenty-first century reading of the Iliad and the Odyssey will highlight a seeming lack of justice: hundreds of men die because of an adulteress, the most honorable characters are killed, the cowards survive, and everyone eventually goes to hell. Due to the difference in the time period, culture, prominent religions and values, the modern idea of justice is much different than that of Greece around 750 B.C. The idea of justice in Virgil’s the Aeneid is easier for us to recognize. As in our own culture, “justice” in the epic is based on a system of punishment for wrongs and rewards for honorable acts. Time and time again, Virgil provides his readers with examples of justice in the lives of his characters. Interestingly, the meaning of justice in the Aeneid transforms when applied to Fate and the actions of the gods. Unlike our modern (American) idea of blind, immutable Justice, the meanings and effects of justice shift, depending on whether its subject is mortal or immortal.
In Book 1 of the ‘Republic’, Socrates, in answer to the question ‘What is Justice?’ is presented with a real and dangerous alternative to what he thinks to be the truth about Justice. Julia Annas believes Thrasymachus thinks Justice and Injustice do have a real existence that is independent of human institutions; and that Thrasymachus makes a decided commitment to Injustice. She calls this view ‘Immoralism’: “the immoralist holds that there is an important question about justice, to be answered by showing that injustice is better.” This essay identifies this ‘Immoral’ view before understanding if and how Plato can respond to it. How does Plato attempt to refute Thrasymachus’s argument? Is he successful?
Glaucon makes multiple points through “The Ring of Gyges” all of which are concerning human nature. The ring is a symbol which is used to make...
Thrasymachus has just stated, "Justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger", and is now, at the request of Socrates, clarifying his statement.
Justice is generally thought to be part of one system; equally affecting all involved. We define justice as being fair or reasonable. The complications fall into the mix when an act of heroism occurs or morals are written or when fear becomes to great a force. These complications lead to the division of justice onto levels. In Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Plato’s Republic and Apology, both Plato and Aeschylus examine the views of justice and the morality of the justice system on two levels: in the city-state and the individual. However, Plato examines the justice system from the perfect society and Aeschylus starts at the curse on the House of Atreus and the blood spilled within the family of Agamemnon.
If there was a way for mankind to be unjust without any consequences, then he would be unjust. For instance, The Ring of Gyges is a fictional tale about a shepherd who took a ring from a corpse that he found after a storm. The ring gave the shepherd the ability to disappear when he turned the facet inward, but he would reappear when he turned the facet outward. When the shepherd became aware of the power of the ring he stole the kingdom by seducing the queen, and killing the king. Afterward, Glaucon made a comparison to justify what would have happened if two of the ring exist. He stated, that if one ring was giving to the just man, and the other ring giving the unjust man, they would both pursue their own self-interest. The essence of Glaucon’s story is that, if a just man had the opportunity to obtain his desires by been unjust, then he would be. Glaucon point is justice is involuntary, it is used to sustain order in society (if you do not break the law, you are more likely not to get punished).
Plato's Book I of The Republics presents three fundamental views on justice which are exemplified in Thucydides' On Justice, Power and Human Nature. Justice is illustrated as speaking the paying one's debts, helping one's friends and harming one's enemies, and the advantage of the stronger.
...cting unjustly. Therefore, justice is determined to be intrinsically valuable from the negative intrinsic value of injustice that was demonstrated, as well as from parts of the soul working together correctly. Glaucon also wants Plato to show that a just life is better than an unjust life. It has been shown that when the soul is in harmony, it only acts justly. It is in a person’s best interests to have a healthy soul, which is a just soul, so that the person can be truly happy. This means that by showing justice has an intrinsic value, it can also be concluded that it is better to live a just life opposed to an unjust life. The conclusion that I have drawn is that Plato’s argument against the intrinsic value of injustice is sufficient to prove that the just life is superior, even if the unjust life may be more profitable.
The philosophical ideas of Plato that relate to the Parthenon include whether the structure is an element of the Visible World or the Intelligible World. In my opinion, Plato would view the Parthenon as an object in the Visible World. The Parthenon is a one of a kind monument that is tangible and exists in our real world. The Parthenon is an architectural project and deals with forms of science and mathematics. Plato's view of science and mathematics are categorized as forms in the Intelligible World, which are intangible. Through analysis of illusory tactics, the Tripartite Soul, the simile of the line, and the artistic qualities of architecture, Plato's, as well as my view of the Parthenon will become evident.
In Chapter 2 of Republic, Glaucon uses the Myth of the Lydian Shepherd to portray a pessimistic view of human nature. Plato, the author of Republic, uses his brother Glaucon to tell the Myth of the Lydian Shepherd. We are led to believe that Plato takes the myth and its implications on human nature very seriously by use of a personal character. The argument, originally given by Thrasymachus, contends that at the root of our human nature we all yearn for the most profit possible. It also contends that any man will act immorally if given free reign. The theory proves unplausible due to circularity in the argument and implications that prove untrue.
The first change in character begins with Glaucon’s position on whether or not the unjust soul is happier than the just soul. This is seen in Book 4, 445b, when he argues against Socrates’ proposal that they define justice in the individual. He feels that this is a ridiculous inquiry because, through Socrates’ proofs, unjust behavior causes the soul to be in a state of unrest and torment. Glaucon believes that the query warrants no further investigation, since an individual whose soul is unbalanced cannot possibly be happy. Through his objections to pursue the matter further, it can be seen that Glaucon has already begun to transform, though gradually. He sees now, through his own admission, that material possessions and power is not worth having “when his soul – the very thing by which he lives – is ruined and in turmoil.” These feelings stem from the conclusion of the three classes within the...
In Plato’s The Republic, we, the readers, are presented with two characters that have opposing views on a simple, yet elusive question: what is justice? In this paper, I will explain Thrasymachus’ definition of justice, as well as Socrates’s rebuttals and differences in opinion. In addition, I will comment on the different arguments made by both Socrates and Thrasymachus, and offer critical commentary and examples to illustrate my agreement or disagreement with the particular argument at hand.
In Plato’s The Republic, Plato uses a central story, the myth of the three metals, to illustrate his overall philosophy that a just society is one in which all citizens fulfill their assigned roles and responsibilities. Socrates tells the myth of the three metals to Adeimantus and Glaucon because he believes that citizens’ familiarity with the myth will promote loyalty and enforce society’s three tier system. According to the myth of the three metals, Mother Nature created all human beings by utilizing one of three different metals: gold, silver, and iron/bronze. The metal used to create each person defines the role he or she will assume in society. Gold represents the guardians, who are governed by reason, making them suitable to rule. Silver depicts the auxiliaries, who are guided by their spirit, predisposing them to be guards. The
The three men discuss justice as if it's a good thing. Glaucon wants Socrates to prove that it is, and argues if it is just to do wrong in order to have justice, or on the other hand, is it unjust to never do wrong and therefore have no justice. For example; a man who lies, cheats and steals yet is a respected member of the community would be living a just life, in comparison to a man who never lied, cheated, nor stole anything but lives in poverty and is living an unjust life. Glaucon assumes the life of a just man is better than the life of an unjust man.
Glaucon attempted to prove that injustice is preferable to justice. At first, Glacon agreed with Socrates that justice is a good thing, but implored on the nature of its goodness? He listed three types of “good”; that which is good for its own sake (such as playing games), that which is good is good in itself and has useful consequences (such as reading), and that which is painful but has good consequences (such as surgery). Socrates replied that justice "belongs in the fairest class, that which a man who is to be happy must love both for its own sake and for the results." (45d) Glaucon then reaffirmed Thrasymachus’s position that unjust people lead a better life than just people. He started that being just is simply a formality for maintaining a good reputation and for achieving one’s goals. He claimed that the only reason why a person would choose to be unjust rather than just due to the fear of punishment. This is supported by the story of the shepherd who became corrupted as a result of finding a ring which made him invisible. He took over the kingdom through murder and intrigue since he knew there could be no repercussions for his unjust actions. In addition, Adiamantus stated that unjust people did not need to fear divine punishment since appeals could be made to Gods’ egos via sacrifices. Finally, Glaucon gave an example of the extreme unjust person who has accumulated great wealth and power which he juxtaposed with an extreme moral man who is being punished unjustly for his crimes. Clearly, injustice is preferable to justice since it provides for a more fruitful life.