Eugene Albert Olarte Javillonar For September 12, 2013

Absent Report, PH104 Section B

On the lecture it was discussed in the lesson the first book of the
The Republic, where Plato, speaking through his teacher Socrates, sets out
to answer two questions. What is justice? Why should we be just? Book I
sets up these challenges. The interlocutors engage in a Socratic dialogue
similar to that found in Platos earlier works. While among a group of both
friends and enemies, Socrates poses the question, What is justice? He
proceeds to refute every suggestion offered; showing how each harbours
hidden contradictions. Yet he offers no definition of his own, and the
discussion ends in aporiaa deadlock, where no further progress is possible
and the interlocutors feel less sure of their beliefs than they had at the
start of the conversation. In Platos early dialogues, aporia usually
spells the end. The Republic moves beyond this deadlock. And builds on to
what it means for justice. While The Republic is a book concerned with
justice, it also addresses many other topics. Some scholars go so far as to
say that the book is primarily about something other than justice, the book
first and foremost can be used as a defense of philosophyas Socratess
second apology. Socrates was executed by the city of Athens for
practicing philosophy. The leaders of Athens had decided that philosophy
was dangerous and sought to expel it from their city. Socrates had called
the old gods and the old laws into question. He challenged, and asked
others to challenge, the fundamental beliefs upon which their society
rested. In The Republic, Plato is trying to defend the act for which his
teacher was executed. His aim is to reveal why the philosopher is
important, and what the philosophers relationship to the city should be.
While a philosopher is potentially subversive to any existing regimes,
according to Plato, he is crucial to the life of the just city. Plato
wanted to show how philosophy can be vital to the city. The Republic is the
first work of political science because it invents a political philosophy
grounded in the idea of building a city on principles of reason. Looking at
The Republic as a work on justice, we first need to ask why justice has to
be defended. As Thrasymachus makes clear, justice is not universally
assumed to be beneficial. For as long as there has been ethical thought,
there have been immoralists, people who think that it is better to look out
for your own interest than to follow rules of right and wrong.
Traditionally, the Greek conception of justice came from poets like Hesiod,
who in Works and Days presents justice as a certain set of acts that must
be followed. The reason for being just, as presented by the traditional
view, was consideration of reward and punishment: Zeus rewards those who
are good and punishes those who are bad. In late fifth century Athens, this
conception of divine reward and retribution had lost credibility. No one
believed that the gods rewarded the just and punished the unjust. People
could see that many unjust men flourished, and many of the just were left
behind. In the sophisticated democracy that evolved in Athens, few were
inclined to train their hopes on the afterlife. Justice became a matter of
great controversy. Leading the controversy were the Sophists, the general
educators hired as tutors to the sons of the wealthy. The Sophists tended
not to believe in objective truth, or objective standards of right and
wrong. They regarded law and morality as conventions. The Sophist Antiphon,
for example, openly declared that we ought to be unjust when being unjust
is to our advantage. Plato felt that he had to defend justice against these
onslaughts. The Sophistic challenge is represented in The Republic by
Thrasymachus, who declares that justice is nothing but the advantage of the
stronger. Since this statement motivates the entire defense that is to
follow, it deserves analysis. What exactly does Thrasymachus mean by
claiming that justice is the advantage of the stronger? Who are the
stronger? What is their advantage? Regardless of how we interpret
Thrasymachuss statement, the challenge to Socrates is the same: he must
prove that justice is something good and desirable.