How Did Socrates Set Up An Imaginary City

In The Republic Book IV, pp. 130e-136d, Socrates sets out to prove that societal justice is analogous to individual justice. In order to substantiate the analogy, Socrates compares the individual and the city. As he previously defined, justice in the city involves the power relationships between the different parts of the city, namely the guardians, the auxiliaries, and the producers.

Though defeated on this point, he's not yet satisfied with Socrates' argument, and sticks by one of his previously stated views which held that injustice is more profitable than justice. However, he shrinks back and seems no longer able to speak for himself after Socrates refuted his argument on justice. Despite his withdrawal from the argument throughout the rest of the Republic, his early ideas help lead Socrates farther on his search for justice through the construction of a hypothetical just city. In describing the education of the guardians of this city, Socrates discusses the need for a balance between gymnastics and poetry. He relates how too much gymnastics lead the spirited part of someone to be overtightened and hard. "He'll be museless and hate discussion" explains Socrates. This hardness and hate for discussion reminds us of the actions of Thrasymachus at the beginning of the argument defining justice. Thrasymachus becomes an example of a "badly tuned soul" that Socrates goes on to describe.

To be begin with, an individual cannot be good until they have attained the virtue of wisdom, and the same can be said for the city. For the individual, the person must not only be wise himself, but his soul must have wisdom. The only way to achieve this according to Socrates, is through for philosophy. In this way it is the same for the city, for in the city, wisdom lies with the guardians as they are the philosophers. The guardians are put in charge of the city because of their knowledge of how the city should be run. Because of this, the Guardians wisdom becomes the City’s. (Book IV)

Although Socrates encourages questioning authority, he focuses on achieving morality and justice. He believes that

“Different men are apt for the accomplishment of different jobs” (Bloom 46). This is the basis in which Socrates’ “Just City in Speech” is founded upon. The idea of “one man, one art” allows for the creation of an ideal state by assigning each member of the city a designated role. This, then, allows the city to flourish since each individual is specialized and skilled in one specific art. As the city grows larger, Socrates acknowledges the fact that an army is necessary to protect against enemies and invaders. Abiding by the city’s fundamental standard, it is determined that soldiers too should be adept in their field of work. Consequently, in an effort to provide an army fit to defend such a city, Socrates sets out to establish “which are the natures, and what kind they are, fit for guarding the city” (Bloom 51).

Socrates said “The healthy city isn't adequate anymore, but must already be gorged with bulky mass of things, which are not in cities because of necessity. “but to provide all of these things the city will need to grow in land and so likely sparking war and enmity. As a result, the city will need an entire army to protect its citizens and its property from other cities in order to create an adequate army. Socrates determined that the guardians must be lovers of learning and wisdom they must be philosophers.

Socrates’ view on morality is that anyone can do wrong. It is said that injuring someone in return for injury to oneself is wrong. He follows this with the connection between morality and the city. You do badly without the cities authorization; you are doing wrong towards the city and the laws. He felt if you are behaving against peoples mind and in this

In the Greek society, there was enough wine and spirits for Socrates and his buddies to philosophize on the world around them, beginning the conversation of what is just and not. Ideas transform throughout the conversations of Socrates, Adeimantus, and Glaucon in the Republic forming what justice is in the opinion of Socrates. This opinion, the city in speech, is challenged by Adeimantus and Glaucon but Socrates eloquently responds to their challenges. Socrates’ answers with his city of speech are effective against the challenges of Adeimantus and Glaucon because every human has a soul with decency that is almost impossible to deny.

Socrates and his interlocutors “watch a city coming into being in speech” (369a), trying to pinpoint justice in a collective setting. An interesting choice, when Socrates puts justice amidst the seemingly logical interactions of trade and relationships he inescapably links justice to action and a fair, sustainable, interaction between human beings. This effort to pinpoint political justice before individual justice is crucial because it is easier to distinguish what is good in a collective construction rather than in a

It is argued that one of the most important part of the book is when Socrates tries to define justice and find it in his artificially established city therefore I chose to critically analyze the passage from Book IV. Before starting to assess the argument he

In the discussion between Socrates and Glaucon that involved how to create an ideal city, they divided the people into three classes: rulers, auxiliaries, and craftsmen. In this city each class has a certain role. The rulers are the highest of rank in the city. They are older, wise men who govern the state and make decisions in the best interest of the

In response to Thrasymachus, Glaucon, and Adeimantus, Socrates seeks to show that it is always in an individual’s interest to be just, rather than unjust. Thus, one of the most critical problems regarding the Republic is whether Socrates defends justice successfully or not. Socrates offers three arguments in favor of the just life over the unjust life: first, the just man is wise and good, and the unjust man is ignorant and bad; second, injustice produces internal disharmony which prevents effective actions; and lastly, virtue is excellence at a thing’s function and the just person lives a happier life than the unjust person, since he performs the various functions of the human soul well. Socrates is displeased with the argument because a sufficient explanation of justice is essential before reaching a conclusion as to whether or not the just life is better than the unjust life. He is asked to support justice for itself, not for the status that follows. He propositions to look for justice in the city first and then to continue by analogy to discover justice in the individual. This approach will allow for a distinct judgment on the question of whether the just person is happier than the unjust person. Socrates commences by exploring the roots of political life and constructs a hypothetical just city that gratifies only fundamental human necessities. Socrates argues

Many of Socrates’ statements suggest that the moral education offered to each class is substantially different. For example, Socrates asks Glaucon, ‘In the city we’re establishing, who do you think will prove to be better men, the guardians, who receive the education we’ve described, or the cobblers, who are educated in cobblery?’ (456d). Socrates suggests that his city will be harmonized through persuasion (431e-432a) and he claims that the city will run smoothly with relatively few laws (427a). No one will ever find the need to think, speak, or behave in an unacceptable manner because they will not have the mental capability of even thinking to do such a

According to Socrates, the city is similar to a human being in a sense that it also consists of three classes: the money-making (appetitive), auxiliary (spirit), and deliberative (reason). He claims that the city is just if, and only if, all these three classes do their own job and do not interfere in one another’s actions. Consequently, a person is just because all 3 parts of his soul are doing their own job, according to provided analogy.

“Then, under the influence either of poverty or of wealth, workmen and their work are equally liable to degenerate” (Plato 277). On the other hand, poverty causes the craftsmen to develop a rebel attitude. As such, the will resort to evil deeds in order to sustain themselves in the city. Another class in the city is the soldiers. Plato, through his mouthpiece Socrates, argues that the courage of the people of the city lie in their soldiers. However, courage is not a state in which there is lack of fear. Rather it is a state of knowing and persevering in one’s own convictions. However, for this to happen, soldiers need access to good education, which will strengthen their convictions. Education becomes an important part in ensuring that the soldiers understand their role in the city. “Educating [soldiers] in music and gymnastic; we were contriving influences which would prepare them to take the dye of the laws in perfection” (Plato 286). In other words, without education, soldiers would not be able to make decisions that resonate with their beliefs. Thus, lack of fear alone would not serve a full potential as it forms only a smaller portion of what courage constitutes. The third class of the city is the guardians. According to Plato, “Here, then, is a discovery of new evils, I said, against which the guardians will have to watch” (277). Guardians are portrayed as people who have wisdom to watch over