Read book I,
text available at http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html
Journals due on Feb. 9
Guidance questions:
1. Can justice do good to friends and do harm to enemies?
2. Does justice mean the advantage of stronger?
3. Is injustice more useful than justice?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jonathan Hicks
ReplyDeleteYes! Justice can do good to friends by giving hope in time's of despair,comfort in time of pain.As well,Justice can do harm to someone's enemies by showing no mercy in the enemies time of need simply by letting Justice be served in punishing their enemies.Once again, I say Yes!Justice is the advantage of the individual that's stronger be it physically, politically,or financially.No!injustices doesn't make people feel good about life.Where as Justice makes people feel good about living.I believe that injustice could never be more useful than Justice although at times it may appear so.
Kunti Hanif
ReplyDeleteAccording to the beginning of the text, justice can do good to friends and harm to enemies. But this depends on what the definition of justice breaks down to.
I do not necessarily think that justice means the advantage of the stronger. This can be further examined by Socrates explanations and examples that he gave to Thrasymachus. Those who are strong and powerful make laws in their own interest and their subjects have to obey those laws. This is justice to the strong because they achieve their happiness. On the other hand, this is considered as injustice to the subjects who have to follow these commands even if it cause misery to them. In contrast to the latter, the strong might unintentionally command things that cause themselves misery and in turn is injustice to themselves.
Injustice is not more useful than justice. This is so because justice is being happy and not in misery; which is profitable. Unjust is not having happiness which then makes it less useful.
Book one of The Republic sets up a journey to discover what justice is. However, by the end of the first book, not only has Socrates not come any closer to discovering what justice is, a new question of why justice should even be sought is introduced.
ReplyDeleteSome of the theories of justice presented to Socrates actually seemed sort of injust, such as people with more power, wealth, etc. having more justice. Others, like giving what is owed to people, while seeming just, can actually put people in danger (like giving a madman back his sword), the opposite of what justice seeks to do.
Is injustice more useful than justice?
ReplyDeleteIt is my humble opinion that injustice is not more useful than justice. According to the definition agreed upon by S and T, justice is virtue and wisdom and injustice is vice and ignorance. To affirm that injustice is of more use than justice is to say that vice and ignorance trumps virtue and wisdom. I doubt many people would agree with this. So based on the definition agreed upon, injustice cannot be more useful than justice, maybe more expedient. Vice and ignorance are constraining, and thus leaves one’s soul torture, whereas, virtue and wisdom soothes the soul.
De ja vu:
Reading the “Republic” is reminiscence of “Apology.” It is another example of egotistical men professing to know that which they do not. In the “Republic,” T. professed to know what justice and injustice is, just as Euthyphro, in “Apology,” professed to know what was piety and impiety. Likewise, Socrates examined and exposed T. ignorance of the subject matter.
In sum, the argument, with regard to justice and injustice, concluded without a definite answer as in the “Republic.” However, I believe that justice and injustice are subjective, meaning that what is just to one person, may be unjust to another - vice versa.
Kennee Mcfadden
Can justice do good to friends and do harm to enemies?
ReplyDeleteyes justice can do good with friends because your telling the truth it may harm enemies in a way because they might not want the truth and also make more harm.for ex:if you know you dont steel and not willing to do so why would you tell someone else to steel knowing that they willing to do so your suppose to know that they do right.
Does justice mean the advantage of stronger?
justice make that person feel mentalliy, emotionally, politically, criminally and ect. feel great about themselves because they just recieve justice,making them feel stronger about theselves.
Is injustice more useful than justice?
justice is more useful in away without putting anyone to death, knowing that what the person did was worng and they cant be free without doing time.
Plato: Republic I by Plato
ReplyDelete1. Can justice do good to friends and do harm to enemies?
2. Does justice mean the advantage of stronger?
In "The Republic" book one by Plato, it's main topic is about finding the answer to justice? and why should we be just with people? Justice helps good friends and hurts or harm your enemies. This is because friends are good people and enemies are bad people. For example by telling the truth you are serving justice to the good person and injustice to the bad person in most cases. I do think and agree that justice mean the advantage of strong. I think that the ability to make justice gives you a certain power and control of a situation. And the outcome will be considered justice to one person and bad to the other. I also believe that sometimes by being just, it is possible to hurt the good person and help the bad person.
Sheila Lopez
Accordind to the republic -book 1; justice has its right and wrong of advantage and disadvantage. Thrasymachus stated that justice has a certain set of act that must be follow that was presented by the traditional view of rewards and punishment. He stated that thoes who behave unjustly naturally gain power and become ruler and strong, while thoes who behave accordance with justice are at a disadvantaged and are weak and stupid.
ReplyDeleteGaneshwari latchman
Socrates deals directly with the philosophy of the individual's goodness and virtue, but also ties it to his concept of the perfect situation, which is a republic of three classes of people with a strict social structure and who are rarely amused. One of his main points is that goodness is doing what is best for the common, greater good rather than for individual happiness. There is a real sense in which his philosophy turns on the concepts of virtue, and his belief that ultimately virtue is its own reward. His first major point is that justice is an excellence of character.
ReplyDeleteSocrates quotes in this excerpt that justice is excellence in character. However, he also says that the unjust are prone to gaining power naturally and becoming leaders.
ReplyDeleteThere's a conflict here.
Justice, which in this sense is described as powerful because it allows the individual to decide what's right and what's wrong, can be used to punish enemies and benefit friends by means of truth-telling -- this is believed to bring happiness and inner strength.
If one who is considered to be just has the authority to deliver truth to both friends and enemies, wouldn't that put him/her in a position of power in society and not only amongst himself?
If the unjust is a natural-born leader because of the laws/beliefs they force upon others, would that mean that injustice is more useful than justice; doesn't that make it the SAME thing as justice in a sense?
I personally believe that if a leader were to be considered unjust, it wouldn't really matter. If you're in a position to lead, you can be considered a being of great justice to your network rather than to the country you lead; if you're accepted within your network and you are happy with what you consider to be just/unjust, then you are in a higher and more satisfying position than a person who is considered to do justice.
According to the text justice can sometimes be cruel, and therefore can harm both the friend and the enemy. However, in the text the definition and what consequences can justice bring to the person who wants justice and to the enemy are being argued by Socrates and his friends. I do not think justice means the advantage of the stronger, because even though rich people sometimes make their own laws to make someone pay for their wrong doings, they cannot interfere with Gods own definition of justice that he has for every individual in this world. No, I do not believe that injustice is more useful than justice because if someone commits a crime than I believe that this person should paid for what he/she has done and therefore justice will be used at this situation. On the other hand, injustice will be applied if they let this person who committed the crime get away without punishing him/her for the wrong doings.
ReplyDeleteInjustice is more useful than justice, Socrates made a statement that “the just man is a thief” which I believe is true. An individual could do some selfish things and call them justice which in reality in injustice. This is because many people pay back a just person with injustice. I think justice can do well to friends and do harm to enemies but this can be the opposite some times when selfishness sets in.
ReplyDeleteIn the Republic Socrates searches for what is just or injust,and what does justice really mean? I think that justice most of the time is served to the stronger person,because they did a "good" thing and injustice to the person that did somthing "bad" or unfair to others.So in the end justice does mean the advantage of the stronger.
ReplyDeleteJustice will always be more useful than injustice, because with injustice there will always come injustice, on the otehr hand, with justice there will always come justice.
Isabella Soteldo
Justice does mean the advantage of the stronger, more rich then anything else. From Socrates speech he made it clear that in politics and any labor done money is what is expected from the person labor is being done to, such as doctors to the sick or politicians to the people. And yes Injustice is more useful then justice because there’s more initiative taken place when disobeying the law.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the definition of justice in the Republic, I feel justice can be good to friends and bad for enemies; however, this can work vice versa. Justice allows an individual to decide what’s right and what’s wrong. This means, what one may feel is justice, maybe be injustice in the eyes of another. Injustice can only be viewed as injustice, but justice can be considered one or the other depending on who’s judging the situation. This shows justice does have an advantage of being much stronger. This also brings me to the conclusion that justice is much more useful that injustice. We must keep in consideration that the one who makes the rules controls the land, and that truly is an advantage!
ReplyDeleteIn the case of justice doing good for friends and rather harm for enemies can't really come to a clear consensual answer, only depending on the situtation of a person can one figure out which side of justice falls on to them. For example, a just person could have harm done to them being that if a polticians was corrupt with power and making all these rules that would best benefit his alliances. Justice could mean the advantage of the stronger depending on who the strong are and well if they are rich justice will always be in there pockets. In the case of injustice being more useful than justice, again depends on the person and the situation. The corrupt need injustice to thrive seeing that the justice might only be given to those who are rich.
ReplyDeleteSyron Singh
Reflection on “The Republic Book 1”
ReplyDeleteThis discussion between Socrates and his friends was an argument about the difference of justices and injustices. An argument of justice about doing good to friends and harm to enemies arose. It seems as if this is not so, because friends are only those who you see as good and enemies are those who you see as evil. If a friend is seen to evil by one and one does good to them that becomes injustice and vice versa. Another argument came up about justice being the advantage of the stronger. I believe that this argument is not so because the stronger is not necessarily the just person as they may be unjust and evil using their own power as injustice. Therefore a just person is not always the one with power, but always the one with virtues and good within their soul.
Luis Mercedes
The nature of the conversation was really interesting. It's interesting to see how Socrates is being pushed by this other philosopher. Socrates goes on as he does by asking questions to test his "opponent's" statement. Justice certainly does harm to both to friends and foe alike. Though the end of the text Socrates states that he still does not know what justice is, he's proven what it is not. He proves that justice is not as Thrasymachus says about justice being interest of the stronger. History itself I believe it always written by the state which is in control. As to say the American civil war, the north had won so slavery had abolished, this is an example of justice being the interest of the stronger. The biggest argument I think Socrates made was that the stronger themselves can be wrong and in just so it's all very conflicting to each other.
ReplyDelete-Kaven Kim
Justice has three distinct points of view rather than one defenition. Justice is defined by a sophist, an old buisnessman, and a politician. Socrates himself doesnot have a percise defenition of just but counteracts the views of Cephalus, Thrasymachus and Polemarchus . Who Like his father’s view, Polemarchus’s depicts the idea of justice as a strand of thought. Cephalus’s definition represented the attitude of an old businessman.
ReplyDeleteSocrates seees many inconsistent flaws in this view. He feels that because our judgment concerning friends and enemies is important, this will lead us to harm the good and help the bad. We are not always friends with the most virtuous individuals,our enemies can too be more virtuous than our closest friend. Socrates points out that there is some incoherence in the idea of harming people through justice.
Alea Smalls
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn this text Plato’s philosophy gives a strong opinion of the idea of justice. Plato was highly disappointed with the deplorable conditions of the degenerating Athens. The Athenian government was solely responsible for Socrates’ death. Plato was demonized and targeted by the democracy. This attack came in the form of the ideal society in which justice reigned supreme. Plato believed justice can cure these evils of injustice. After analyzing the theories of justice presented differently by his friends, Plato gives us his own theory of justice. Individually, justice is a human virtue that makes a person conscious and good; therefore, true justice is meant for the righteous.
ReplyDeleteFriends are those who in perception to each man are worthy and those who actually are, even if they do not appear to be. Enemies are not the same. People become friends with people, they think are good, and grow to detest the ones they deem as evil. Theoretically, in the eye of the beholder those who are good are an extreme advantage when it comes to justice. Justice implies a strong character and intelligence, while injustice means a defect in retrospect. Therefore, just people are superior in intelligence and in character and are more effectual in action. As people who have an injustice character trait it implies ignorance, stupidity and incompetence. It cannot be superior to character and intelligence. A just man is wiser and more successful because he acknowledges the principle of his own limit.
David Larosiliere
In the reading of republic book 1 i think justice can do good friends and do bad for enermies.its believe that friends are good people and enermies are bad people.justice also has its advantage and disadvantage.at the same time justice can do good to people by giving them hope and freedom and at the same time justice can cruel and and eveil to friends.but in real life most people see they friends as good and kind hearted people and see they enermies as evil and bad indivuals.but sometimes only the rich can benefit from justice and this is an example of justice being the interest of the stronger.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Nandalall
Yes there is justice against friend. We give our friend enough leeway when it comes to friendship. The same leeway we will never give to an enemy. David made a good point in the Book of Psalms when a friend betrayed him. He said if it was an enemy I would know what to do to him, I would kill him but because this is my friend I'm at lost as to what I should do. Justice is useful when its fair, when you are dealing a unjust person who is presiding over the argument, there is no justice. Yes justice has the advantage of being stronger, when the every involve is seeking the truth. When there is one who is looking for personal gain, there is no justice to be had.
ReplyDeleteSocrates describes that injustice brings misery to people so it is not as useful as justice. Being Unjust means that you will live a life that is unfulfilling based on the facts that you will not be as happy as a just person and in the end you will live your life worse off then others. To Socrates, friends are good people where justice will do good for a friend. An enemy on the other hand, is bad and that justice will harm them. Even despite all of the ideas brought up in the discussions, Socrates leaves with out the knowledge of what true justice is. It seems to me though that justice is basically something we can’t see but it lives within our soul. Justice affects us on the basis of good and bad. Justice is positive or negative energy that affects us based on our actions that define us as individuals.
ReplyDeletei dont think that justice do good for friends and do bad for enemies because it does not matter if your friends with someone or not justtice can swing in many ways.. what if u have money can it swing in your favor in our enemies dont have money? or what if our enemy wiser that you would justice come this way.. when you think about things like that you should question ur self where would justice go
ReplyDeleteCan justice do good to friends and do harm to enemies?
ReplyDeleteI think this question poses a double standard. Of course, justice is good and injustice is bad generally. But both justice and injustice is absolute in my opinion. There is no exception to either of these. if something is justified, it is justified. if it isn't, it isnt. Just because someone is your friend doesn't mean they are absolutely good. Vice versa with your enemies. Justice does not give room for reasoning which i think is the virtue of 'good.' A crime, big or small convicted by an idividual with virtuous reasoning will still be penalized through justice. To sum it up, i think justice CAN be good to friends and it CAN be bad for enemies but at the same time it can be bad for friends and good for enemies.
Does Justice mean the advantage of the stronger?
I think its definitely a possibility. The higher-ups (stronger) make up the rules and pass the laws (as stated by someone above). One would think it will be biased in a way where it will be advantaeous to them.
Is justice more useful than injustice?
I think not. I think they are equally important. If you know what is right then you know what is wrong. The same idea applies to injustice. If you know what is wrong then you know what is right.
Cephalus states that justice is as simple as telling the truth and returning what you receive. Socrates disagrees, and, to prove his point, he states the following as an example: if a person receives a weapon from a friend who then becomes insane, would it be just to return that weapon if the friend then asked for it back? In this case, what would be justice - giving him his weapon back or not?, They agree that telling the truth and returning what you receive cannot always be the definition of justice. Polemarchus states that justice is giving "each his due," thus quoting Simonides, and saying that the weapon should be returned to the owner in the example above. However, Socrates challenges this and Polemarchus agrees that that would be a mistake, and that by "due" perhaps Simonides was referring to doing your friends well. By giving someone his "due," you would also harm your enemy. Thus, justice is helping your friends and harming your enemies.
ReplyDeleteJustice can go both ways, it depends on what is justified. Sometimes justice is not always something that will benefit or do good to friends because if may not be to their advantage, but then again it can also do good. Same goes with the enemies, not all justice will be classified as an act of making yourself feel that society has accomplished what is right, justice is based on society. What may be justified to you, will not be justified to the person next to you, there will always be a winner and a loser in this situation.
ReplyDeleteJustice will only seem as its for the stronger only because it was acted upon, the strength of the stronger depends on it. In a way its just gives ,the person who wanted justice, an assurance of strength. If it went the other way around, that person would seem weak, so it only really depends on whom asked for justice and if it was served.
No, i believe the act of having something justified is more useful than just leaving things unanswered without any concern, justice serves as a conclusion. If we didn't have justice, there wouldn't be any act of organization and law. Justice serves as way of direction so that actions have consequences depending on whether it was good or bad.
Yohan Kim
ReplyDeleteJustice may not always be good to friends and punished the wrong doers. This is perhaps due to because the friend may not always be the one following the law or be the good ones. Furthermore the wrong doers may also be the friends.
The justice may not not always be advantaged to the stronger ones. This is because the stronger which posess more power may abuse it and give injustice to the weak.
Lastly i firmly believe justice can exist with out the injustice. If there is no such thing as injustice, how can anyone tell whats justice and whats injustice
Yohan Kim