Importantly, the Athenians do not disagree on principle. Instead, they say that it is the Spartans that would defeat them, not their subjects alone, and the Spartans would not be disposed to treat them terribly. This admittance seriously undermines the Athenian Thesis’ claim that justice is only relevant “between equals in power,” as the Athenians implicitly confess that arguments of justice could perhaps benefit them; they just don’t believe that those particular circumstances will arise. Justice and perceptions of justice, then, are relevant between those in unequal power – the Athenians only deny it to the Melians because that position is expedient to them. Thus, this disproves the universality of the claim that justice is only relevant between those equal in power. Justice is relevant because perceptions of justice influence action. Pericles’ plague speech and Cleon’s speech strengthen this …show more content…
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