The Definition of Justice in the Apology by Socrates and the Republic by Plato
The Virtue of Justice
In The Apology, Socrates professes to know that he does not know. However, he explicitly states: “I do know that injustice and disobedience to a better, whether God or man, is evil and dishonorable.” From this it can be inferred that Socrates supposes to know what is moral and what is not. The point he is trying to make is that of living with honor, which ultimately points to virtue. When we care about living with honor, it prompts us to reach higher and stick to the principles we ascribe to. Conversely, when we care too much about honor, sometimes the culture or public opinion on the subject can be wrong – especially in today’s society. Today, things that would be considered “honorable” might not have been considered honorable years ago. For example, chivalry and acting like a gentleman used to be very prevalent in society. Today, however, with equality by default in place, it seems that society views it completely fine to treat women the same as men without any special consideration.
Order custom essay The Definition of Justice in the Apology by Socrates and the Republic by Plato with free plagiarism report
450+ experts on 30 subjects
Starting from 3 hours delivery
One of the main points of The Republic of Plato is to define exactly what justice is. It also appears that Plato is going to use the book to give a defense of philosophy. Most of Book 1 is Socrates using logic to disprove opinions that his friends hold on the subject of what justice is. In the interactions with his friends, we can see how he is able to point out flaws in their logic and get them to question their own argument. When Thrasymachus, enters the argument, he claims that justice does not benefit humans and should not be adhered to. Socrates gets Thrasymachus to agree that he is trying to define injustice as a virtue. He leads Thrasymachus through a series of reasoning where they both agree that justice is a virtue of the soul. Since virtue of the soul means that the soul is benefited, it follows that justice is to be desired.
One of the reasons for the discussion over justice was Thrasymachus is a sophist. The sophists of the time generally did not believe in objective truth. Their views are in opposition to that which Socrates takes in The Apology. Thrasymachus’ argument is that those who subscribe to justice are not benefitted while those who are unjust gain power and become the rulers in the society. He views the laws and morals as simply conventions set up by society. Socrates is able to breakdown his argument by proving that “justice being virtue and wisdom, and injustice both vice and lack of learning.”
Once Thrasymachus agrees to that point, Socrates is able to lead to his conclusion that being just is beneficial because virtue benefits the soul. In Book 1, Socrates never gives his own opinion of what justice actually is; he spends his time breaking down the arguments of others. This could be part of the reason why people thought he was corrupting the youth. He makes people question their own beliefs and opinions while not really giving any of his own. Of course, it is to be assumed that in the following books he will give his own definition of justice and make a defense for it.
The Definition of Justice in the Apology by Socrates and the Republic by Plato. (2023, Mar 10). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/the-definition-of-justice-in-the-apology-by-socrates-and-the-republic-by-plato/Cite this Page
Run a free check or have your essay done for you
