True Justice In Plato's The Republic

The Republic, is another one of Plato's Socratic dialogues written in 380 BCE. Within the dialogue, Socrates, discuses and sets out to answer the question "What is Justice?" As the conversation continues, Socrates disproves every suggestion offered, showing how each harbors hidden contradictions and then embarks on a discussion to find out what true justice is, and to find out whether the just man is truly happier than the unjust man, or vice versa.
The story begins as Socrates and his friend Glaucon head home from a religious festival at Piraeus. On their journey, they are stopped by old acquaintances Adeimantus and Polemarchus who then convince Socrates to make a detour to Polemarchus's house. Once they all arrive at the house, Socrates sees Polemarchus's father, Cephalus, who's an old friend and Thrasymachus. The two begin a conversation about the merits of old age. Cephalus, claims many of his friends complain about old age and not being able to do youthful things, he believes that they make old age a burden, and that old age is in fact not a burden, but instead a relief from bodily desires. He goes on to justify this by saying that if old age was really a bad experience, everybody would be complaining about it, but since he has friends who are enjoying their old age more than they enjoyed

their youth. Furthering the conversation, Socrates, says Cephalus bears old age well, not because of the way he lives, but because he is a very wealthy man. Cephalus says that wealth lets one live a just life since a wealthy man does not need to fear owing money or not having enough to sacrifice to a god. As they continue to chat, their topic gradually shifts from old age to the nature of justice.
Cephalus, is the first to offer a definition of justice.

He uses the traditional definition of a just life—paying what one owes to gods and men, and being honest. Socrates dismisses this definition and uses this example: if a person receives a weapon from a friend who then becomes insane, would it be just to return that weapon if the friend asked for it back? In this case, what would be justice - giving him his weapon back or not? The two men then agree that telling the truth and returning what you receive cannot be the definition of justice. Because Cephalus's definition fails he goes to prepare the sacrifice for the festival, and Polemarchus continues the

conversation.
Polemarchus has his own interpretation of the nature of justice, saying that justice is giving "each his due," thus quoting Simonides, and saying that the weapon should be returned to the owner in the example above. He also claims that friends owe it to their friends to do well by them, and never harm them, and enemies are owed harm. Polemarchus thinks of justice in terms of actions a person performs or does not perform but Socrates points out that when humans are harmed they become worse in terms of human virtues, just as the behavior of a horse who is harmed becomes worse. Socrates' example leads Polemarchus to agree that it is not the proper function of justice to harm anyone, friend or foe. It is the function of an unjust man to cause harm.