An Analysis Of Plato's The Republic

1177 Words5 Pages
Plato an ancient Greek philosopher, whose philosophical work influenced the founding of western thought. Born in 427 B.C in the town of Athens, during the time of the Peloponnesian War Plato witness the collapse of Athenian democracy and emergence of an Oligarchy, establish by the Spartan. The repressive system of government was known as the “the thirty” the thirty were elected officials who managed all of Athens affairs. However, the end result of the thirty was repressive governing for the Athenian people who were accustom to democracy. This was one major event, that had a profound impact on Plato life, due to the unjust ruling placed upon the Athenian people, by 403 B.C democracy was restored once again and Plato had an interest in politics,…show more content…
Due to how extensive The Republic is, there is going to be selective choosing of dialogues in order to understand Plato political opinion. The republic begins with “Socrates: I went down to the Piraeus yesterday with Glaucon, son of Ariston, to pray to the goddess” the Piraeus was the port city of Athens where commerce was exchange, however the Piraeus was not a place of knowledge, because only Athenian citizens were allowed to live up in the city. Soon as Socrates was about to leave with Glaucon, Polemarchus, son of Cephalus ordered for Socrates to wait and to have dinner. As soon as they get to Polemarchus house his father Cephalus Polemarches father and, as stated “Socrates, you don’t come down to us in the Piraeus very often, yet you ought to” the dialogue that is occurring here is important to take note of, due to the context behind it. Cephalus has asked why doesn’t Socrates come down to the Piraeus, and the reason why is because the Piraeus was not a place of philosophy, learning did not occur in a place of trade. Instead the Piraeus was filled with foreigners and thieves where mischief took place. This is Plato first indication of skepticism, because Plato did not view the Piraeus a place suitable, however Plato thought that individuals can be taught noble things, since Socrates came down in order to…show more content…
Justice is not the conception of the strong, while the weak are ruled by unjust rulers how Thrasymachus thought. Instead the ruler, rules accordingly establishing just laws even if they seem unfair. Rulers are infallible, thus creating just laws because if a ruler were to make an unjust law for the strong that would place the weak at an advantage creating a flaw in the argument. The ruler would want to create laws that are filled wisdom so that nobody would want to choose the life where an unjust men would be more profitable than a just men. In addition, Socrates demonstrates that an unjust men will not be able to live a more virtuous lifestyle than a just men due to the lack of learning that the unjust men has no recollection of, thus the just men will not be able to get the better of another just men. Furthermore, a city that imposes an unjust rule among its citizens does not create justice, instead the outcome are factions because the unjust will be at conflict among themselves and will be trying to take advantage of each
Open Document