Thrasymachus Theory Of Justice

1398 Words6 Pages
Intro: (Thesis) Thrasymachus believes justice is having an advantage over another because of strength. Socrates soon brings out the fallacies in this argument by mentioning how rulers help their subjects, improve the art they specialize in, and how they should be reimbursed for the service they provide. Socrates successfully refutes Thrasymachus’ theory by bringing up these fallacies and showing that justice is not just the stronger surviving, there is a genuine good in people that prevents this theory from taking hold.
Main Argument: Thrasymachus’ theory is that justice is nothing more than the advantage of the stronger. He provides an example of how different cities are governed by various forms of government like democracies, aristocracies,
…show more content…
Thras brings up the point that craftsmen, physicians, and rulers do not err but instead only makes such a mistake when they are not acting in their respective jobs. It is also brought up that rulers are not infallible and can make mistakes at times and should not be considered a ruler when mistakes are made. This means that since they are not a ruler at the time of erring that there is no advantage lost. Just because the ruler has the title of ruler, does not mean he is a ruler all the time, especially when he makes mistakes. When he is in the position of ruler though, he only enacts what is best for…show more content…
Whenever a business dealing occurs between two people, the just person will always be in the position of power compared to the unjust person who has the bad part of the deal. To illustrate how a ruler runs things, one can imagine how someone that does an act to wrong someone else feels good about it and the person that is wronged often feels miserable when they would never even consider doing such an act. This leads to the advantage of the stronger and the unjust being taken advantage of to provide profit for the just. No matter the situation, there will always be someone that is at a disadvantage due to justness.
One objection is that every man does things for his own advantage and not for the good of others. As we previously learned, some believe that no matter the act, man is always trying to do good for himself. If he does an act that appears to help someone else out, it was to only make himself feel good and not actually for the benefit of those he helped.
Open Document