Defining Justice In Plato And Plato's Republic

Decent Essays
Republic written by Plato is one of the early works of political philosophy. Using dialogue between students and Socrates, his teacher, Plato attempts to define justice and explain why being just is rewarding. Republic ends with the myth of Er, a story about a man who travels to the afterlife then returns to tell what he saw. The myth of Er fits into the rest of Republic because it supports the assertion that being just is beneficial and that being just or unjust is a choice; however, it appears different than the rest of the book because the myth introduces a different reason why justice is advantageous, and it has a non-dialectical style. These differences support the idea that Plato may have used the myth of Er to persuade those who …show more content…
In the myth of Er, the reasoning of why someone should be just is based on the individual and the rewards they receive by being just. Socrates tells Glaucon, "they had to suffer ten times the pain they had caused to each individual. But if they had done good deeds and had become just and pious, they were rewarded according to the same scale" (286). The individual focus of the myth of Er contradicts the emphasis earlier in the dialogue of being just to help the community. Earlier in Republic, Socrates argues to Glaucon that philosophers should rule even though they are the ones who dislike political rule the most. He claims that justice is to make the community as a whole happy, not the individual: "it isn 't the law 's concern to make any one class in the city outstandingly happy but to contrive to spread happiness throughout the city" (191). Plato uses the argument that justice helps the community achieve the common good to support the claim that being just is worthwhile. Contrarily, in the myth of Er, individuals are motivated to be just out of self-interest instead of for the common good since souls are rewarded and punished based on whether they were just or unjust. This is one of the differences between the myth of Er and the rest of …show more content…
The myth of Er tells a story and gets away from the dialectic nature of the rest of the argument. The previous arguments in Republic use deductive reasoning in an attempt to discover the truth. In comparison, the myth of Er is anecdotal evidence. Ironically, the myth of Er is similar to the myths in epic poems which Plato believes should be banned. Socrates tells Glaucon, "all such poetry is likely to distort the thought of anyone who hears it" (265). Socrates argues poets imitate things because they do not truly understand what they imitate. It is strange that Plato ends Republic with the myth of Er because he suggests these stories are used by those who do not understand. The stylistic difference between the myth of Er and the previous parts of the dialogue is peculiar considering the negative view of poetry that Plato

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    In the Crito, Socrates asks Crito “is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted that unjust action harms and just action benefits…or do we think that part of us…is inferior to the body?” Crito’s answer is no to both presented questions. Socrates then asks if the soul is more valuable than the body, which Crito answers yes. In this line, Socrates is stating that the health of one’s soul is paramount to one’s body and doing unjust action harms the soul. Socrates is arguing that just actions benefit the soul and are virtuous while unjust actions harm the soul and are not virtuous. These series of questions culminate into Socrates’ conception of virtue leading him to reject Crito’s pleas for him to escapes because if he does he will be disobeying the laws of the state.…

    • 1839 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Socrates Poetry Analysis

    • 743 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Socrates then questions Ion whether he could do the same, in which he answers that he could not interpret inferior poets. This raises a debate between Socrates and Ion that one who knows the better poet would also know the inferior poets. Socrates claims that Ion is unable to interpret the inferior poetry because he has no knowledge of poetry as a whole. Instead, Ion can interpret Homer, not because of knowledge, but because of inspiration and possession. Ion has no knowledge of Homer and poetry because if one can point out flaws and excellences of one poet, they should also be able to point out the same for another, otherwise their argument is invalid.…

    • 743 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Glaucon supports his theory out of his analogy of the Rings of Gyges where those who practiced justice only did so out of fear and as soon as the barrier was lifted, they started to commit bad deeds. Acting justly simply makes their lives more secure and convenient rather than their spirits aligning with reason. Glaucon concludes his argument by adding a statement by Adeimantus who claims that justice is praised only for its consequences, it holds a reputation with winning, such as within political campaigns or successful marriages. Ultimately, both philosophers challenge Socrates to prove whether or not justice can be justified as a good in…

    • 1319 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Or is better to say that Justice is indefinable and unsolvable, and that is beyond human understanding? Plato and Socrates imparted their noble wisdom so that we were better off in life. If they would be still around, they would be disillusioned to see our state of deterioration. They endeavored us to be in harmony with our souls. Indeed, things, people, and ideas have changed, except…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “Crito” and the beginning parts of “Phaedo” portray Socrates as somebody who has entirely “given up” on life. A plan of escape is presented to Socrates in full confidence- to clarify, “confidence” in both connotations meaning the plan was more or less fool-proof too- and still, he refuses. His foundation, in this case, is for altruistic reasons. Escaping would be unjust, he tells Crito, and so would injure his soul. This justification is hard to believe for some readers considering that he argued against the existence of definite definitions of just and unjust and a professional in knowledge of all their features so profusely in “Euthyphro”.…

    • 1318 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Socrates’ most palpable reasoning for this principle is that the many found him guilty even though he thinks he’s innocent. The judgement of the many is degraded in Socrates’ mind after they convict him. Another motive for Socrates to dismiss the opinion of the many is because he likes to consult experts. Socrates believes that no one should claim knowledge over anything that they are not experts on. This is seen in Plato’s Symposium when Socrates says “how ridiculous I’d been to agree to join you in praising Love and to say that I was a master of the art of love, when I knew nothing whatever of this business, of how anything whatever ought to be praised” (Sym.…

    • 1420 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    ‘The Apology’ written by Socrates most famous student Plato, is a Socrates dialogue where he is defending himself from the accusations of corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods of Athens. He tells the court that these accusations are false and he does believe in the gods of Athens. He also tells them that he did not corrupt the youth, in fact the youth followed him on their own free will. According to Socrates the problem was that people who called themselves wise were not actually very wise, their knowledge was based on ignorance thinking that they were wise and he wanted to help them see that true knowledge was knowing nothing rather than believing that they know everything. As philosophy is based on questioning everything, he…

    • 1048 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    One cannot reap the benefits of the gods if they are wicked. While one can be just without being wise, the soul who choose tyranny as an example, only those who are truly wise, like the soul of Odysseus, will continue to prosper eternally. Plato uses the word persuaded in his text, I believe that is intentional. Plato knew that not everyone took his word as gospel, the Myth of Er was something that needed to be taught, not simply heard. Hearing the myth, it could be dismissed as a pretty bed time tale.…

    • 1994 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This is unlike the philosopher Socrates, who is capable of seeing that there are more contributing factors to happiness and in turn is able to challenge Polus’ first glance of the conceptual idea of happiness. After this discussion, Plato’s audience can see that Polus only analyzed happiness purely at the surface level since he only thinks of punishment is purely “a bad thing," since it would make anyone upset and miserable at the moment; he failed to contemplate a deeper meaning of happiness without the discussion he and Socrates underwent (470 a). In this example, Plato shows how their discussion ultimately forces both of them to think about their views of happiness on a deeper level by factoring in the idea of shame as a…

    • 1911 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Socrates however argues that it is better to show the gods as just to promote justice in the cities, than it is to show them as they truly were understood to be. Griswold explains that the gods must be seen “as good and the cause of only good; as incapable of violence…for god ‘doesn’t himself change or deceive others by illusions’” (Griswold, section 2). Even though Socrates is arguing against poetry on the basis of its promotion on unjust behavior, Socrates is acting unjust to present the gods in the manner he believes to be effective. This manipulation is tyranny, which is ironically what Socrates argues…

    • 2031 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays

Related Topics