Socrates: life, philosophy, and historical significance

Plato's Republic And Justice

Justice is ultimately an unknowable concept, if we accept Plato's ideas of 'form' or the essential nature of concepts. In the Republic, Plato presents several intelligent and well-thought-out discussions about the nature of justice. He refutes the arguments that justice is simply rewarding friends, or asserting the interests of the strong. He ultimately concludes that the goal of life is the pursuit of what is just, and that a just life makes man happy. However, if we accept Plato's ideal of the 'form', or essential nature of a concept, it is thereby impossible to truly understand the concept of justice. The best that we, or even the brilliant and inquisitive Plato can attempt, is to achieve a clear representation of the ideal or 'form' of justice.

In Plato's Republic, he provides a challenging discussion of the nature of justice and injustice. In Book One, Socrates contemplates the nature of justice with the aging Cephalus, Polemarchus who is Cephalus' son, and Threasymachus, a sophist. By Book Two, Plato's brothers challenge Socrates to convince them of some of his ideas about justice, namely that an unjust life filled with wealth, power, and fame is no preferable to a just life without these things. In this book, Plato's brothers consider ways to create the best possible human life, comparing a republic that is based on wealth with one based on simplicity and health. Ultimately, their discussion reveals a great deal about the foundations of justice and injustice.

In Book 1, Plato presents one of the most basic of the views about justice. He notes, "As concerning justice, what is it? --to speak the truth and to pay your debts -- no more than this" (Plato, The Republic). Ultimately, he continues, writing "then justice is the art which gives good to friends and evil to enemies" (Plato, The Republic). Through the words of Sophocles, Plato eventually dismisses this first definition of justice, positing that the just man is simply a thief.

Eventually, Plato (through the voice of Thrasymachus) argues that justice is essentially asserting the interests of the stronger. "I believe that Periander or Perdiccas or Xerxes or Ismenias the Theban, or some other rich and mighty man, who had a great opinion of his own power, was the first to say that justice is 'doing good to your friends and harm to your enemies" (Plato, The Republic). Thrasymachus notes fiercely that injustice benefits the ruler completely, while Sophocles argues that true rule is just, thus offering unity, harmony and strength. By the end of the discussion, Thrasymachus has been convinced that the just man is happy, while the unjust man is unhappy.

Socrates goes on to compare perfect justice, perfect injustice, benevolent rule and tyranny. Here, Socrates shows that pride and ambition of the unjust man are weaknesses, while the just man is wise and humble. He then goes on to prove that the goal of a man's life should be justice, rather than injustice. He notes that the excellence of the soul is the goal of life, and that the just man's better quality of life creates excellence of the soul, thus making the goal of life the pursuit of what is just.

After this intense debate and discussion, it is Socrates arguments that it is impossible to know justice that seem to ring the truest. He argues at several points that he truly knows little about justice, but only something of his its relationship to virtue and wisdom.

During the debate Socrates and the other debaters discuss a great deal of the manifestations of the idea of justice. However, justice is simply an abstract concept, and perhaps examining the physical manifestations of such a concept are ultimately flawed. It may be impossible to study such an abstract truth.

Certainly, Plato himself argued that everything in life has a 'form' or essential nature, which is simply an abstract or perfect representation of that concept (Magee). For example, justice is an abstract concept that has a perfect ideal, and any human discussion can only hope to give a representation of that ideal, but cannot every completely approach that ideal. Plato argues that the 'form' or ideal belongs to a realm that is outside our world, and thus beyond definition.