The Republic of Plato: Arguments of Socrates and Trasimaco on Justice
The Republic is one of Plato’s best known and celebrated works, it is a dialogue between Socrates and other characters. The theme of this book focused on that it is justice and how man is expressed. In this essay an opinion about the dialogue between Socrates and Trasimaco will be reflected
The term justice is defined in different ways, one of these definitions says that justice is: “Recognize what corresponds to a person for their merits or values."Justice is that value that should be put into practice in society, but this is affected by different reasons as we see it commonly in governments with the issue of corruption.
In the work of Plato’s republic, the character Socrates maintains a conversation about justice, does not give an exact definition, but raises different arguments. The issue of justice arises in this conversation based on the fact that Céfalo and Socrates commented that Céfalinjustices worried and lived an unhappy life waiting for his death and if this is not the case has a quiet old age.
This is where the question arises about what justice is really. Céfalo states that justice is "telling the truth and returning the things that one can receive", after having several comparisons they come to the doubt that if justice is based on doing friends well and evil to enemies, enemies,This was said by Polemarco, this argument was answered by Socrates making different comparisons, comparing art with justice, stating that as it would be really a friend and who not, how it would be known to differentiate at the time of justice.
After that argument they reach another point, where it is said that justice is basically a "human art", and damaging another man will imply making it less fair, but the good man cannot do another bad, since an injustice would commit an injustice. One of those who was listening to this conversation was temporary, he was outraged by the dialectic and he raises the following, he sees justice as "the interest for the strongest", the art of selfishness says that laws must be fulfilled because theyThey are dictated by someone superior, of greater power.
Tramímaco does not believe that in society there is something in society that is really valuable, everything exists to be useful or useless, according to him, man prefers injustices since justice in some cases would not be of such convenience, justice is somethingArtificial and created, it has no value by itself, for him the laws are based on the convenience of an individual, he does not think of society since "man is not a social being by nature".
He refers to morals, he speaks that morality is something like a perversion of natural laws, if there were no laws all act as convenience and no one feared the punishment imposed. Socrates argues that many times the presidents are wrong when making laws, which transimaco refuted saying that if they are wrong then they are not leaders. Given this socrates says that all art is based on seeking the good of the object and not the one that does the practice.
Leave feedback