Relationship Between Thrasymachus And Socrates

Decent Essays
While Socrates and Polemarchus wrap up their conversation, Thrasymachus continues to listen to them speak. Thrasymachus is engulfed with a great urgency to confront Socrates with his own definition of ‘justice’. In his critique of justice he believes it is the advantage of the powerful. Thus, Thrasymachus represents the moral and political views of a cynical sophist. As he defends his claim, he states that the strong are the rulers who establish the laws. He continues by implying that these laws are made only to the advantage of the ruling party. In the conversation that follows, Socrates unmasks the “shameless” Thrasymachus when the narrator states:
Thrasymachus conceded all these points, but not in the easygoing way I have just described.

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    After Socrates, the protagonist in Plato’s Republic, refutes a description of justice similar to the traditional poetic view of justice made by a man named Cephalus, Thrasymachus, a well-known sophist, enters into the discussion of justice with Socrates. Thrasymachus asserts, “I proclaim that justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger” (Plato, Republic I, 338 C). For Thrasymachus, justice is only revealed through the interests of the stronger party. Whatever the stronger party dictates as being good for itself, the stronger party, is what justice is. To further elaborate on his claim, Thrasymachus uses examples of cities governed by different ruling bodies.…

    • 1179 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The idea is that rulers make the laws in their own best interests, and adherence to those laws is what constitutes justice for the individual. Socrates leaps at this opportunity to further his discussion on the subject of justice in book one: what it is, and whether or not it pays to be just. In this essay I will clarify Thrasymachus’…

    • 2199 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    thrasymachus uses the example of a tyrant by showing how they make laws in their best interest and the weak must be obedient to all of the laws or they will be punished. Thrasymachus goes on to explain that most people are good in appearance because they are afraid of the punishment. The more intelligent and strong will disobey the laws and have the courage to wrong others causing the weak to suffer. Believing that the unjust life is better, Thrasymachus says the unjust man can easily benefit himself by not paying his taxes and steal from the weak. Thrasymachus claims that of one steals it will be big to aid himself.…

    • 130 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Socrates and Thrasymachus’ Conception on Justice In Friedrich Nietzsche’s work, The Genealogy of Morality, he states that the existence of laws establishes what is just and unjust within a given society (Nietzsche 1280; sec 12). Thus, there does not seem to be anything explicitly virtuous for justice. In reference to the Republic, I will argue Socrates and Thrasymachus have different views on justice and will ultimately disagree with each other on Nietzsche 's conception of justice. Nietzsche’s entire work is trying to dissect morality from its origins.…

    • 1228 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Glaucon Vs Socrates

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Socrates concludes that justice will need to be follow in the individual, then into the community [1]. Glaucon and Socrates both make strong arguments of justice and injustice, but Glaucon may have a slight edge over the…

    • 1273 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In Plato’s dialogue Gorgias, Socrates argues against Polus an ancient Greek orator, that tyrants and orators do not, in fact do what they want, instead they do what they see fit. As a result of this claim, Socrates believes tyrants and orators have the least power in their cities. This paper will primarily argue Socrates’s views through the definition of power, who holds the “real” power, that some things are inherently bad, and that there are different views of morality. The argument that Socrates sets forth states “If a person does whatever he sees most fit to do when he lacks intelligence, is this still ‘having power?’”…

    • 1029 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this reading, Glaucon, a ‘just’ man and apprentice to Socrates, becomes disappointed with Thrasymachus’ abrupt and willingness in defeat. Glaucon, plays devil’s advocate and challenges his successor; Socrates, to a friendly debate. To start the debate of why the ‘just’ man is the best, rather than, ‘unjust’. Glaucon also discusses the best/worst life and how justice is a compromise.…

    • 779 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Glaucon is unsatisfied with the argument between Thrasymachus and Socrates regarding Justice. Thrasymachus believes Justice is for the common good, it is not for the good for an individual, that any compromise is involved. Glaucon renews Thrasymachus’ argument, he divides the good into three classes: things good in themselves, things good both in themselves and for their consequences, and things good only for their consequences. Socrates places justice in the class of things good in themselves and for their consequences without any hesitation. Glaucon wants Socrates to prove by exploring that Justice is best, not a compromise.…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Elaborating the Definition of Justice Plato, the Republic is about the history of political thought, it includes long conversations and arguments among several intellects. Thrasymachus, a fierce fighter, argues that justice is what is good for the stronger and that the unjust man lives a more profitable life than the just man does. Socrates, Plato’s teacher, play the role in defending justice in all these arguments. He praises justices for itself and its consequences. Next, Glaucon and Adeimantus, sons of Ariston, restore Thrasymachus’s argument in a different prospect of perfectly unjust life is better than a perfectly just life.…

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Melians, the response of Athenians at Melos, and Pericles at his plague speech, all confirm the argument that the question of justice is at least relevant between those with unequal power. In Pericles’ case, the question of justice could influence the subjects of Athens to commit great violence against its oppressor. Justice, then, is real in that it influences action. It is absurd, then, to assert that an abstract principle like justice does not exist while at the same time admitting that it influences people; its influence is proof of its existence. Beyond this philosophical proof for the existence of justice, Athens’ own cries for justice further demonstrate the relevance and importance of questions of justice between those of unequal…

    • 1557 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The switch to the discussion of profitability changes the scale in which justice is analyzed from justice as an overarching concept to an individual in action. From his view, justice has a key role in society but for an individual it is more profitable to be unjust. As a moral skeptic, Thrasymachus doesn’t believe justice to hold an intrinsic good. For an…

    • 447 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Polemarchus replies that justice is useful in war and peacetime only when it protects objects or money, otherwise a skillful man is preferred. Thus, Socrates concludes that if justice is a craft, it is “only useful for useless things,” such as watching money or a lyre. Furthermore, Polemarchus’ first premise, is critiqued by Plato on the grounds that (1) if justice is a craft, a more skilled individual is more equipped to “give what is owed” than a just one, and (2) that Polemarchus’ argument reduces justice to…

    • 1807 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Hourani provides an alternative interpretation to Thrasymachus’s position on justice that is best characterized as deontological. Similarly to Kerferd and Nicholson, Hourani takes the position that Thrasymachus’s opening statement is designed to make an “impression of daring cynicism”; however, that justice is the advantage of the stronger is not meant to be taken as a literal definition of justice. Instead, Hourani advocates that Thrasymachus is talking about obedience to the law when referring to the advantage of the stronger, as reflected in his subsequent description of governments making laws in a self-interested manner. Hourani postulates that Thrasymachus structures his argument in a way that resembles the sophist’s conception of justice in Book IV of Plato’s Laws. In order to demonstrate this resemblance, Hourani provides a reordered schematic of Thrasymachus’s argument that follows: (i) The rulers in each city are the stronger.…

    • 1660 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In Plato’s Gorgias, Socrates and Callicles engage in a debate about what it means to be happy and to live a flourishing life. According to Callicles, a person is happy and flourishing when he or she is living as ambitiously as he or she possibly can. Living the good life includes chasing one satisfaction after another and having a constant influx of pleasure. In contrast, Socrates emphasizes on the idea of eudaimonia, according to which a happy and flourishing person is one that lives an orderly life, in which the person maintains discipline and control over oneself.…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In Plato’s Republic, the images of justice are perceived differently between several characters in this novel. Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, all present contrasting ideals of justice compared to the one envisioned by Socrates. Using the art of rhetoric, Socrates utilizes argumentation to identify the faults in each individual’s vision of justice, and how his unconventional perception of justices can change their entire society. The first vision of justice discussed in The Republic was Cephalus. Cephalus describes justice as honesty.…

    • 1361 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays