Thrasymachus Definition Of Justice Essay

Thrasymachus believes justice is the good of another-- doing what is of advantage to the more powerful. This is a revisionary definition because this is a perversion of the word justice as it is typically associated with morality by his peers. Justice is not defined by laws the more powerful have written, but is defined by what is advantageous to the more powerful as in the example of the eulogy therefore excluding obedience as Socrates assumes he means. He offers an implicit conception of where everyone must work towards the good of the most powerful. By defining this as justice there is no need for exercising self advancing interests in order to act just.

Human interest is naturally necessarily antagonistic. Ultimately in every interaction there

Plato defines justice as a specialized human virtue which make a person self-consistent and good. It seems he believes in social justice concepts whereas Thrasymachus believes that justice involves submission to higher power.

Wedgwood concludes with the description of Thrasymachus clarifying he is incredibly dangerous because he isn 't confused in his horrifying beliefs but instead very coherent therefore creating a very powerful argument that prompts a thoughtful response from Plato rather than dismissing him as dogmatic.

The conclusions one could draw is based upon one’s own belief in the concepts of justice. It seems that Thrasymachus has a more selfish view of justice that seems to only benefit those at the top of a hierarchy while failing to consider the less powerful whereas Plato sees justice in a more socially acceptable light where losses of others are considered for the cost of personal advancements. Plato appears to have a stronger ethical ground while Thrasymachus’ belief system considers only marginal benefit and not social