...In Book II of the Plato’s Republic, Glaucon and Adeimantus challenge Socrates’ claim that justice belongs in the class of goods which are valued for their own sake as well as for the sake of what comes from them (Rep. 357 b- 358 a). Unconvinced by Socrates’ refutation of Thrasymachus, Glaucon renews Thrasymachus’ argument that the life of the unjust person is better than that of the just person. As part of his case, Glaucon states what he claims most people consider the nature of justice to be and what its origins are. He proceeds to present a version of the social contract theory: They say that to do injustice is naturally good and to suffer injustice bad, but that the badness of suffering it so far exceeds the goodness of doing it that those who have done and suffered injustice and tasted both, but who lack the power to do it and avoid suffering it, decide that it is profitable to come to an agreement with each other neither to do injustice nor to suffer it. As a result, they begin to make laws and covenants, and what the law commands they call lawful and just. This, they say, is the origin and essence of justice. It is intermediate between the best and the worst. The best is to do injustice without paying the penalty; the worst is to suffer it without being able to take revenge. Justice is a mean between these two extremes. People value it not because it is a good but because they are too weak to do injustice with impunity. Someone who has the power to do this...
Words: 4725 - Pages: 19
...n the first book, two definitions of justice are proposed but deemed inadequate.[7] Returning debts owed, and helping friends while harming enemies are common sense definitions of justice that, Socrates shows, are inadequate in exceptional situations, and thus lack the rigidity demanded of a definition. Yet he does not completely reject them for each expresses a common sense notion of justice which Socrates will incorporate into his discussion of the just regime in books II through V. At the end of Book I, Socrates agrees with Polemarchus that justice includes helping friends, but says the just man would never do harm to anybody. Thrasymachus believes that Socrates has done the men present an injustice by saying this and attacks his character and reputation in front of the group, partly because he suspects that Socrates himself does not even believe harming enemies is unjust. Thrasymachus gives his understanding of justice and injustice as "justice is what is advantageous to the stronger, while injustice is to one's own profit and advantage".[8] Socrates finds this definition unclear and begins to question Thrasymachus. Socrates then asks whether the ruler who makes a mistake by making a law that lessens their well-being, is still a ruler according to that definition. Thrasymachus agrees that no true ruler would make such an error. This agreement allows Socrates to undermine Thrasymachus' strict definition of justice by comparing rulers to people of various professions. Thrasymachus...
Words: 1839 - Pages: 8
...Daniel Vicinanzo Plato’s Republic: A Guide to Education The Republic of Plato is a dialogue in which Plato’s teacher Socrates outlines his ideal city. The dialogue first sets out to answer one very important question: what is justice? The story begins with Socrates in the presence of several people, both friends and enemies, to whom he poses the question, ‘What is justice?’ Socrates then goes on to strike down every theory proposed and offers no definition of his own. This brings about the discussion of the ideal city. During this discussion, it is decided that the citizens of the city will be divided into three classes: the auxiliaries, the producers, and the guardians. The guardians are to be a class of citizens above the rest. They will be the defenders and rulers of the city and, therefore, must be the best of the best. This essay will summarize the education that Socrates advocates for the guardians of his city, and then discuss analyze the education of the guardian class in relation to that of Socrates’ own Socratic method to see if Socrates truly believes in the city he is creating. The first mention of the guardians’ education comes after Glaucon wishes to make the city far more luxurious, as he has begun having too much fun making up his own city and cannot imagine his ideal city as austere as the one Socrates has been describing. When Socrates begins adding some of these...
Words: 2787 - Pages: 12
...Aristotle believes all men can be virtuous with practice and dedication. GREAT. WAY TO GET TO THE POINT. BE SURE TO MENTION WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE ARGUING THAT VIRTUE IS INTRINSICALLY GOOD. HAVE IT SMACK ME IN THE FACE IT'S SO OBVIOIUS. (LIKE THAT TYPO). Plato’s Republic contains one of the greatest recorded discussions on the nature of justice. His definition of justice can be interpreted today as virtue, or the proper working of the soul. Plato argues in this work that virtue is inherently good only when it is manifest in the perfectly ordered soul of the philosopher. This philosopher is born just and inherently good, thereby making him the only individual capable of loving and seeking after virtue completely. …..... I'M GUESSING THIS ATTACHES TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH? AND I'M NOT SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT “BORN JUST”. REMEMBER, IT ISN'T “INBORN” BUT IT IS NATURAL. YOU AREN'T BORN THAT WAY. YOU TEND TOWARDS IT, THOUGH. Only through virtue, or justice as he calls it, can a man receive happiness, and this hints at the inherent goodness of virtue. A man’s soul will only be truly content when he is doing what he is good at and meant to do. This theory of specialization is discussed in depth in Book Two and throughout Plato’s Republic. …..... I'M GUESSING THIS ATTACHES TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH? AND I'M NOT SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT “BORN JUST”. REMEMBER, IT ISN'T “INBORN” BUT IT IS NATURAL. YOU AREN'T BORN THAT WAY. YOU...
Words: 1667 - Pages: 7
...In book 2 of Plato's Republic, Glaucon challenges Socrates to explain why he believes it is better to be just than unjust. Using the analogy of Ring of Gyges, Glaucon Socrates to explain why anyone should still desire justice even if there are no further ends to be pursued such as good reputation and honour. Socrates then offers a conception of justice which goes beyond the definitions offered by his previous interlocuters earlier on in the Republic. This essay will first aim to discuss in detail the challenge set forth by Glaucon followed by an analysis of Socrates' conception of justice with reference to his city-soul analogy. Glaucon claims, on behalf of the average Athenian, that justice is purely a social construction, valued by the masses in view of obtaining a good reputation for justice and virtue(358a). He claims that goods are of three kinds: (1)Goods valued only for what they are and not for their consequences, (2)goods valued for what they are and for their consequences, and (3) goods valued only for their consequences(357b-d). After the two agree on justice belonging to the goods of type-2, Glaucon proceeds to give an explanation of the majority's conception of justice by giving an account of its origins: Before any laws came to be...
Words: 1948 - Pages: 8
...PETER SINGER ETHICS AND INTUITIONS (Received 25 January 2005; accepted 26 January 2005) ABSTRACT. For millennia, philosophers have speculated about the origins of ethics. Recent research in evolutionary psychology and the neurosciences has shed light on that question. But this research also has normative significance. A standard way of arguing against a normative ethical theory is to show that in some circumstances the theory leads to judgments that are contrary to our common moral intuitions. If, however, these moral intuitions are the biological residue of our evolutionary history, it is not clear why we should regard them as having any normative force. Research in the neurosciences should therefore lead us to reconsider the role of intuitions in normative ethics. KEY WORDS: brain imaging, David Hume, ethics, evolutionary psychology, Henry Sidgwick, Immanuel Kant, intuitions, James Rachels, John Rawls, Jonathan Haidt, Joshua D. Greene, neuroscience, trolley problem, utilitarianism 1. INTRODUCTION In one of his many fine essays, Jim Rachels criticized philosophers who ‘‘shoot from the hip.’’ As he put it: The telephone rings, and a reporter rattles off a few ‘‘facts’’ about something somebody is supposed to have done. Ethical issues are involved – something alarming is said to have taken place – and so the ‘‘ethicist’’ is asked for a comment to be included in the next day’s story, which may be the first report the public will have seen about the events...
Words: 9074 - Pages: 37
...PHIL 127: History of Ancient Philosophy Socrates and His Mission When is a Question Philosophical? Philosophical questions have answers. (A question that has no answer is not a question; it just masquerades as one.) But a question is philosophical for a particular culture at a particular time when no means of answering it are available – or, none of the prevailing methods have any authority. A problem is a philosophical problem when the way to go about answering the question is in question. An issue is a philosophical issue when the right way to settle the issue is at issue. A Philosophical Crisis If the claims in the previous paragraph are true, then 5th century Greece was in a philosophical crisis. It was a crisis in morality. In our culture we think of morality as being concerned with rules. Here are some rules – You should not kill. – You should not steal. – Don’t hit people. – Lying is wrong. – It’s wrong to promise to do something and then not do it. – You should not covet your neighbors wife, or his ox or his ass or his male or female slave, or anything that is your neighbor’s. – You should not lie with a man as with a woman. – Thou should not wear fabric woven of wool one way and linen the other. – Do (imperative) unto others as you would have them do unto you. – Help (imperative) other people who are in need when you can do so at no great risk or cost to yourself. Why do we think of morality as consisting of rules? This question is important...
Words: 28769 - Pages: 116
...FREAKONOMICS A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything Revised and Expanded Edition Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner CONTENTS AN EXPLANATORY NOTE In which the origins of this book are clarified. vii PREFACE TO THE REVISED AND EXPANDED EDITION xi 1 INTRODUCTION: The Hidden Side of Everything In which the book’s central idea is set forth: namely, if morality represents how people would like the world to work, then economics shows how it actually does work. Why the conventional wisdom is so often wrong . . . How “experts”— from criminologists to real-estate agents to political scientists—bend the facts . . . Why knowing what to measure, and how to measure it, is the key to understanding modern life . . . What is “freakonomics,” anyway? 1. What Do Schoolteachers and Sumo Wrestlers Have in Common? 15 In which we explore the beauty of incentives, as well as their dark side—cheating. Contents Who cheats? Just about everyone . . . How cheaters cheat, and how to catch them . . . Stories from an Israeli day-care center . . . The sudden disappearance of seven million American children . . . Cheating schoolteachers in Chicago . . . Why cheating to lose is worse than cheating to win . . . Could sumo wrestling, the national sport of Japan, be corrupt? . . . What the Bagel Man saw: mankind may be more honest than we think. 2. How Is the Ku Klux Klan Like a Group of Real-Estate Agents? 49 In which it is argued that nothing is more powerful than information,...
Words: 105214 - Pages: 421
