Thrasymachus and Justice in Plato's Political Philosophy Research Paper

Thrasymachus and Justice in Plato's Political Philosophy - Research Paper Example Distinguished sophist of ancient Greece Thrasymachus has elucidated the term justice while entering into discussion on the same topic with great philosopher Socrates, which has been elaborated by Socrates’ renowned disciple Plato in his Republic. Book I of the Republic encompasses the debate between Thrasymachus and Socrates, where the former makes two assertions about justice. At first, he declares the notion as mere the ‘advantage of the strong over the weak’; and secondly he views justice as ‘submitting to the prevailing statutes of the state law.’ (Hourani, 111) The powerful governments, according to Thrasymachus, strive to implement their policies by dint of the force they enjoy in comparison with the weaker states; consequently, the policy is expected to be observed and followed by all the weak nations. As a result, it becomes the law, which is unconditionally and unanimously imitated by all. Consequently, it is equally beneficial for the weaker due to the very reality that it would be obeyed by all the weak without discrimination, and hence will become a law for all individuals. The sophist also argues that justice imposes unnecessary restrains on the human desires, and thus it does not turn out to be advantageous for the majority of the people in general. Hence, on the one side, Thrasymachus defines justice as the exploitation of the weak individual(s) or stratum at the hands of the powerful; and on the other side, he declares it as the abiding of the uniform law, which looks at everyone on the foundations of equality and impartiality. Thus, stronger group signifies the elite or ruling stratum of society, while the weak can be compared to the masses at large. Since the stronger stratum not only articulates the rules and laws, but also abides the same rules it has devised for all, these statutes of law are supportive for the protection of the rights of the weaker too. Somehow, Socrates points out contradiction in the very definition of justice Thrasymachus has developed. Consequently, it invites criticism from Socrates because of the contradiction it contains in its very scope. Socrates, during his cross examination of the very arguments made by Thrasymachus, vehemently refutes the validity of his viewpoint. He is of the opinion that since the individuals, even from the strong and ruling classes, are humans, and hence can make mistakes, they cannot be expected to devise error free laws, policies and strategies. On the other hand, even their most sincere efforts can maintain flaws and mistakes while devising the laws; so these statutes, in the form of advantages and privileges for the stronger, are unable to present the real picture of justice in their nature and scope. Somehow, Thrasymachus counters Socrates’ objection by stating that the rulers are free from making errors or committing mistakes till they are at the helm of the power. And even if they commit they same, there is no one to chal lenge or point out their mistakes till they are enjoying the position of rulers. In other words, the weaker strata do not have the power to put even the incorrect rules into jeopardy. Consequently, they remain as the laws of the country till the individuals, introducing the same, are in the power. (Bloom, 25) Being one of the greatest logicians the world has ever produced, Socrates could not submit to the Thrasymachus’ claim that rules and laws are devised for the benefit of the rulers only. On the other hand, he clarifies his objection with the example that the artwork is created for the consumers and public, and not for the use of the artisan. Similarly, the shopkeeper involves into trade and merchandise by bringing commodities for the people. It is therefore, justice carries advantages for the common man at first, and hence cannot be attributed to the dominant political group only. Socrates also cites the professional abilities and proficiencies of the