2900 Short Essay: The Republic
Plato was born in 429 BCE in the town of Athens, and was known for being one of Socrates followers; Socrates being an older man who loved philosophy. He was known for the “Socratic” method or dialogue, which involved questioning people on moral virtues. Generally people would realize that their arguments had faults, and then Socrates would explain to them why their arguments are faulty. This style of questioning is known as “elenchus.” In the book, “The Republic” by Plato, Socrates asks the meaning of Justice, and although the people or characters that answer have an ideal of Justice that they truly believe in, Socrates is able to refute with conflicts and beliefs that he has. A debate that starts the book off is between Trasymchus and Socrates. Thrasymachus is a radical sophist, believing that the unjust are more successful than the just; and Socrates the opposite. This essay will focus on the distinct arguments about what both Socrates and Thrasymachus see as reality: and why Socrates argument against the radical sophists and traditional morality is successful.
“The Republic” focuses on the virtue of justice and whether it is worth it in the end to be Just. Socrates argument is superior to those of Thrasymachus because the scope of Socrates argument encompasses …show more content…
Asking the question if a knowledgeable person would want to intentionally take more for himself than another intelligent person. Creating the understanding that a knowledgeable person is wise and people that are wise are good. And a bad, unintelligent person would want to do better than all. Thus just people are wise and wisdom is just. He then continues to explain how justice is the virtue of the soul and because of this people would want to be just so that they would have a “healthy”
Plato was born in 429 BCE in the town of Athens, and was known for being one of Socrates followers; Socrates being an older man who loved philosophy. He was known for the “Socratic” method or dialogue, which involved questioning people on moral virtues. Generally people would realize that their arguments had faults, and then Socrates would explain to them why their arguments are faulty. This style of questioning is known as “elenchus.” In the book, “The Republic” by Plato, Socrates asks the meaning of Justice, and although the people or characters that answer have an ideal of Justice that they truly believe in, Socrates is able to refute with conflicts and beliefs that he has. A debate that starts the book off is between Trasymchus and Socrates. Thrasymachus is a radical sophist, believing that the unjust are more successful than the just; and Socrates the opposite. This essay will focus on the distinct arguments about what both Socrates and Thrasymachus see as reality: and why Socrates argument against the radical sophists and traditional morality is successful.
“The Republic” focuses on the virtue of justice and whether it is worth it in the end to be Just. Socrates argument is superior to those of Thrasymachus because the scope of Socrates argument encompasses …show more content…
Asking the question if a knowledgeable person would want to intentionally take more for himself than another intelligent person. Creating the understanding that a knowledgeable person is wise and people that are wise are good. And a bad, unintelligent person would want to do better than all. Thus just people are wise and wisdom is just. He then continues to explain how justice is the virtue of the soul and because of this people would want to be just so that they would have a “healthy”