Justice Opinion 3

Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?

Socrates says that when the government or captain, that the orders they give are in the interest of the subordinates, not the leader. “So that a captain in this sense is in control, but will not give his orders with his own interest in view, but that of the crew which he controls.” This a good point because it is true, when the subordinate gets the task, it is there interest because it shows their skill. “No ruler of any kind, qua ruler, exercises his authority, whatever its sphere, with his own interest in view, but that of the subject of his skill. It is his subject and his subject’s proper interest to which he looks in all he says and does.” It is in the subordinate’s interest to live up to their title.

In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?

One of Thrasymahcus main points is, justice is good for the stronger party, at the expense of the subject that obeys the stronger party. One main point of Socrates is, injustice does not pay better than justice. That brings up Thrasymahcus other point, injustice pays more than justice. “…no profession or art or authority provides for its own benefit but, as we said before, provides and orders what benefits the subject, of which it is in charge, thus studying the interest of the weaker party and not the stronger.” That is Socrates next point, most jobs don’t do anything for themselves. The product of their work usually goes to the public, mainly the weaker party, not the stronger.

In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymahcus say in response to your answer?

I think that harming somebody should only be if they attack first. It should only be used in self defense. The reason why I say this is because fighting never solves anything, it only leads to worse situation. A just man should never use violence; a just man should find a way around fighting. That is something that Socrates would say, that is basically what the told Polemarchus. He said that fighting is never the right thing that a just man would never right. Thrasymahcus would probably say something along the lines of the only time you should fight is if you are the stronger man. To me it seems that Thrasymahcus is about strength, because of his opinion on justice. He would say fight if you are strong because if you are weaker, then you will surly lose and be hurt, but if you are stronger, take advantage of the weaker man and defeat him.