|
While the preceding remark seems outrageous, proof remains glaringly obvious in Book 1 of The Republic. I certainly do not expect anyone to take such an extreme statement on my word and I highly recommend readers compare my subsequent version of Instant Plato to any of the numerous translations online by simply searching for “Socrates and Thrasymachus.” Yes, you read correctly; it said INSTANT PLATO… welcome to America.
The Republic represents ten Books and each one originally fit onto a single papyrus scroll. Much of the writing consists of dialogue between Socrates and others interested in his notions. After a discussion about justice proceeds in a manner one might expect of Socrates, it takes a startling turn as Thrasymachus asserts that he knows what justice is and suggests the definitions others present are “nonsense.”
In Book 1 of The Republic, Thrasymachus says, "I declare justice is nothing but the advantage of the stronger" Robbery and violence generally represent injustices but when practiced wholesale by rulers becomes justice, because it serves the interest of those stronger rulers. In this approach, since the rulers do not obey the laws they impose on citizens, they are essentially unjust but still able to claim they are just, in a sense. At one point, Thrasymachus says, "You will understand it more easily, if you consider the perfect injustice; one which makes the unjust man most happy and makes those who are wronged but unwilling to be unjust miserable."
According to Thrasymachus, tyranny is a type of wholesale plunder but if a citizen commits theft or violence, they will face disgrace and punishment. When someone robs or commits atrocities against a whole nation and then reduces them to slavery, however, the people will eventually forget ugly names like theft or violence, only to call him fortunate, in spite of his unmitigated wrongdoing.
To Thrasymachus a tyrant is happy and fortunate because he breaks the rules of justice he imposes on the weak. What a weak citizen calls "justice" is essentially slavery and the strong do not obey those rules. Later, existentialists, like the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, will expand these notions to challenge traditional morality and Christianity.
After listening to Thrasymachus, Socrates refutes him: “If the weak can prevent the strong becoming a tyrant or taking what they want, they are in fact strong! As one might expect the voice of the master quiets Thrasymachus but at the beginning of Book 2, Glaucon and others renew arguments that anyone would be unjust, given the opportunity, if injustice leads to happiness. The students ask Socrates to prove that it is better to be just, since unjust individuals often enjoy happiness and rewards as just people suffer poverty and disgrace.
In much of the rest of The Republic, through the words of Socrates, Plato attempts to prove that just individuals are actually happy, while unjust people, such as tyrants, generally tend to be unhappy.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
