Thrasymachus Plato Analysis

1203 Words 5 Pages
In Plato's Republic transcribed by Plato, Socrates argues with Thrasymachus on the matter, is being just good and wise? Socrates asks Thrasymachus a question that eventually makes Thrasymachus rethink his position. Socrates makes the argument that justice is wise and good and injustice is ignorance and bad; however, Thrasymachus thinks alternatively in a sense that he defends injustice as being better of the two. Through Socrates’ method of elenchus, Socrates comes to the conclusion “the just has turned out to be wise and good and the unjust evil and ignorant” (The Republic 350c). Socrates arises to this conclusion because the just wouldn't want to exceed his like but the unjust would want to exceed his like and unlike simultaneously. In the …show more content…
Socrates states “Whether he would or would not be able,I said, is no to the point” (The Republic 349b). All Socrates states in response to this notion is the unjust can’t exceed his unlike when he states “he would think is just, and would try to gain the advantage;but he would not be able to do so”(The Republic, 34b).The unjust might actually be able to exceed the just however. Socrates doesn’t go into depth of why or why not the unjust can exceed his unlike. If the unjust were able to exceed the unjust they must have had knowledge to do so. Socrates argument offers some ambiguity to what extent this element actually connotes. If one understands the unjust as ignorant and the just as knowledgeable then one can perceive this contradiction. In a situation one can see this argument in which two students that apply to the same college. The college accepts students based on grades and it has one spot left for a student. In this case, the ignorant would have bad grades and the knowledgeable have exceptionally great grades. It’s logical that the ignorant person won’t get into the college but the knowledge will get into the college based on his grades. However, if an ignorant person were to get into this college then he would be knowledgeable. A college can accept anybody who applies. If an ignorant person gets into this college then one could make the argument that the unjust has exceeded his unlike because he has knowledge. Any person that gets into college has knowledge in some sense and if the ignorant gets into college then he would be knowledgeable. Therefore it is possible for an ignorant person to exceed the knowledgeable. If that notion is true then the just can exceed the

Related Documents