He defends justice against all odds and in his world just will always beat un just. To display this Plato writes, “I thought I showed how superior justice is to in justice,” (56). Plato says this to his comrades after they state what they believe justice is. In Plato’s mind, he see his fellow Elenchus members claims as invalid. His first partner in discussion is Thrasymachus, who is a sophist, during his argument with Plato he claims justice is “what is in the interest of the stronger”(19). Thrasymachus’ answer is not actual an account to what justice is but rather is degrading justice. The idea behind this, is being just and following rules can actually be doing what is in the interest or benefits the stronger (un just). This however this claim differs from Glaucons challenge. Glaucon sees being just as a means to an end, which is shown when he says, “that they’ll gain by making a contract- to ban the doing of in justice, and so being the victim of it as well” (45). Glaucon’s claim found a way around the exact thing Thraysmachus’s claim inhibits; people being taken advantage because of being just. His idea of the social contract is that, if a I am just and the next person is just then by doing so neither one of us gets hurt. As opposed to Thraysmachus’s challenge where there will always be one winner and one
He defends justice against all odds and in his world just will always beat un just. To display this Plato writes, “I thought I showed how superior justice is to in justice,” (56). Plato says this to his comrades after they state what they believe justice is. In Plato’s mind, he see his fellow Elenchus members claims as invalid. His first partner in discussion is Thrasymachus, who is a sophist, during his argument with Plato he claims justice is “what is in the interest of the stronger”(19). Thrasymachus’ answer is not actual an account to what justice is but rather is degrading justice. The idea behind this, is being just and following rules can actually be doing what is in the interest or benefits the stronger (un just). This however this claim differs from Glaucons challenge. Glaucon sees being just as a means to an end, which is shown when he says, “that they’ll gain by making a contract- to ban the doing of in justice, and so being the victim of it as well” (45). Glaucon’s claim found a way around the exact thing Thraysmachus’s claim inhibits; people being taken advantage because of being just. His idea of the social contract is that, if a I am just and the next person is just then by doing so neither one of us gets hurt. As opposed to Thraysmachus’s challenge where there will always be one winner and one