In this essay, I will argue the main keys to the advantage of leading a just life, which better than unjust life. In The Republic by Plato, speaks through his teacher Socrates who sets out the basic laws for humans through the longest argument among group of friends in a meeting at Polemarchus house. Socrates presents a question, “What is Justice?” He continues to disprove any answer he was given. Therefore, he present no definition of his own. Later, Thrasymachus, present himself like a wild beast asking Socrates what is just and why you go on circles and never answer the question. Then, he refers the unjust life comes with many advantages upon the just life, which that the just means nothing but a benefit interest to the stronger, the unjust
…show more content…
(Plato, 22) Here Socrates prove his point by meaning, if all materials target for their only perfection, making them self-sufficient there will be no use of aspects, however, with the aspects it will find their greatest benefit. What Socrates meant, doctors and pilots they don’t do the best thing for them self as “Thrasymachus claimed about rulers” but for the sake of their people. To rephrase it, Socrates proves to Thrasymachus his understanding of ruler is wrong because rulers should worry about their people not themselves. Socrates continues to point out Thrasymachus idea about injustice is more profitable, and strong men have the courage to break the rules; they can take advantage of the weak and justice is differed. (Plato, 31) Further, Socrates confirms the group that Thrasymachus is wrong on three points; one, that the unjust man is superior to the just man with knowledge, second, the injustice is strength, and third injustice brings happiness. (Plato, 32) Another analogy Socrates had to point out to respond to this challenge, a musician versus unmusical. He said, the ignorant man always try …show more content…
Glaucon and Adeimantus were not convinced with Socrates explanation and they outlined three classes of what good could possible be. First class, a good that everyone wants for their own benefits. Second class, some things people value for their own sake and for their both knowledge and healthy living. And third class, good that everyone benefit from like, medical treatment, physical training, and wages for work. Then, Glaucon ask which category justice belong from these classes? (Plato, 42) Socrates begins to clarify the argument to the brothers, by stating, consequently we are nearsighted to find justice in the individual rather looking for it at large scale. Socrates instruct them to look at the subject at large in the ideal. He led them to scenario of ideal just state. Socrates took the historical development of an actual state, he took the type of state where he lived. The Greek city-state. To demonstrate, let people unite to shape of community because of the mutual needs; food, residence, farms and farming, education, and go on. Moreover, each human is born with both different talents and abilities, then they should be assigned to different level of occupations to ensure the common good and stability of the country. He continued describing the image of a perfect society by adding: Some people should be farmers, some tailors, carpenter,
(Plato, 22) Here Socrates prove his point by meaning, if all materials target for their only perfection, making them self-sufficient there will be no use of aspects, however, with the aspects it will find their greatest benefit. What Socrates meant, doctors and pilots they don’t do the best thing for them self as “Thrasymachus claimed about rulers” but for the sake of their people. To rephrase it, Socrates proves to Thrasymachus his understanding of ruler is wrong because rulers should worry about their people not themselves. Socrates continues to point out Thrasymachus idea about injustice is more profitable, and strong men have the courage to break the rules; they can take advantage of the weak and justice is differed. (Plato, 31) Further, Socrates confirms the group that Thrasymachus is wrong on three points; one, that the unjust man is superior to the just man with knowledge, second, the injustice is strength, and third injustice brings happiness. (Plato, 32) Another analogy Socrates had to point out to respond to this challenge, a musician versus unmusical. He said, the ignorant man always try …show more content…
Glaucon and Adeimantus were not convinced with Socrates explanation and they outlined three classes of what good could possible be. First class, a good that everyone wants for their own benefits. Second class, some things people value for their own sake and for their both knowledge and healthy living. And third class, good that everyone benefit from like, medical treatment, physical training, and wages for work. Then, Glaucon ask which category justice belong from these classes? (Plato, 42) Socrates begins to clarify the argument to the brothers, by stating, consequently we are nearsighted to find justice in the individual rather looking for it at large scale. Socrates instruct them to look at the subject at large in the ideal. He led them to scenario of ideal just state. Socrates took the historical development of an actual state, he took the type of state where he lived. The Greek city-state. To demonstrate, let people unite to shape of community because of the mutual needs; food, residence, farms and farming, education, and go on. Moreover, each human is born with both different talents and abilities, then they should be assigned to different level of occupations to ensure the common good and stability of the country. He continued describing the image of a perfect society by adding: Some people should be farmers, some tailors, carpenter,