Plato’s Republic represents a good civilization because they had economic equality. In every civilization, there will always be a social stratification, but even though Plato’s Republic had a social stratification, all the classes on top were given the same things as the classes beneath them. Luxury was avoided since the producers were the only group that could manufacture products for all the people. To be equal, the producers only produced what was necessary. There was limited trade, and the city produced everything that was needed. This was good for a civilization because it made sure that no class was greater than another. Although some classes had more authority than others, they were dependent on each other. Without luxurious products, each class was worth the same. When it comes to economic equality, Plato’s Republic was more equal compared to the other civilizations. Even though there was a social stratification, the groups weren’t split because of how much money you made, or by which gender you were, instead, they were separated by jobs, and your abilities. An example of a not so equal civilization is Athens. The social stratification for Athens was very divided among the people because rich/free men were at the top, then poor/free men, free women, and then lastly slaves were at the bottom.Athens didn’t show a good model for economic equality because everyone was divided. If everyone in Athens was paid by how much they worked, then the slaves would be richer than
Plato’s idea of civic justice displays a criteria for specialization that holds each individual responsible for producing their own rendition of excellence that leads to a just life, which produces a just city, and ultimately civic justice. Plato describes civic justice as “…doing one’s own work provided that it comes to be in a certain way” (433b-pg.108).
Ralph Waldo Emerson once wrote “One man’s justice is another’s injustice.” This statement quite adequately describes the relation between definitions of justice presented by Polemarchus and Thrasymachus in Book I of the Republic. Polemarchus initially asserts that justice is “to give to each what is owed” (Republic 331d), a definition he picked up from Simonides. Then, through the unrelenting questioning of Socrates, Polemarchus’ definition evolves into “doing good to friends and harm to enemies” (Republic 332d), but this definition proves insufficient to Socrates also. Eventually, the two agree “that it is never just to harm anyone” (Republic 335d). This definition is fundamental to the idea of a
Now let us take a look into the background of the story. Plato gives his ideals on a perfect society and everything it should include. He basically implies that justice is rightness, and rightness is whatever he feels it should be. He breaks society down into guardians, wage earners, and auxiliaries. Wage earners are people such as surgeons or shoemakers.
The ideal society as suggested by Plato is composed of three classes: the producers, the auxiliaries, and the guardians.
In Plato' "ideal" model of a city; he chose an aristocratic form of government, describing it as
At the beginning of Book I, we are introduced to the narrator, Socrates, and his audience of peers. We are made aware, however, of Socrates' special charm and intellectual gifts through the insistence of Polemarchus and the other men for the pleasure of his company. The tone is casual and language and modes of expression rather simple, as is commonly the case in Plato's dialogues. However, Plato's unaffected style serves at least two purposes. For one it belies the complexity and elevation of the ideas, thus it is in accord with Socrates' characteristic irony itself, which draws the "fool" in by feigned ignorance, only so that the master can show that he does not know what he thinks he knows. And second,
Plato creates a seemingly invincible philosopher in The Republic. Socrates is able to refute all arguments presented before him with ease. The discussion on justice in Book I of The Republic is one such example. Socrates successfully refutes each different view of justice presented by Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus. Socrates has not given us a definitive definition of justice, nor has he refuted all views of justice, but as far as we are concerned in Book I, he is able to break down the arguments of his companions.
In The Republic Book 3, Plato uses a fictional character named Socrates to argue that people in society must be handpicked to rule as well as also handpicking people to become ruled in order to confirm there will be no disagreements over who is leading. He essentially claims choosing what every citizen does with their life is necessary for creating a steady and working structure in society. This theory of telling people what they were destined to do in life is known as the “noble lie.” It tells everyone a “religious lie” that people all originate from the same place and are siblings of each other, an attempt to convince everyone to get along regardless of their social class. Personally I do not believe that Plato’s arguments in his book are correct and that the use of a “noble lie” would not work in society.
Philosophy is a Greek word meaning "love of wisdom." Throughout Plato's Republic, wisdom plays an important role. According to Plato, education is wisdom. In the passage, 518d, Plato discusses the true meaning of education vicariously through Socrates. Some literary mechanisms can be found in the passage and I will show how they fit in the text and how they contribute to the main themes of Plato's Republic.
Socrates continues the conversation with Glaucon and now focuses on the obligation of the guardians and philosophers to serve the people as a result of their education.
In the Republic, Plato divides social classes into three categories. These categories were Rulers, Guardians, and Craftsmen. These classes work together to ideally create Utopia. Plato believes social order must be maintained in order to have a fully functional society. These social classes are similar to the Feudal System, and modern day social classes. Each class has its own role, which if not carried out can disrupt the flow of society. Within each social class all men, women, and children had their own roles that they also had to fulfill.
“the having and doing of one’s own and what belongs to one would be agreed to
believes that the son will realize to be just is only worth it if you can get a
Plato's Republic is often read as a political work, as a statement of some sort on government, society, and law. This is certainly not a rash reading of the dialogue; it is called the Republic, and over half of it is devoted to the construction of a city through speech, a city complete with a government structure, a military, an economic system, and laws. However, I believe that to read the Republic as a political statement is inaccurate. Although Socrates and his companions construct a city out of speech as they attempt to define justice, the dialogue repeatedly frames justice as something that cannot be established through a fixed system of morality, let alone through a rigid
Explain and evaluate the reasons given by Plato in the Republic, to support the contention that justice is superior to, or more beneficial than, injustice?