What Is Thrasymachus Theory Of Just And Unjust Behavior

Improved Essays
Why follow the rules? Why not get what you want when you want it however you can get it? The mere function of today’s world is based on the elite necessity to have every citizen obey their laws. In addition, people never stop to ask themselves, “Why is there a pressing validity in the action of obeying wholesome rules, and how does this benefit me personally”? Thrasymachus addresses the underlining importance behind morality and the misleading advantages that follow with being virtuous. In a society built on making the elite happy, Thrasymachus proclaims that injustice defines the advantage of the powerful. By suppressing the weak, the elites are able to do as they please while others follow the rules. Following the selfish desires of one’s …show more content…
Generally speaking, just behavior is courageous, however Thrasymachus finds that just behavior will leave one with no happiness or leverage to more power. While these factors of justice all make sense, Thrasymachus theory of happiness in terms of just and unjust behavior is unreasonable. “Injustice… it rules the true simple and just, and those it rules do what is to the advantage of the other and stronger, and they make the one they serve happy, but themselves not at all”, said Thrasymachus (Book I 359-362). Claiming that the unjust are the unhappiest is not only a far-reaching statement, but there is no way of proving this claim. There are many factors that go into measuring one’s happiness, like environmental influences, social life, and internal sense of self. While a truly unjust man may have all the money, cars, and fancy clothes, he may feel hollow inside from the lack of emotional depth in his life. Furthermore, a person of wholesome just action and abides by the most strict life, one may find joy in serving those one is loyal to. There are effective examples to expose the mere selfish desires of the powerful and defining what it means to be a just and an unjust person, however happiness is not something one individual can measure or prove there or lack

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

    According to Thrasymachus ‘Justice is the advantage of the stronger’. What does he mean by this and does Socrates succeed in proving him wrong? The name Thrasymachus means fierce fighter, and this certainly represents the character of the same name, who appears in book one of Plato’s Republic. Thrasymachus enters Plato’s world with a statement designed to shock, stating that “justice is the advantage of the stronger”.…

    • 2199 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mccaleer V. Horsey 35 Md

    • 1849 Words
    • 8 Pages

    [N]either the common law nor any code of human law seeks to enforce the rule of perfect morality declared by divine authority, which acknowledges as its one principle the duty of doing to others as we would that others should do to us, and which, by consequence, absolutely excludes and prohibits all cunning and craft or astuteness practiced by any one for his own exclusive benefit. And it thence follows that a certain amount of selfish cunning passes unrecognized by Courts of justice, and that a man may procure to himself, in his dealings with others, some advantages to which he has no moral right, but to which he may succeed in establishing a perfect legal title. But if any one carries this too far: if by craft and selfish contrivance he inflicts an injury upon his neighbor and acquires a benefit to himself beyond a certain point.…

    • 1849 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved 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
  • 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
  • Great Essays

    What is “happiness” and how is it obtained? The word “happiness” is defined as ‘a mental or emotional state of well-being defined by positive or pleasant emotions ranging from contentment to intense joy’. The decisions people make on a day-to-day basis are to reach the ultimate goal of being happy. While everyone strives to obtain happiness, not everyone succeeds. In today’s society, happiness seems to be directly correlated with factors such as wealth or status.…

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Kallipolis is a perfectly structured society in which justice is achieved at the social and interpersonal realms. It is ruled by a philosopher king, who maintain the peace and harmony in the ideal society. According to Plato in The Republic, the philosopher king possesses the qualities to be the rightful king to rule in Kallipolis. Philosophers are qualified to rule because they have a understanding of the Forms or the truth, their wisdom allows them to understand justice and their knowledge makes them superior than others. However, a philosopher can be a tyrant in disguise.…

    • 1641 Words
    • 7 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
  • 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

    Following Socrates’ contention that Simonides would side with Cephalus and return a weapon to a madman, Polemarchus narrows his definition of justice, by claiming that justice is to give each what they deserve or is “appropriate to him.” Further, when prompted by Socrates, Polemarchus claims that medicine lends, or “gives medicine, food and health to bodies” (332c) and cooking gives seasoning to meat. Thus, Polemarchus comes to the conclusion that justice must give or “owe” what is good to friends and what is bad to enemies. Socrates then asks his interlocutor which profession or craft is most just in its treatment of others. He claims that, for example, a doctor will treat a sick patient with more skill than a just man, and conversely, be more adept at harming a patient, if he “deserves bad.”…

    • 1807 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Justice: a set of values deemed "just" that are often used to establish law codes or serve as the basis for governments. And yet, despite its ability to invoke a moral high ground, the concept of justice may often go unexamined. However, in Book I of Plato's Republic, Polemarchus is forced to not only articulate a concise definition of justice, but is also forced to come to its defense in response to an inquisitive Socrates. Through the conversation between Polemarchus and Socrates, Plato forces the reader to question the traditional Greek perspective on justice and attempt to develop a new definition. Central to comprehending the conversation between Polemarchus and Socrates lies in understanding Polemarchus' notion of justice.…

    • 1132 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    1. Why should we moral , according to Glaucon? Do you agree or disagree? Explain why?…

    • 1406 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    In Plato’s ‘Republic’, happiness and justice are deeply questioned and analyzed as being interconnected. The broadest assumption of a happy person is one who is most wealthy and with very much power. This is almost an unspoken truth, however, does it really work out? One of the most famous Greek philosophers was Socrates, a son of a stonemason who encouraged discussion among many elite, powerful men. In the Republic written by Plato, the idea of a happy person is dissected thoroughly by Socrates and explained.…

    • 1622 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To be just does not mean that you are a temperate person. You can be a temperate person that but not just but to be both just and temperate you must be doing something for the good of the city. Virtuous people don’t become just when doing virtuous acts. Thesis*** For a person to be known as just they have to be lawful by creating laws to keep people good, equitable by being fair, and decent by being fair according to the law. Aristotle explains, “It is well said, then, that by performing just actions one becomes a just person and by performing temperate actions on becomes a temperate person, and no one is going to become good by not performing these actions” (1105b 9-12).…

    • 909 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays