For centuries thinkers have been searching for the correct account of what justice is. Many philosophers theorized that justice is whatever the ruler of any political system says it is. Is it because they are in power they dictate what is just and unjust. A few great thinkers who support this claim are Thrasymachus an aspiring tyrant who wishes to have absolute rule, The Athenian generals negotiating with Melian oligarchs, and Machiavelli a renaissance politician. Critics of this claim include Plato, who is one of the most significant figures of ancient Greek philosophy, seeks what is justice in one of his dialogues, The Republic, Socrates, Plato’s Teacher as well as another ancient Greek philosopher is the main character in the book is involved
…show more content…
Plato shows this in The Republic through Socrates. Where Socrates gives reasons why living a just life is better than living an unjust one and injustice produces is not harmonious, which prevents successful outcomes. The just person lives a happier life than the unjust person. So instead of justice being whatever those in power says it is, Socrates and Plato believes it is an independent standard based on wisdom, virtue, and harmony. To protect the right and punish the wrong and unjust. And since everyone is tempted to do injustice people are more likely to agree …show more content…
He understands what justice is ought to be, but knows what it actually is. Some consider Machiavellianism to be linked with emotionless and a detachment from morality. However in his treatise Machiavelli doesn’t fully detach morality from politics. Just that when and if the time arrives a ruler must set them aside to do what is needed to ensure order. If a ruler is morally bounded he cannot do what is ever necessary to help his subjects or keep power. A ruler cannot be just if he doesn’t do what is necessary to bring order. So I do believe that justice is whatever the rulers says it is, be it a monarchy, tyranny, or a democracy along the lines of Machiavelli’s
Plato shows this in The Republic through Socrates. Where Socrates gives reasons why living a just life is better than living an unjust one and injustice produces is not harmonious, which prevents successful outcomes. The just person lives a happier life than the unjust person. So instead of justice being whatever those in power says it is, Socrates and Plato believes it is an independent standard based on wisdom, virtue, and harmony. To protect the right and punish the wrong and unjust. And since everyone is tempted to do injustice people are more likely to agree …show more content…
He understands what justice is ought to be, but knows what it actually is. Some consider Machiavellianism to be linked with emotionless and a detachment from morality. However in his treatise Machiavelli doesn’t fully detach morality from politics. Just that when and if the time arrives a ruler must set them aside to do what is needed to ensure order. If a ruler is morally bounded he cannot do what is ever necessary to help his subjects or keep power. A ruler cannot be just if he doesn’t do what is necessary to bring order. So I do believe that justice is whatever the rulers says it is, be it a monarchy, tyranny, or a democracy along the lines of Machiavelli’s