The Concept of Justice According To Plat

THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING TO
PLATO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
General Introduction ...............................................................................................4
CHAPTER-1
ANCIENT VIEW OF JUSTICE
1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................6
1.1 Life and History of Plato ...................................................................................6
1.2 The Origin of Justice in Ancient Philosophy ...................................................7

1.2.1 The Concept of Justice According to Cephalus .............................................7
1.2.2 The Concept of Justice of Polemarchus ........................................................8
1.2.3 Tharamachus, Justice as the Advantage of the Stronger ..............................9
1.2.3.1 Justice is Knowledge. ............................................................................10
1.2.3.2 Justice is Cooperation ............................................................................10
1.2.3. 3 Justice is Happiness ..............................................................................11
1.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................12

CHAPTER 2
JUSTICE: STATE AND INDIVIDUAL
2.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................14
2.1 Justices in the City. ..........................................................................................14

2.1.1 The Problem State. .......................................................................................15
2.1.2 Basics of Social Organization...................................................................15
2.1.3 The Luxurious State..................................................................................16
2.1.4 The Virtues in the State. ...........................................................................17
2.2 Justice in the Soul.............................................................................................19

2.2.1 The Guardian’s Temperament .....................................................................19
2.2.2 The Guardian’s Education ........................................................................20
2.2.3 The Duties of Guardians ...........................................................................21
2.2.4 The Three Parts of the Soul ......................................................................22
2.2.5 The Virtues in the Individual ....................................................................23
2.2.6 The Equality of Women ...........................................................................23
2.2.7 The Philosopher King. ..............................................................................25
2.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................26

CHAPTER -3
CRITICISM AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING

PLATO
3.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................27
3.1 Argument from Practical Point of View ........................................................27
3.2 The Argument from Psychology.....................................................................28
3.3 The Argument from Justice ............................................................................28
3.4 The Argument from Wisdom..........................................................................29
3.5 The Argument from Metaphysics ..................................................................29
3.6 Argument from Logical Point of View...........................................................30
3.7 Argument from the Weakness of Human Being ...........................................31
3.8 The Argument from Caste Systems ...............................................................31
3.9 Argument from the Aesthetics ........................................................................31
3.10 Conclusion ......................................................................................................32
General Conclusion ................................................................................................33
Bibliography ...........................................................................................................35
General Introduction
Plato was son of Ariston and Perictione and born in 428/7 BC. He died in 348/7
BC at the age of 80 or 81. His elder brother’s Glaucon and Ademantus appear as young
men in the Republic. In his early stage itself Plato influenced by Socrates; Socrates was
the man who was fighting against injustice in the society. He was distracting day of war
and revolution, stood aloof from active life to inquire, with any one who cared talk with
him, what men should live for. Under his influence Plato was inspired with the concept of
justice; he tried to reshape the society in a just way.
Plato’s childhood was spent under the shadow of war and injustice in the state.
There was no just ruler in the state and the leaders who were there, just tried to satisfy
there own needs. They were not concentrating the welfare of the state, so that there were
so many internal and external problems. According to Plato, one of the greatest problems
in the state is conflict betweens the rich and the poor. The rulers were giving more
priority for rich people, because the rulers wanted to keep their power constantly.
Socrates was fully against the injustice of the ruler, so the rulers turned against Socrates
concept of justice. The Athenian democracy was on the verge of ruin was ultimately
responsible for Socrates death.
Plato was highly dissatisfied with the pathetic situation of Athens and this was the
reason that he entered into public life to avoid unjust political situation at Athens.
Individualism became one of the main targets of Plato’s attack. By individualism here
Plato meant selfish mind of oneself, and tried to satisfy one’s own need and this attack
came to maintain just state. State becomes just only when it helps the each individual to
be happy and virtuous. In order to attain happiness individual must subordinate his
private interest with of the state. Then only the state becomes just state according to
Plato.
In Plato’s Republic, Plato gives an important place to the idea of justice.
According to Plato, justice is part of virtue and bond which joints mind together in
society. It is identical quality that makes good and social. Plato says that justice is not
mere strength, but it is harmonious strength. Justice is not the right of the stronger but
harmony of the w
In the first chapter of this scientific paper, I am trying to bring the and give
knowledge of justice by the some of the scholars, Like Cephalus, Polemarchus,
Tharaymarchus, the contemporaries of Socrates and who came up with many doubts for
and against the concept of justice. Their concept of Justice is far different from Socrates
and Plato. Socrates and Plato tried to make them sense, what is the aim of justice?
Because, in the time of Plato, there was no concept of justice and Cephalus is the one
who firstly used the term justice. After the coming of Socrates and Plato, they brought the
concept of justice in the Athenian state.
In the second chapter mainly depends upon the concept of justice in the state and
individual. According to Plato individual and state are important roles, if there is no,
individual there is no state. Individual and state go hand in hand, that makes harmony in
the state. Justice exists in both souls and city both should be in the identical character. In
this chapter I mainly tried to explain the union of the state and individual.
In the third chapter we see the critical evaluation of the concept of justice according to
Plato. Plato was very well explained the concept of justice, but most of the concepts are
not practical, these concepts are known as utopian ideas. In theory it is easy to explain but
in practical much difficult to practice. By reading the republic we will know how much
effort Plato takes to make a state into a just state.
CHAPTER-1
ANCIENT VIEW OF JUSTICE
1.0 Introduction
“The Greek word for ‘just’ has as many senses as the English ‘right’. It can mean
observant of custom or of duty, righteous: fair, honest, legally right, lawful; what
is due to or from a person, deserts, rights, what one ought to do. Whatever is right
opposed to wrong. A proverbial saying declared that justice is the sum of all
virtue.”1
In his philosophy Plato gives a prominent place to the idea of justice. Plato was
highly dissatisfied with the prevailing degenerating conditions in Athens. The Athenian
democracy was on the verge of ruin and was ultimately responsible for Socrates death.
The amateur meddlesomeness and excessive individualism became main targets of
Plato’s attack. This attack came in the form of the construction of an ideal society in
which justice reigned supreme, since Plato believed that justice to be remedy for curing
these evils. After criticizing the conventional theories of justice presented differently by
Cephalus, Polemarchus, Thrasymachus and Glaucon, Plato gives us his own theory of
justice according to which, individually, justice is a human virtue that makes a person self
consistent and good. According to Plato justice is a sort of specialization.2
1.1 Life and History of Plato
“Plato, sun of Ariston and Perictione, was born in 428/7 B.C and died at the
age of eighty or eighty one; in 384/7 both parents came of distinguished
families. His elder brothers, Glaucon and Adeimantus appear as a young
man in the republic. In his youth Plato became closely attached to
Socrates, who by that time was wholly engaged in the mission to his fellow
citizens described the apology. Socrates was the one man in Athens who, in
those distracting days of war and revolution, stood aloof from active life to
1
Plato, The Republic Of Plato, trans. Francis MacDonald Cornford. (Oxford University Press, New York & London,
1967), pg. 1.
2
Dr. Bandary, Plato’s Concept of Justice: An Analysis, Eric Brown <eabrown@wustl.edu.>(Accessed 2014-06-12),
pg. 1.
inquire, with anyone who cared to talk with him, what men should live for.
Under this influence Plato’s thought from first to last, was chiefly bent on
the question how society could reshaped so that man might realize the best
that is in him.”3
Plato was highly dissatisfied with the pathetic conditions in Athens. Plato saw in
justice the only remedy of saving Athens from decay and ruin, for nothing agitated him in
contemporary affairs more the meddlesomeness and political selfishness which was
rampant in Athens of his day in particular and in the entire Greek world in general. In
additional, sophistic teaching of the ethics of self satisfaction resulted in the excessive
individualism also induced the citizens to capture the office of the state for their own
selfish and purpose and eventually divided. Athens in two hostile camps of rich and poor,
oppressor and oppressed. Evidently these two factors meddlesomeness and excessive
individualism became main target of Plato’s attack. The attack came in the form of the
construction of an ideal society in which ‘justice’ reigned supreme, since Plato found in
justice the remedy for curing these evils. Thus, we are to inquire in this study the nature
of justice as propounded by Plato as a fundamental principle of well order society. 4
1.2 The Origin of Justice in Ancient Philosophy
During the period of Socrates, there came up some men like Cephalus,
Polemarchus and Tharaymrhus, who came with doubt for and against the concept of
justice according to Socrates & Plato.
1.2.1 The Concept of Justice According to Cephalus
Cephalus is the speaker who first uses the words of just and injustice in his chant
with Socrates. Cephalus’ concept of justice is that he afforded to pay his debts both to
God and to the society and speak the truth always given back what he owned in this life
by seeing as just man and escape the punishment. In reply Socrates offers his counter
3
1967), pg. xv.
4
Dr. Bandary, Plato’s Concept of Justice: An Analysis, Eric Brown <eabrown@wustl.edu.>(Accessed 2014-06-
12), pg. 1.
example of the friend gone mad who returns to reclaim his weapons. Returning the
borrowed weapons does count as delivering what is owned but cannot count as the right
or just action to perform.5 So that Cephalus would not give that weapon and if he gives
that weapon he would misuse that weapon. In order to avoid that situation, Cephalus was
compelled to lie and would not give back weapons what Cephalus borrowed from him.
Socrates clarified the misunderstanding concept of justice according to Cephalus and
made him understand by telling the truth and retuning what you have borrowed isn’t the
correct definition of justice. According to Socrates justice means to do our duty with right
action.
1.2.2 The Concept of Justice of Polemarchus
“According to Polemarchus, Justice is helping friends and harming enemies.
Polemarchus is the son of Cephalus, Who speaks about justice as honesty in word
and deeds Polemarchus takes over his father’s definition and improves on it.
Polemarchus brings greater generality to his conception of justice, so that Socrates
cannot simply demolish the definition of the counter example. Instead Socrates
deploys and extended reputation showing that proposed definition justice.
Polemarchus defines justice as the act of giving to each what is owned, which
means doing good to friend and to enemies. Since doing good and doing harm are
border notion of action than in the payment of money and performance of
sacrifice. The definition stands a better chance of telling us something essential
about justice. Justice consists in adhering to the obligations implicit in our social
relationships.”6
A philosophical definition of the sort that Socrates looked for is unusual thing.
Unlike the definition found in dictionaries, it does not aim at clarifying use of a word, but
at unearthing new information about the concepts, in dictionary the definition of just
might include the word right. Here Polemarchus did not follow meaning and concept of
justice. For Polemarchus, justice is helping the good and harming the enemy. Socrates
criticized against this concept and replied that, Polemarchus is not clear of the word
5
Nickolas Pappas, Plato and the Republic, (Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane London EC4P 4EE), pg. 30.
6
friend and enemy. One can harm the friends and make the wicked as friend one can be
mistaken a wicked as friend and friend as a wicked may be both of them are good
according to Socrates.
Socrates clarified the meaning and concept of Justice according to the view of
Polemarchus. Justice is not harming the enemy but and helping in the good and Justice
means consists in adhering to the obligations implicit in our social relationship,7and do
our duty with right action
1.2.3 Tharamachus, Justice as the Advantage of the Stronger
For Tharamachus, justice or right is nothing but holding power in any state to any
actions they enjoin by law upon their subjects and that all their laws are framed to
promote the personal or class interest. Just accordingly means what is for the
interest of the stronger, ruling party right and wrong don’t have meaning at all.
But ruler imposes ‘his rights’ by sheer force .Ruler is precisely the man who has
the will and power to do well, himself and his friends and harm his enemies.8
“The word translated ‘ stronger’ commonly means also superior or ‘better’ but
‘better has no moral sense for Tharamachus, who does not recognize the existence
of morality the superiority of the stronger lies in the skill and determination which
enables them to size and hold power. Interest again means the personal
satisfaction of the ruling individuals.”9
According to Socrates, justice means right. Socrates replied against the concept of
justice is the advantage of the stronger is the capacity of the strong to make mistakes
about their own advantage. If a city’s rulers support a law that will in fact hurt them then
on the Tharamachus view, justice would have to consist in disobeying that law. If the
stronger become ruler, he tries to satisfy their own ambitions. He never looks welfare of
the state and good condition of the people. Shepherds real concern is not for the sheep’s
welfare but for their sale as meat. For Tharamachus, Justice profits not the just, but unjust
7
8
9
1967), pg. 15.
who take advantage of them. Here he did not give importance for the morality so that
morality became unprofitable for the state and for people. For Socrates justice means
right, it looks for the welfare of the state and people. So that, no one try to satisfy their
own ambitions, then justice becomes profitable for the society.
1.2.3.1 Justice is Knowledge.
Socrates argues that, justice resemble knowledge and goodness, and therefore
stands on the side of virtue, which injustice belongs among the vices. 10 For Socrates just
person is good.
But Tharamachus has refused to group justice with virtues and injustice with vices
,he is still adheres to some traditional value, that justice is the advantage of the stronger
and the unjust try to get the better of all others, and just only to get better of the unjust.
Here Socrates brings meaning and concept of justice. Justice suppresses the spirit of
unchecked complete in personal gain manifested in the unjust person’s disregard for law
and order. The behavior of just and unjust in general sense resembles that of the
knowledgeable and the ignorant and those who know are wise and good therefore just
resemble wise and good, the unjust ignorant and bad, those who have the knowledge,
they understand the real meaning of justice they are wise and good, but who is unjust and
ignorant they are able look the way of injustice. Just people always look what is the
probability of justice for others. They never try to satisfy their own advantage.
1.2.3.2 Justice is Cooperation
Socrates wants to show directly, how justice can be profitable. For Socrates
‘justice means cooperation injustice means factiousness’11. Socrates advocates that, when
injustice comes in to being in a group, he says, it divides the group members. If injustice
should come in being within one man, he tries to posses his power. Socrates assumes that
injustice is the force with the power of promoting disunion that can exist within an
individual or society. The superiority of justice over injustice will not lie in the
probability of particular action. Socrates could complicate his position to make it
10
11
stronger- arguing that a mixture of justice and injustice into total injustice, or that in
profits of injustice is merely apparent- but stronger leaves it as it is, ignoring so much
about social organization that it is best left alone. Stronger never bother about welfare of
the society but looks only his own benefits.
But just person works for the profits of the justice. Any human activity call for a
group to act together requires cooperation. This cooperation can find in justice. Justice is
a force with a power of promoting union and that exist within an individual or society.
1.2.3. 3 Justice is Happiness
Whether Justice or injustice brings happiness? According to Plato, Just men are
superior in character and intelligence and more effective in action without justice men
cannot act together at all. But unjust man could not have kept their hands off one another;
they must have had some justice in them, enough to keep them from injuring one another
at the same time with their victims.
The just man who does recognize it shows a wisdom and virtue corresponding to
the skill of the good musician. The unjust who acknowledge no measure or limit,
because there is no limit to getting more and more for yourself at others expense and that
is his object, is , by analogy, exhibiting rather a lack of intelligence and character. As a
man and therefore and moral agent is no more wise and good than an instrumentalist who
should refuse to recognize such a thing as the right pitch. When work men strive to do
better than well, they do confound their skill covetousness.12
For Plato just man has only virtue. Man’s virtue is state of character which makes
him a good man and makes him do his work well. It is the quality which enables him to
live well,13 for living is a soul’s function and to live well is to be happy .According to
Plato just men has the soul that soul helps him to do justice.
For Plato soul cannot perform the functions by nothing else, the soul as having
certain specific excellence or virtue. But Thrasymachus opposed against Plato argument.
If the soul is robbed of its peculiar virtue, it cannot possibly do its work well. It must
12
Plato, The Republic Of Plato, trans. Francis MacDonald Cornford. (Oxford University Press, New York &
London, 1967), pg. 33.
13
Plato, The Republic Of Plato, pg. 38
exercise its power of controlling and taking charge well or ill according as it is in a good
or bad state. So that Thrasymachus disagree that, the virtue of the soul is justice and
injustice its deficits and just soul, or in other words just man, will live well, the unjust
will not. But Plato replied against his argument that, if the soul is robbed of peculiar
virtue that virtue helps man to live well so that, living well involves well being and
happiness. According to Plato, the justice brings happiness, injustice is unhappiness.
1.3 Conclusion
The Greek word for ‘just’ as many senses as the English ‘right’. It can mean
observant of custom, duty, righteous, fair, honest, and lawful.14 During the period of
Plato and Socrates, there was a misunderstanding meaning of justice. Some of them were
arguing their views and concepts of justice. Cephalus, Polemarchus and Thrasymachus
were mainly arguing and clarifying their concepts of justice. Then Socrates and Plato
clarified their doubts and arguments, they justified that, justice is honesty in word and
deed, justice is helping friends and harming enemies, justice is the interest of the strong.
But here according Socrates and Plato justice means right. When one try to satisfy their
own welfare or try to keep their own power and their interest that become injustice. Just
people always try to look welfare of the state and interest of the people. Just men are
superior in character and intelligence and more effective in an action. If one is not good
in character, he will mislead the people and not have the intelligence and they wouldn’t
have the ability to take right decision and wouldn’t understand the meaning of life A man
can live well only if he knows clearly the end of life and what they are of real value and
how they are to be attained. This knowledge is the moral virtue of man and constitutes
the art of living. If a man imagines that the end of life is to gain wealth or power, which is
value in them all his actions, will be misdirected. It leads to central thesis the society
must be ruled by men who have learned , by long and severe training , not only the true
end of human life ,but the meaning of goodness in all its forms .
14
London, 1967), pg. 1.
Those who have the virtue they understand the meaning of justice and that those
people looked not their own interest but the interest of the people. Those who do not have
the virtue, they do not have the concept of justice they never look interest of others and
try to satisfy their own interest. Man’s virtue is the state of character which makes him a
good man and makes him do his work well .It is the quality which enables him to live
well. For living is the soul’s function and live well is too happy.15
Just man lead virtuous life and desire for others good. So that, those people are
happy in their lives. But the unjust men did not have virtuous life, he desires to satisfy
their own interest and have the great ambitions to keep their positions. So that they never
enjoy their life but they give more importance to the positions because of that they do not
have virtuous life and they have always unhappiness in their lives.
15
London, 1967), pg. 36.
CHAPTER 2
JUSTICE: STATE AND INDIVIDUAL
2.0 Introduction
Justice exists in both souls and cities. Socrates asserts that cities and souls can be
just; they must contain identical characteristic called justice. In a just city, justice takes
the form of just institutions and laws and just relations among the city’s residents. Its
legal system will not discriminate unfairly among citizens; nor will a small wealthy class
enjoy disproportionate power. The justice of the city will consist in internal relations,
whether between two individuals or between one individual and the city understood as a
whole.
If we understand city as soul, it brings the thought of unity. Citizen is for the city
and city is also for the citizen. Individual souls make city and the differences in
individual soul is seen in city. City always concerned about the welfare of the people and
if not people become unjust.
2.1 Justices in the City.
For Plato, in the ideal society, justice is a ‘human virtue’ that made a person self
consistent and good; socially, justice is a social consciousness that makes a society
internally harmonious and good.
Plato asserts that, a good state depends upon the government. Here the rulers rule with
reason and wisdom. The citizens are divided into three classes just like the division of
men. “1.The lowest class. 2. The middle class. 3. The highest class.”16
The most capable member of the highest classes will become philosophers and will be
given complete political role. Every good ruler is one, who governs in virtue of
knowledge of the truth. When all this classes work together, the city becomes virtuous
and prefect. The special virtue of the highest class is justice and wisdom. The goal of the
state is general justice; while each of three classes follows their own virtue. We can tell
that social morality or individual’s morality is the purpose of the state.
Dr. Lazar Kuttikadan, “Ethics in Greek Philosophy” Perspective in Ethics (New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National
16
Open University Press,2010), 21

2.1.1 The Problem State.
When there is a lack of laws and rules in the state, there is a possibility of arising
problems. Justice is not merely for gaining some external rewards, but it is intrinsically
good as an inward state of the soul. Even though the just man may be persecuted rather
than rewarded in society. The laws and rights of an individual in the society can preserve
‘just man’ without being persecuted. So if there are no laws and rights, there will not be
any more just persons. If individual is given full license to do whatever he likes, it can
create problems in the society and each one will be led by his own desires.
Even just man becomes unjust in the society after being just for a long time; it is because
just man does not have equality from the society. Just people have to suffer or to be
persecuted by unjust people. It is one of the reasons why just people become unjust even
after being just for a long time. Here the just people are forced to move from justice to
injustice because they find difficulty in being a state of just. The unjust people will be
moved by self interest and selfish motives. So there may arise so many problems in the
city because of this unjust people and nobody can prevent them from evil acts such as
stealing, killing each other and so on.
In order to avoid such problems in the society, there should be laws and rights that bring
equality. These laws provide justice for all the people in the city. Justice is accepted not
as a lack of power to do evil but as an ability to go according to the laws and rules of the
city. If city is governed by the power of the ruler it can lead to injustice and that create
problems in the state, so that there should be a just ruler in the state. “Justice in the form
of conformity to laws brings benefits round by stopping us from stealing and killing each
other and so on.”17
2.1.2 Basics of Social Organization
“According to Plato, justice makes unity in the city or state. Men are not born self
sufficient or all alike hence an organized society in which they are under
dependent and specialize according to innate attitudes is, according to Plato both
17
Plato, The Republic of Plato, 44.
natural and advantageous to all the individuals. People are naturally disposed to
perform different tasks.”18
City must exist, and that it must to satisfy human needs, the basic fundamental needs of
human beings that are food, shelter, and cloth. In order to get the availability of these
needs, there should be division of labor. The division of labor has a natural origin and
should not be mistaken for giving over emphasis on individual. People must have unity
among them and this unity leads the city to cooperation. Since justice is the essential
virtue in the state, it must bring cooperation to state. If there is no justice in the city or
state, cooperation or unity is not possible. The concept of division of labour brings
justice to the society. Division of labour makes economically balanced society and
finding justice in the cooperation among social groups with different functions. Only
when there is justice in the society there will be unity in the that makes city or state
division of labour would make possible.
According to Plato human society is natural, because justice arises in that one social
relationship essential to every city. Justice in turn becomes a natural concomitant to
every city.19
2.1.3 The Luxurious State
“Luxurious state means refinements of civilization and culture satisfy higher
needs and this state entailed unhealthy elements of luxury. For Socrates luxurious
state is known as lavish state and opposed to the true or healthy city of his
fantasy. According to Plato, there is no promise for kind of self-awareness or
reflection needed for the cultivation of genuine virtue like justice. Division of
labour makes city more powerful and make state a just state, but in luxurious state
leaves it lacking any irrational or expansive element of the sort that call for social
constraint, may make it unilluminating case study, for a theory that justice will
see justice as a network of restrictions.”20
18
19
20
If people go for taste of luxurious they would be irresponsible for their obligations
of the state. So that it become injustice against state.
If every state finds satisfaction; this taste leads to the immorality. If one go for finding
satisfaction and forgetting their obligation is called injustice, it is against just state and
just man.21
2.1.4 The Virtues in the State.
Virtues are needed in order to construct just state. People in the state should follow
virtues such as wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice of the state to become the ideal
state. If there is no those virtues in the state, that state become unjust state.22
People in the state need these qualities for the welfare of the state. First quality, wisdom
or prudence in counsel is clearly a form of knowledge: good counsel cannot be due to
ignorance and stupidity. If counsel do not have wisdom or prudence, that creates
problem in the state. There would not be good judgment. One of the greatest qualities of
rulers is wisdom. Ruler must have the wisdom. If ruler doesn’t have wisdom, that state
becomes unjust. If rulers cannot rule properly, they don’t know how to manage problems
of the state. According to Plato philosophers must be the rulers, because they have the
wisdom. They are good teacher, leaders and good managers. So they know how to
manage state. If rulers don’t have wisdom, many problems can arise, for example, if
there is problem in the state or among people, rulers must manage that problem with
immediate solution. Otherwise it creates external and internal problem. So that people of
the state don’t have peaceful life, that is why Plato says, wisdom must be needed for the
rulers, in order to avoid those problems, philosophers must be king.23
Courage should be needed for the people for the fighting force. For Socrates courage is
knowledge of what reality is.24 If people understand reality only, then they become more
courageous, because they can avoid their fear. By attaining knowledge; one can realize
what is good or bad. By realizing this one becomes more courageous to avoid all evils
21
22
Plato, The Republic of Piato,119.
23
24
Plato, The Republic of Plato, 119-120.
from their lives. They can avoid even the fear of death. According to Plato, philosophers
are more courageous people, because they have the courage to attain knowledge. One of
the basic qualities of a ruler is courage then only he can defeat enemies who are threaten
him in internally and externally. The enemies can never defeat his opponent if he is
courageous. Philosophers must be king because; they attain courage through knowledge
so that they become fearless people in the state. Those rulers must have courage, and
then only he can rule the state with courageous mind.25
Temperance means a control of certain pleasure and appetites. It used as an expression
“master of oneself”. A man who is master of himself considers as subject to himself and
the subject would be the master.26 A man within himself has two parts. There is a better
part and worse part. He is one of his own masters and able to control of pleasure and
appetites, he is in better part. But the better part oneself is overwhelmed by the worse, a
man, that condition is called a slave to himself and intemperate.27
If temperance and self mastery don’t exist in oneself, better part rules the worse. If any
society can be called master of itself and in the control of pleasure and desires, it will be a
better state. Governors must be the willing consent of the governed, so that there will
solidarity between ‘governors and governed’. If governors don’t consider governed there
will not solidarity. Solidarity makes a good relationship between governors and
governed.28 “It is consequently like a harmony pervading and uniting all part of the
whole, a principle of solidarity. The harmonious union of different and complementary
elements of this virtue over shadows even justice.”29
Justice is the complementary principle of differentiation, keeping the part distinct. If first
made keeping distinct in economic level as the division of labor based on natural
aptitudes. Doing one’s own work is the great duty and obligation in the community, or in
the state. Each person have each duty, if each duty is not fulfilled by a person, there is no
order in the state. People in the state concentrate on their peculiar duty or functions in the
25
26
27
Plato, The Republic of Plato, 121-123
28
29
community. Justice means doing one’s own duties.30 This conception of doing and
possessing what properly belongs to one is wide enough to cover the justice of the law-
courts, assuring to each man his due rights. Injustice will mean invasion and
encroachment upon the right and duties of others.31
The virtue described in this chapter to what Plato calls “vice or popular virtue. Except
the rulers it is not directly based on that ultimate knowledge of good and evil which is
wisdom to be attained only at the end of the higher education of philosophers.32
2.2 Justice in the Soul
According to Socrates, justice in the city serves only to illuminate justice in the
individual soul.33 If society creates good atmosphere only, there will be good family, if
there is good family only there is good society same like the ruler’s wisdom makes city
wise, this must mean that the city’s wisdom will resemble the human wisdom that
produced it. If there are no wiser rulers, there will not be good city, in order to have
wiser in the city; city must make opportunity to attain wisdom. For Plato wisdom is the
one of the virtues. If there is virtue only there is good city. Good city creates good
citizens.34
2.2.1 The Guardian’s Temperament
War has been traced to aggression, consequent on the growth of luxury. With the help of
war, luxury aggression might cease. But the state would still need a force to ward off
invasion and to keep internal order.35 Luxury life tries to satisfy higher needs, and also
make unhealthy elements of luxury. It create problem in the state, lose beauty of simple
life and internal conflicts arises because of the luxury life. The name ‘guardian’ suits for
the defensive purpose. Guardians are not like the professional soldiers. Here for Plato
30
31
32
33
34
35
Cf. Plato, The Republic of Plato, 124.
guardian is for solving internal conflict of the state and among the people. Guardians are
self masters because they control over pleasure and desire.36
2.2.2 The Guardian’s Education
The education was must need for the guardians to understand temperance and
moderation. They are solders to defend all the evils in the city. By attaining education
only, they can understand morality and avoid or defense against internal conflict. Since
philosophers are the kings, education is very important in the just city. It is the education
that makes city just. So education in the state was compulsory. 37 “Plato adopts the system
only removing features which will not help to produce the type of character his guardians
are to have. These simplifying reforms are part of process of ridding the luxurious state
of unhealthy element in contemporary civilization”.38
They were given training in different areas of knowledge such as poetry, art, letters,
culture and philosophy. The ultimate end of all education is insight into the harmonious
order of the world. By giving education people should support harmonious order of the
world. If there is harmonious order in the city, there is peaceful atmosphere and justice in
all people. Otherwise if giving more importance for luxury life, there will not be
harmonious order in the state and there will not be peaceful atmosphere. Luxury life
makes city internal conflict instead of harmonious order and there would be disorder. In
order to change this situation philosopher must rule the state. Philosophers are wiser
people and they have ability to solve the problem. Education is for avoiding luxurious
desires. Education helps us to have temperance and moderation.39
The physical training suitable for a citizen by attaining training gets knowledge about the
simple life. Simplicity in life produces bodily health just as it produce temperance in the
soul. Educated person can be controlled and managed in his own life physically and
morally. If one controls over his own body can be avoided such disease from his own
body. Education is very important in one’s own life. If one didn’t attain education, he is
36
37
38
39
unaware of temperance and they filled desires and ambitions, so that they look for luxury,
life that makes their lives unhealthy. Education makes person healthy and give awareness
of temperance. Temperance helps to avoid pleasure and desires. The avoidance of
pleasure and desire make us free and healthy mind. Education is needed for the one’s
own mastery. If one can make mastery of oneself only, we can attain healthy life.40
2.2.3 The Duties of Guardians
The community of goods is prescribed for the guardians only: the industrial order,
concerned with economic needs, will have private poverty. But the guardians must
exclude from the other both riches and poverty. Great wealth will not strengthen the state
against its economics, but weakens it by setting up an internal class war of rich against
poor. Unity is all important and must further preserve the principle promotion by merit;
there must be no purely hereditary governing class. 41
“The one essential is to maintain unchanged system of education which will
forestall the growth of lawlessness. To rightly educated rulers may be safely left
all the usual subjects of legislation. The main duties of guardians are to find their
way into the common wealth: riches and poverty. The one produce luxury and
the other low standards and workmanship.”42
Guardian has great duties in state and among people. To make union with rich and poor
is the greatest duty of guardians. According to Plato, great wealth is not only help for the
protection of its enemies but internal peaceful also needed. If there is no internal unity in
state, the enemies can easily defeat the state. In order to have good union of rich and
poor only, there is good peaceful state. When every one should consider things as
common wealth, there is no distinction between poor and rich. By attaining education,
there will not be desire for luxurious life and ambitions and they should get temperance.
This temperance helps man to make union. That makes city more powerful. Guardians
are educated people and they have the greatest duty to make union among the people.
40
Plato, The Republic of Plato, 92
41
42
Guardians don’t have desire and selfishness, because by attaining education, he became
self aware of oneself and others.43
2.2.4 The Three Parts of the Soul
“Every citizen must practice only one activity of the many regarding civil life: that
activity to which his natural inclination is most disposed. Therefore, that state gets its life
and its function goes well. Then there arises the need for defense and the government”.44
A good government depends upon the rulers. Here rulers are ruling with reason and
wisdom. According to Plato citizens are divided into three classes just like a division of
society.
“1) the lowest class is productive and acquisitive and its virtue is in particular
temperance. 2) The middle class is spirited, competitive and warlike; its
distinctive virtue is courage. 3) The higher class is that of rulers is that of rulers
which are distinguished by it’s rationally and its special virtue is practical
wisdom.”45
The highest people become philosophers, because they have the knowledge of truth.
According to Plato they are only able to rule the state and people. Those who don’t have
the education they are not able to rule the state, because they have also selfishness and
ambitions in their minds. So they can not rule people with proper knowledge. The
special virtue of highest class is justice and wisdom. The goal of the state is justice. If
there is justice in the city only there is virtue among the people. If there is no justice
among the state, there will not be equality in state and among the people.
The middle class is competitive and warlike, their virtue is courage. For Socrates,
courage as knowledge of what reality is. If the competitive understand the reality only,
they become more courageous and help them to avoid the fear in their life. Competitive
persons are important role in the state.
43
44
Open University Press,2010), 24.
45
The lowest class is productive, those who people should fulfill their duty then only
people satisfy their appetite. Those three classes join together only, state become
virtuous and perfect so there will be justice in the city.46
2.2.5 The Virtues in the Individual
The three elements exists in individual and state, then man or state become virtuous or
perfect man and state, that man or state’s reason will rule. They have self control and
temperance that makes internal harmony. All the parts being contend with their
legitimate satisfaction. Finally justice appears, and then we shall conclude that man is
just in the same way that a state was just. If just person fulfill his proper function only,
their will be justice in the state. If person don’t fulfill his proper function, then injustice
appears, that creates problem in the state. In order to avoid the injustice, virtue must be
there in the state and among the people.
If reason rule, there will not be internal conflict. When those three elements exist in
persons, there is a perfect being, that perfect being rule the state with reason. When
person fulfill these functions, he avoids selfish and he filled with pace in himself.
The activity produces a healthy or unhealthy condition in the body. In the same way, just
and unjust produce just or unjust character. Justice is produced in the soul like health in
the body, one can exist their virtues. Injustice is like diseases and means that this natural
order is inverted. Virtue and wickedness are brought about by one’s way to life
honorable or disgraceful. Luxury and wealth and power in the world cannot make life
worth living. Disgraced and corrupted life will be worth living so longs as a man can do
as he will, and wills to do anything rather than to free himself from vice and wrong doing
and to win justice and virtue.47
2.2.6 The Equality of Women
“The common life of the guardians, it now appears, involves that men and women
shall receive the same education and share equally in all public duties: When the
best Guardians are selected for training as rulers, the choice may fall upon a
46
47
woman. At Athens, where women lived in seclusion and took no part in politics,
this proposal would appear revolutionary.”48
By reading Plato’s republic we can understand that he is giving more importance for
women. He realizes that women could rule a country because women have exactly same
powers like men. They get same training with men; women are eligible for the
Guardianship. They have some ability like men, so that women should get training with
men. Women are more important role in the state because they are giving new birth of
the children for the state. Socrates and Plato gave equality for men and women.
Ancient Roman standards, there were no importance for women, they are just like slave.
Women of the middle class were married off by their early to men twice their age. They
were not allowed to go outside. The main duties of women supervise the kitchen and
waving the cloth.
Plato gave importance for the women and make light to women’s right. Some of the
areas women have been wrongly deny equality of opportunity, and then Plato considered
feminist equality of opportunity. According to Plato people should come forward with
their talents. Even if it is women or men, everyone should get the opportunity for their
desires and dreams.49
The Republic contains a number of such passing comments evidence of nothing to much
as of contempt toward women. Even Socrates word for his hold new proposal, the
community of women suggests that the women are to be held in common by the men. It
never hints that the men might be heard in common by the women, even after we realize
that a woman can have many as twenty breeding relations, perhaps all with different men.
Plato cannot shake the idea that women belong to men. Socrates twice refers to the
possession of women by men.50 Plato gave more importance for women and considered
their equality of opportunity. Plato says a state that does not to educate and train women
48
49
50
a man who only admits his rights. Plato had a good vision of women, considering the
time he lived.51
2.2.7 The Philosopher King.
According to Plato philosophers must be the king, they are higher classes of citizens who
have wisdom and reason. They rule the city or state with reason. They are educated
people; they can only rule state properly. For Plato those who rule the city, they should
have temperance and master of oneself, they must avoid pleasure and ambition. This can
avoid only attaining knowledge. The philosophers are educated people; they attained
wisdom by studying philosophy. They have control over their body, so that they don’t
have the selfish mind towards worldly pleasures and desires. So they can manage their
lives in healthy manner.
Those who don’t have education they never consider others satisfaction, they look
towards their own satisfaction, and they filled with selfish mind, so that if they become
the ruler of the state they cannot satisfy the welfare of the state and cannot manage the
problem of the state. There is possibility to arise so many problems in the state because
of these uneducated rulers. Even the rulers cannot marry; they fully concentrated only
for ruling. As an uneducated ruler he cannot manage without marriage because they
don’t have temperance and they filled with full of desire. The citizens, those who have
the education, they can manage their lives with full of temperance. Because they are
ruling their own bodies, philosophers rule the state with reason.
One experience happiness only when there is a unity among the three parts of the soul.
Each part may bring its own happiness. But the highest part of happiness lives on reason.
An individual is perfectly happy only when his other parts are guided by reason. Reason
is that which unites other parts and gives solution to the soul. In the same way in a city
the ruling class must be philosophers, because they have capacity of reason other than
51
any other class. The middle class and other lower class are to be joined with ruler class.
This brings happiness in the state. This makes a city good.52
2.3 Conclusion
Justice in the soul and justice in the state are important rule to have development for our
lives. If there is no justice in the soul, justice in the state is not possible and vice versa.
The city’s wisdom will resemble human wisdom. If the justice is good and have justice
only, the citizens can attain virtuous life. Justice in the state helps man to have good
moral life. If there is good society only, there is good family. Justice in the state and
justice in the soul are the inevitable part of human’s growth. The citizens need wisdom
to have moral life. This wisdom is possible only through the just city and just soul.
Wisdom leads city and soul in good morality. Just city and just soul are needed for the
growth of the human development.
52
CHAPTER -3
CRITICISM AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING
PLATO
3.0 Introduction
We are talking about the concept of just city according to Republic. He explained very
well about the concept of justice. Some of the concept of justice cannot accept because of
his utopian concept. Even Aristotle the disciple of Plato was not in favor of his concept of
justice. One of the most problems in the Philosophy is a utopian idea. We could not
follow this concept of justice. It does not make me so good. I explain the reason why I am
not in favor with this concept of just state.
3.1 Argument from Practical Point of View
After doing this research paper I understood that most of the concepts of justice is not
practical. Plato himself says that it is an ideal state. If it is an ideal state why do we think
about such a state? Thinking of ideal state will not help us in our practical life. According
to Plato the real world is not in this world but in the world of forms. The thinking of ideal
state will not help us until we apply it to our practical life. So the worthiness of a thought
is measured in the practicality. Thought and action go hand in hand; if we are always in
ideal mind, we will not be concerned about nature. It will be injustices against oneself
and others thus we cannot fulfill our duty and obligation. Plato makes contradiction of his
concept of justice. Because according to him the concept of justice is to fulfill one’s own
duty and obligation. The understanding of his ideal state cannot fulfill duty and obligation
in a proper way. As a tree is known by its fruits, a thought is also known by its
practicality. If there is no practicality in ones own thought, then what is the use of that
thought which creates problems in oneself and others. Always being in a state of ideal
mind, affects a person’s psychological nature which creates problems such as doubting
and misunderstanding. This leads to a lot of problems in family and society. If we cannot
practice philosophy of Plato what is the use of proposing it? Philosophy is more useful,
when it can be practiced in our lives.53
3.2 The Argument from Psychology
Humans are always craving for love and affection. If it is not meeting properly then
community may become hell for one. This will exactly happen in ideal state. Sex is
below love. So people will hate common sex when time passes. Sex is the important role
in the society. If it is not getting much importance what is the usefulness of family? Sex
creates real love between husband and wife. It if there is lack of sex it makes problem in
the family.54
How can a child live without the care of a mother until certain age? In order to get the
education for creating the philosopher king the child is separated form the family. That
separation may affect the behavior pattern, because that child needs special care and love
from their mothers. One of the greatest educations is getting from the family. If we are
not getting love, care and basic formation or education, it affects child characteristics.
Instead of creating a philosopher king it will create a Hitler to rule the country.55
3.3 The Argument from Justice
According to Plato, Justice is that to do our duties from our obligation and abilities. The
Plato himself makes contradiction here, because he divided society has three groups 1)
Higher class, 2) Middle class, 3) Lower class. Here philosophers or higher class only
becomes the ruler because they have wisdom and virtue. If philosopher rules the state that
city becomes the just city. The other two classes cannot become rulers because they
don’t have the knowledge. Knowledge is not enough for ruling the state. If there is
knowledge also, the philosophers can make mistake. The knowledge is not enough for
ruling the country. Those who are expert in theories may be poor in practices. So if
philosopher becomes the ruler of the state, that state will not become just city. There are
53
Cf. Subrata Mukherjee and Sushila Ramaswamy (ed.), Plato, A Biography of His Vision and Ideas, Deep and
Deep Publications,1998, Pg. 492.
54
55
so many kings ruled the state in a proper way without having education. One of the most
faculties of the king is the ruling ability. If there is no ruling ability then what is the use
of knowledge or wisdom? So Plato himself makes contradiction of the ability of the
individual. If the middle class and lower class have the ability to rule the state Plato reject
his ability because of the lack of knowledge. From here itself we can understand that
Justice according to Plato is meaning less in some of the concepts.56
3.4 The Argument from Wisdom
By loving wisdom makes truthful. According to Plato philosophers must be king, they
have wisdom. Plato suggests that philosopher rulers might have need for telling myth and
fiction, in order to become people aware that the character of people are not corrupted
and grow morally good citizens. Myths are the pseudo-science. That means false stories
or false events. How this knowledge become a truth.
By teaching these Stories, people become untruthful. So truthful disappear from the
people. The wisdom is for attaining truthful knowledge, not for the untruth knowledge.
Plato’s philosophy is known as Utopia, which cannot be practicable in our day today life.
By attaining wisdom, person must understand what is wrong or right. Here philosophers
are wiser people, but they are not able to recognize what is right or wrong. If there is no
acknowledging faculty what is wrong or right, and how can we call philosophers wiser
people.57
3.5 The Argument from Metaphysics
Every human being is composed of act and potency. Potency means ability to
become the division of those element affect act and potency to becoming something else.
If there is ability to become something, that become finished product that is common law.
But here these divisions of three elements make people doesn’t allow to take out their
ability. How can Pato divide people without looking their abilities? If there is lack of
knowledge or virtue, the lower people limit to become warrior or king. If there is no
56
57
Cf.Jermy Jayward , Daniel Cardinal and Gerald Jones, The Republic Plato, Hodder Education London, 2007,Pg.
277
virtue or courage, why could not they become the warrior or king? If there is a virtue or
knowledge, are they perfect people? No, they could not become perfect; there will be
weakness among the human being. So that this division of element is not possible to
adopt the state, may be there will be good ruler the middle class or there will be good
warrior in the lower class, because of their limitless of their knowledge and virtue, he
can’t divide people these three elements. Poor are always poorest, the same way if they
are not getting proper education, how could arise from their social status. According to
Plato education is possible only for higher people. If they don’t have such opportunity,
how can they grow in their lives? If there is potency, there should be an opportunity for
the Act.
3.6 Argument from Logical Point of View
“According to Plato human’s soul divided into three parts. One part stands for the
appetitive part of the soul. The second part is the spiritual part, in fact these two parts
represent two appetites in man; the desire for sensual satisfaction and aspiration for
success and fame. The third part is reason the highest part of man’s soul. All these parts
work together for happiness. In some states are divided into three elements 1) Higher
Class 2) Middle Class 3) Lower Class.”58 For individuals three elements are three
divisions, it doesn’t creates controversial, but how can he make these three elements in
the state. Because in the case of individual, we can say reason is true but in society how
can we say, that whose reason is true, society is divided into three elements. These three
divisions are the groups of individual, so that we cannot say, whose reason is true or
valid. If we accept one group of individual it will be injustice to other groups. From this
we can understand that Plato’s justice cannot fully apply in the just city.59
58
59
Open University Press,2010), 23-24

3.7 Argument from the Weakness of Human Being
No one is perfect in the world; every human being has weakness in this world. But
how can Plato exclude ruler from this category. Philosophers are wiser so that they are
perfect being, we cannot say that even they have the wisdom they make mistake, the
nature of human being is called weakness. Otherwise the Plato’s wiser people should be
an extraordinary people but Plato is not mentioning about that, so that we can understand
most of his ideas are utopia, which cannot accept and practice in our lives.
3.8 The Argument from Caste Systems
The three divisions of elements in the society are same like caste system in India.
For Plato, philosophers are higher people because they have wisdom. They can only
attain wisdom or knowledge. Middle class people and lower class people cannot attain
knowledge but they have to do their duties from obligation and abilities and satisfy the
higher class people. In comparison, the caste system of India is higher evil than Plato’s
division in society. In India higher class was Brahmin, because they are in priestly class,
so that they can only attain education and have all kind of freedom. Middle classes don’t
have that much freedom but in the lower class people is just like a slave and they have to
do work hard for the higher and middle class. Even there was untouchability system; it
was a cruel deed towards lower class people. In Plato’s division of society is not that
much cruelty like in India’s caste system, but there was a limitation of freedom that
makes injustice towards middle class and lower class. Again irrelevant of justice can be
seen in the just city.
3.9 Argument from the Aesthetics
Aesthetics is prohibited in the just city. According to Plato, art is the copy of copy. That
means it is not giving importance for the art. Art is the ability of a person, there should be
a chance for growing ones own ability. If Plato did not like the art, he must consider
others taste. According to him do our duties from our obligation and abilities. We are not
doing this, it is injustice but in this case Plato looks for his own taste. By seeing this we
can understand that he is not promoting the ability of the artist, that itself is injustice
towards artist. How can be justice possible in the just city?
3.10 Conclusion
There are many criticisms against the concept of justice according to Plato. One of the
most problems, we can see his philosophy is that the utopian ideas which cannot practice
in our lives. Most of the concepts are difficult to understand for e.g. the real world is not
in this world but in other world, but he was not mentioning about that world so that we
are not able to understand. But in Christianity speaks about the heavenly world, they are
teaching very well about that so we can understand about that world.
Even there are so many criticisms in his philosophy. But there is good contribution he has
given in the society. In his philosophy of concept of justice he is giving more importance
for women and equality and he speaks about how we can be moral in our society .Plato is
good philosopher and most of the concepts are relevant in philosophical world.
General Conclusion
We saw the aim and obligation of justice in Plato’s Republic. Before the period of
Socrates and Plato, there was no prominent place for justice. The term justice arouse only
after the teaching of Socrates and Plato. The first chapter itself we saw that there was no
proper understanding of justice for people. Mainly some of the scholars of that time were
having different opinion of justice such as Cephalus, Polemarchus and Thraymachus. The
understanding of justice was very different from the real idea of justice, because in the
state itself there was no importance for justice before the period of Socrates and Plato.
There were only selfish mind of the rulers and their autonomy. They were not interested
in the welfare of the state. They gave more importance for their satisfaction of the self
needs and that was the behind the problems in the state, Such as internal and external
conflict. One of the greatest internal conflicts was problem between rich and poor. Rich
become richer and poor become poorer, So that there were lot problems in the state. In
order to avoid this problem, Plato made the division of labor to create new just cite
Socrates and Plato gave more importance for justice in the state, In order to become
union among the state and individual. The people did not have any clear knowledge of
justice because of selfish rule of the ruler. There was no concept of justice, so that no one
could act in a just way. Even some of the scholars misinterpret justice. But after the
teaching of Socrates and Plato, there was a total change in the concept of justice.
In Plato’s philosophy, Plato gave more prominent place for justice. According to Plato
justice means duty of the part of the soul that is one’s job from his or her obligation and
connection between human virtue and bond in the society. In order to have just state and
just man, there should be virtue in the state. Plato says that Just is not a mere strength but
it is harmonious strength. Justice is not right of the stronger but effective harmony of the
whole. This harmony of the whole is possible only through the virtues in the state and
virtues of person. There should be virtuous persons in the state, and then only they will be
called as good and peaceful state. Persons have their own duty, when person fulfills his
duty it becomes virtue of a person. If person is not responsible for his duty there will be
disorder in the society, that society creates problem in the state. So that Plato divided
society into three parts to have proper function and avoid such problems in the state such
as conflict between poor and rich and wipe away injustice in the society. When these
divisions function in proper way, the city becomes just city. If there is no proper law
there will not be any unity and harmony in the state, then it becomes the problem state. In
order to avoid the problems in the state, Plato says there should be just city and just
person. According to Plato just person are philosophers, because they have wisdom. The
make them perfect person and able to mange problem in the state. According to Plato
justice is inevitable in the state and he gave more priority for justice. But in his
philosophy most of the concepts of justice is not practical, most of the criticisms against
Plato is that these are utopian idea, which we cannot be practiced in our life. His idea of
justice is very well explained but if we cannot practice then what is the use of such
concepts?
Plato was the follower of Socrates and was inspired by his way of teaching that made a
public person to attack against injustice. The main aim was to avoid all evil from the
society. He got the victory to wipe away injustice by the concept of justice. Plato tried to
bring equality in the society among men and woman. Even some of the ideas cannot be
accepted but most of the concepts are well appreciated in the philosophical world. Plato’s
Republic is very relevant even in cotemporary world. This concept of justice used for
developing other philosophy. Most of the concepts and ideas of Plato are relevant in the
philosophical world.
Bibliography
Jermy Jayward, Daniel Cardinal and Gerald Jones. The Republic Plato. London:
Hodder Education, 2007.
Pappas, Nickolas. Plato and the Republic. London: Routledge 11New Fetter Lane ,
1995.
Plato. The Republic of Plato. Translated by Francis MacDonald Cornford. New
York & London: Oxford University Press, 1967.
Subrata Mukherjee, Sushila Ramaswamy. Plato: A Biography of his Vision and
Ideas. Delhi: Deep and Deep Publications, 1998.

The Concept of Justice According To Plat

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Concept of Justice According To Plat

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING TO

ANCIENT VIEW OF JUSTICE

1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................6

1.1 Life and History of Plato ...................................................................................6

1.2 The Origin of Justice in Ancient Philosophy ...................................................7

1.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................12

JUSTICE: STATE AND INDIVIDUAL

2.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................14

2.1 Justices in the City. ..........................................................................................14

2.2 Justice in the Soul.............................................................................................19

2.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................26

CRITICISM AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING

3.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................27

3.1 Argument from Practical Point of View ........................................................27

3.2 The Argument from Psychology.....................................................................28

3.3 The Argument from Justice ............................................................................28

3.4 The Argument from Wisdom..........................................................................29

3.5 The Argument from Metaphysics ..................................................................29

3.6 Argument from Logical Point of View...........................................................30

3.7 Argument from the Weakness of Human Being ...........................................31

3.8 The Argument from Caste Systems ...............................................................31

3.9 Argument from the Aesthetics ........................................................................31

3.10 Conclusion ......................................................................................................32

General Conclusion ................................................................................................33

Open University Press,2010), 21

Open University Press,2010), 23-24

S-ar putea să vă placă și