Gorgias, edited and translated by James H. Nicholas Jr., is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato in 380 B.C. In the text, Plato investigates questions on the nature of rhetoric and its relation to philosophy, politics and education as a whole. He takes in account the focus on Socrates as he discusses major political themes with him as he is a political thinker and actor in Gorgias. In engaging Plato’s Gorgias, it matters that Callicles argues that there are two types of justice-natural and conventional-because Socrates himself uses these two forms of justice to trick Polus into agreeing that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice. If one speaks on the nature of justice Socrates will argue back to get one to answer in
…show more content…
Conventional justice, on the other hand, is the nomos or laws of society and it is also the unjust for one not to share or treat people equally.
Callicles took these two forms of justice to prove Socrates argues by equivocation on the meaning of justice and that Socrates himself tricked Polus into believing that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice. Polus in this argument felt ashamed to say what he thought and got tied up in Socrates’ evil and said contradictory things. Callicles argues with Socrates about how suffering injustice does not belong to a man but to a slave for it is him more superior to die than to live, who, suffering injustice and being trampled in the mud, is unable to help anyone even himself. Callicles goes on to state that “those who set down the laws are the weak human beings and many. It is therefore in reference to themselves and their own advantage that they set down the laws and praises their praises and blame their blames.” (Gorgias, 483b) Conventional justice is bad suffering in Callicles’ opinion as it is the people who lay down the laws that are frightened of the powerful because they have more and they themselves don’t want more as having more is most shameful and also unjust. Seeking injustice, as Callicles states, is having more than others. Nature, the opposite, reveals that having …show more content…
Callicles won’t agree with Socrates. Callicles argues that the stronger, superior and mightier are all the same and that the many are stronger than the one according to nature. Socrates then states that the lawful usages of the many are those stronger in which Callicles agrees to. So then, Socrates goes on to get Callicles agree to the fact that those lawful usages of the many are those stronger and then they those of the superior. For the stronger, Callicles agrees to, are superior. Socrates, still arguing with Callicles, states, “That having an equal share is just and that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice? And don’t you get caught here feeling shame? Do the many customarily hold that having an equal share but not having more is just and that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice? If you agree with me, I may at last receive confirmation from you, seeing that a man sufficient at discerning things has agreed.” (Gorgias, 488e-489a) Callicles answers back saying that the many do believe this but won’t say if he himself
Conventional justice, on the other hand, is the nomos or laws of society and it is also the unjust for one not to share or treat people equally.
Callicles took these two forms of justice to prove Socrates argues by equivocation on the meaning of justice and that Socrates himself tricked Polus into believing that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice. Polus in this argument felt ashamed to say what he thought and got tied up in Socrates’ evil and said contradictory things. Callicles argues with Socrates about how suffering injustice does not belong to a man but to a slave for it is him more superior to die than to live, who, suffering injustice and being trampled in the mud, is unable to help anyone even himself. Callicles goes on to state that “those who set down the laws are the weak human beings and many. It is therefore in reference to themselves and their own advantage that they set down the laws and praises their praises and blame their blames.” (Gorgias, 483b) Conventional justice is bad suffering in Callicles’ opinion as it is the people who lay down the laws that are frightened of the powerful because they have more and they themselves don’t want more as having more is most shameful and also unjust. Seeking injustice, as Callicles states, is having more than others. Nature, the opposite, reveals that having …show more content…
Callicles won’t agree with Socrates. Callicles argues that the stronger, superior and mightier are all the same and that the many are stronger than the one according to nature. Socrates then states that the lawful usages of the many are those stronger in which Callicles agrees to. So then, Socrates goes on to get Callicles agree to the fact that those lawful usages of the many are those stronger and then they those of the superior. For the stronger, Callicles agrees to, are superior. Socrates, still arguing with Callicles, states, “That having an equal share is just and that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice? And don’t you get caught here feeling shame? Do the many customarily hold that having an equal share but not having more is just and that doing injustice is more shameful than suffering injustice? If you agree with me, I may at last receive confirmation from you, seeing that a man sufficient at discerning things has agreed.” (Gorgias, 488e-489a) Callicles answers back saying that the many do believe this but won’t say if he himself