...Justice has always been an interesting topic for philosophers and also for ordinary people. Justice can be defined briefly as “the fairness in the way that people are treated” (Collins Cobuild, p. 910). Plato and Aristotle, two leading figures of ancient Greek civilization, were earliest philosophers who thought about justice and developed theories about the sublime aspects of being just. This assignment is an attempt to prove that pursuing a life of justice would make living more worthwhile than being unjust or a combination of just and unjust life. In order to reach this point, I am going to explain the concept of justice and its superior aspects from the perspective of both Plato and Aristotle by taking help from their famous works “The Republic” and “The Nicomachean Ethics”. I will also give place to counter arguments and their rebuttals. I will make my own comments at the final part of the assignment. Plato (427 BC-347 BC) was one of the earlier and most important philosophers of the world and is also known as the founder of “The Academy”. Plato’s most famous work is “The Republic” in which he tries to draw the qualities of a just individual and a just state by explaining the sublime nature of justice. In the first two books of The Republic, dialogues between different characters focus on different meanings of justice. During the conversation two conventional definitions of justice (“giving a man’s due” and “doing good to your friends, harm to your enemies”) are refuted...
Words: 1724 - Pages: 7
...definitions of justice are proposed but deemed inadequate.[7] Returning debts owed, and helping friends while harming enemies are common sense definitions of justice that, Socrates shows, are inadequate in exceptional situations, and thus lack the rigidity demanded of a definition. Yet he does not completely reject them for each expresses a common sense notion of justice which Socrates will incorporate into his discussion of the just regime in books II through V. At the end of Book I, Socrates agrees with Polemarchus that justice includes helping friends, but says the just man would never do harm to anybody. Thrasymachus believes that Socrates has done the men present an injustice by saying this and attacks his character and reputation in front of the group, partly because he suspects that Socrates himself does not even believe harming enemies is unjust. Thrasymachus gives his understanding of justice and injustice as "justice is what is advantageous to the stronger, while injustice is to one's own profit and advantage".[8] Socrates finds this definition unclear and begins to question Thrasymachus. Socrates then asks whether the ruler who makes a mistake by making a law that lessens their well-being, is still a ruler according to that definition. Thrasymachus agrees that no true ruler would make such an error. This agreement allows Socrates to undermine Thrasymachus' strict definition of justice by comparing rulers to people of various professions. Thrasymachus consents to Socrates'...
Words: 1839 - Pages: 8
...Human nature drives individuals to define the most perplexing concepts; however, understanding the true meaning refers to more than its denotation. The definition of justice proves to be a conflicting view point, dating back to Socrates’s attempted explanation in Plato’s The Republic. Within the first book, Socrates finds himself exposing the flaws behind three definitions of justice proposed by the traditionalists of Athens. Through Socrates’s ridicule of physical attributions equating to justice, he disproves these perceived virtues and conveys the necessity for a lack of physicality. Due to Celphalus’s patrician status within the ancient Athenian society, he derives his definition of justice through his high financial position. After speaking...
Words: 1330 - Pages: 6
...In Book II of the Plato’s Republic, Glaucon and Adeimantus challenge Socrates’ claim that justice belongs in the class of goods which are valued for their own sake as well as for the sake of what comes from them (Rep. 357 b- 358 a). Unconvinced by Socrates’ refutation of Thrasymachus, Glaucon renews Thrasymachus’ argument that the life of the unjust person is better than that of the just person. As part of his case, Glaucon states what he claims most people consider the nature of justice to be and what its origins are. He proceeds to present a version of the social contract theory: They say that to do injustice is naturally good and to suffer injustice bad, but that the badness of suffering it so far exceeds the goodness of doing it that those who have done and suffered injustice and tasted both, but who lack the power to do it and avoid suffering it, decide that it is profitable to come to an agreement with each other neither to do injustice nor to suffer it. As a result, they begin to make laws and covenants, and what the law commands they call lawful and just. This, they say, is the origin and essence of justice. It is intermediate between the best and the worst. The best is to do injustice without paying the penalty; the worst is to suffer it without being able to take revenge. Justice is a mean between these two extremes. People value it not because it is a good but because they are too weak to do injustice with impunity. Someone who has the power to do this...
Words: 4725 - Pages: 19
...In the opening books of Plato’s The Republic, Thrasymachus and Glaucon argue that justice, as it is traditionally conceived, is merely the advantage of the stronger over the weaker, that rulers simply rule for their own benefit and that people only act justly for its consequences. Despite Socrates’ opposing view on the meaning of justice, the events depicted in Jonathan Kozol’s Amazing Grace support the views of Thrasymachus and Glaucon. In Book I, Thrasymachus begins his argument by defining traditional justice. “…As I have said from the beginning, the just is the advantage of the stronger, and the unjust is what is profitable and advantageous for oneself” (Plato, 344c). Here, Thrasymachus introduces his first point, that the unjust man will always be better off than the just man. He then defends this claim with three key examples. Thrasymachus states that in contracts between a just and unjust man the unjust man will always come up with more, in tax systems the unjust man will pay less taxes and receive higher distributions, and finally the just man will “incur the ill will of his relatives and his acquaintances when he is unwilling to serve them against what is just” (Plato, 343e). Unconfined by the rules of justice, unjust men are able to act selfishly and for their own benefit rather than acting for the good of others. This point of view is exemplified in the actions and resulting fortunes of Mrs. Washington in Amazing Grace. Mrs. Washington is the epitome of just. Living...
Words: 1431 - Pages: 6
...Raven Williams 10/2/2012 History of Political Thoughts TR 1:00pm Dr. Andrew Douglas Plato’s Plea Against Democracy Democracy is defined as a government by the people that exercise their rights through the elected officials and ruled by the majority. The written dialogues of Socrates by Plato take into account that democracy is actually inefficient and undermines the true values of their citizens. Plato’s best known and comprehensive work is the Republic. He criticized democracy as an inadequate form of government because it caused corruption of people through public opinions and created rulers whose main concern it to the ability to influence its citizen rather than being knowledgeable of proper rulership. Therefore, this government is capable of molding the perception and ideas of the citizens. According to Plato, democratic governance is a poor form of government due to the focus on self-interest rather than the welfare of society as a whole. In this essay, Plato’s background, views on politics will be presented first; then, his in-depth opinion of democracy and what he believed to be an ideal society. Plato wrote, in his autobiography Seventh Letter, that he could not identify himself with any political parties because they were heavily engage in corrupted activities. However, it was due to the execution of Socrates that provided Plato with the assurance that the existing governments were fallacious without any possible reparation. He perceived politics as unhealthy and...
Words: 2213 - Pages: 9
...Defining Justice How do Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus respectively define “justice”? On what grounds does Socrates refute them? In the first book of Plato’s Republic three possible definitions of the term “justice” are brought up by Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus which Socrates is able to refute. Though Socrates presents no personal opinion himself he is able to question each explanation given to him by the others. The book begins with a discussion between Socrates and Cephalus where the question of justice is initially brought up. What makes Cephalus different from the other characters is that he does not offer his own opinion but that of traditional Greek beliefs. He simply states that justice is achieved by giving back what one has taken from another and by being an honest man. Although Cephalus does not boast about his fortunes, it becomes apparent that he is very economically-oriented and he possesses a very black and white view that justice is something that can be paid off. From this Socrates then questions how that can always be right. He provides an example of if one friend took weapons from another who was mentally unstable and they demanded them back. Would it be just for the mentally stable friend to simply return them even if he knew dangerous consequences could follow because the person was legally entitled to the weapons? Cephalus agrees that this would indeed contradict his definition of justice. From this Cephalus’ son Polemarchus...
Words: 1228 - Pages: 5
...evolution of Rhetoric, with Mailloux introduce a historical and philosophical criticism of “sophistic Rhetoric as applied in the modern American context” (for example, neopragmatism and poststructuralism), and evaluated in the rest of the book, whilst West and Turner enlighten the reader about the heurism and globalism of Aristotle’s Rhetorical theory with a focus on the discipline of public speaking. Mailloux introduces sophistic Rhetoric as founded on the pragmatic doctrine that “Man is the measure of all things: of things which are, that they are, and of things which are not, that they are not”, a phrase attributed to the Sophist Protagoras (Patrick, 2006). Others Sophists of note include Gorgias, Prodicus, Hippias and Thrasymachus – quoted in Plato’s Republic as saying “… ‘Just’ or ‘right’ means nothing but what is to the interest of the stronger party” (Plato & Lane, 2007)). West and Turner’s account of the Rhetoric show that the first teachers of Rhetoric were the "Sophists”, who were nomadic teachers of public speaking that were respected for their intellect and subsequently paid highly for their teachings. A modern understanding of Sophistic philosophy can be described by author and activist Rahul Easwar’s quote “The real fight is not between right and wrong; the real fight is between my right and your right”. Mailloux explains Plato and his (classical and contemporary) sympathizers’ contempt for Sophism and dismissal of the same as a...
Words: 2288 - Pages: 10
...Volume 27.4 December 2003 939-41 International Journal of Urban and Regional Research Debates and Developments The Right to the City DAVID HARVEY The city, the noted urban sociologist Robert Park once wrote, is: man's most consistent and on the whole, his most successful attempt to remake the world he lives in more after his heart's desire. But, if the city is the world which man created, it is the world in which he is henceforth condemned to live. Thus, indirectly, and without any clear sense of the nature of his task, in making the city man has remade himself. The right to the city is not merely a right of access to what already exists, but a right to change it after our heart's desire. We need to be sure we can live with our own creations (a problem for every planner, architect and utopian thinker). But the right to remake ourselves by creating a qualitatively different kind of urban sociality is one of the most precious of all human rights. The sheer pace and chaotic forms of urbanization throughout the world have made it hard to reflect on the nature of this task. We have been made and re-made without knowing exactly why, how, wherefore and to what end. How then, can we better exercise this right to the city? The city has never been a harmonious place, free of confusions, conflicts, violence. Only read the history of the Paris Commune of 1871, see Scorsese's fictional depiction of The Gangs of New York in the 1850s, and think how far we have come. But...
Words: 1968 - Pages: 8
...PHIL 127: History of Ancient Philosophy Socrates and His Mission When is a Question Philosophical? Philosophical questions have answers. (A question that has no answer is not a question; it just masquerades as one.) But a question is philosophical for a particular culture at a particular time when no means of answering it are available – or, none of the prevailing methods have any authority. A problem is a philosophical problem when the way to go about answering the question is in question. An issue is a philosophical issue when the right way to settle the issue is at issue. A Philosophical Crisis If the claims in the previous paragraph are true, then 5th century Greece was in a philosophical crisis. It was a crisis in morality. In our culture we think of morality as being concerned with rules. Here are some rules – You should not kill. – You should not steal. – Don’t hit people. – Lying is wrong. – It’s wrong to promise to do something and then not do it. – You should not covet your neighbors wife, or his ox or his ass or his male or female slave, or anything that is your neighbor’s. – You should not lie with a man as with a woman. – Thou should not wear fabric woven of wool one way and linen the other. – Do (imperative) unto others as you would have them do unto you. – Help (imperative) other people who are in need when you can do so at no great risk or cost to yourself. Why do we think of morality as consisting of rules? This question is important...
Words: 28769 - Pages: 116
...Metaethics Metaethics is a branch of analytic philosophy that explores the status, foundations, and scope of moral values, properties, and words. Whereas the fields of applied ethics and normative theoryfocus on what is moral, metaethics focuses on what morality itself is. Just as two people may disagree about the ethics of, for example, physician-assisted suicide, while nonetheless agreeing at the more abstract level of a general normative theory such as Utilitarianism, so too may people who disagree at the level of a general normative theory nonetheless agree about the fundamental existence and status of morality itself, or vice versa. In this way, metaethics may be thought of as a highly abstract way of thinking philosophically about morality. For this reason, metaethics is also occasionally referred to as “second-order” moral theorizing, to distinguish it from the “first-order” level of normative theory. Metaethical positions may be divided according to how they respond to questions such as the following: * Ÿ What exactly are people doing when they use moral words such as “good” and “right”? * Ÿ What precisely is a moral value in the first place, and are such values similar to other familiar sorts of entities, such as objects and properties? * Ÿ Where do moral values come from—what is their source and foundation? * Ÿ Are some things morally right or wrong for all people at all times, or does morality instead vary from person to person, context to context...
Words: 21310 - Pages: 86
...AFRICA’S DEVELOPMENT: THE IMPERATIVES OF INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE AND VALUES by MARTIN ODEI AJEI submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the subject PHILOSOPHY at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA PROMOTER: PROFESSOR M. B. RAMOSE AUGUST 2007 Contents Declaration Acknowledgement List of Acronyms Key terms Summary vi vii viii x xi INTRODUCTION: DEVELOPMENT AND PHILOSOPHY i. Statement of the Problem ii. Against Economism iii. Critique of Competition iv. Poverty is Unnatural v. Thesis Statement vi. Methodology vii. Structure of Dissertation 1 1 1 5 6 9 10 15 CHAPTER ONE: DIMENSIONS OF DEVELOPMENT AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON AFRICA 1.1. What is Development 1.2. Development and Economic Growth 1.3. Schools of Development Thought and their Influence in Africa 1.3.1. The Modernization School and its Essential Claims 1.3.1.1. Growth Theory under Economic Liberalism 1.3.1.2. Evolutionary Theory 1.3.1.3. Functionalist Theory 1.3.1.4. Common Assumptions and Methodology 1.3.1.5 The Influence of Modernization on Development Practice in Africa 1.3.1.6. Critique of Modernization 1.3.2 Dependency Theory and its Essential Claims 21 21 25 27 27 28 29 30 32 34 36 39 i 1.3.3. The Theoretical Heritage of Dependency Theory 1.3.3.1. Structuralist Economics and the ‘Prebisch Thesis’ 1.3.3.2. Marxism 1.3.4. Common Assumptions of Dependency Theory 1.3.5. Criticisms of Dependency Theory 1.3.6. The Influence of Dependency Theory on African Development Practice...
Words: 90729 - Pages: 363
...\nvt'$ mvmj of thf "i'emW^ le$t ^mH, THE DISCOURSES OF EPICTETUS. WITH THE ENCHEIRIDION AND FRAGMENTS. TRANSLATED, AND A WITH VIEW NOTES, OF HIS A LIFE OF EPICTETUS, PUILO80PUY. By GEOKGE long, M.A. NEW YORK: A. L. BURT, PUBLISHER, EPICTETUS. Very that he little was a is known* native of and of the life of in Epictetus. Phrygia, the in Maeander the a it is saia Hierapolis, a town tween be- the the to Mgeander branch of named of Paul it in the of Lyons. the Hierapolis of Colossi that time is mentioned epistle from people (Coloss. there of the was iv. a 13); which church date of fact his master has been concluded at Christian The Hierapolis birth of the apostie. The Epictetus life is that is unknown. he a was a only Rome, recorded and of broke the his was early slave in Epaphroditus, There is a profligate that the freedman master to on emperor his slave's dence evi- Nero, story leg by torturing of or him; but the that it is better trust to the Simplicins, who an commentator the weak how Encheiridion in he Manual, from but says Epictetus It is not in was body became that found and a lame early age. said modern slave; parents it has the this ...
Words: 160374 - Pages: 642
