The issue of whether Thrasymachus and his definition of justice serve a constructive purpose in society is one that undergoes vigorous interrogation by Socrates. Thrasymachus, being a sophist like Socrates has strong beliefs on what justice should consist of. However, Thrasymachus, and his definition of justice act to undermine his ethos of being considered a teacher of wisdom. It is apparent through Thrasymachus’ various attempts to prove how authority in society is considered superior that in reality what he reveals is his lack of compassion for others. This lack of sympathy for others ultimately is what accounts for his realization that he cannot be considered a true teacher of knowledge.
Thrasymachus believes that the stronger have advantage in justice implying that the weak in the society do not have access to justice. The belief by Thrasymachus is that someone should be stronger in order to make rules in the society. His perception is that the best thing in life is to have power. Socrates has refuted Thrasymachus view of justice and doubts the wisdom of Thrasymachus in the articulation of justice. Thrasymachus definition of justice undermines his reference as a teacher of wisdom. The connection of justice and power makes Thrasymachus to teach on the importance of acquiring power. The powerful and the stronger should be making the rules and the lesser group follow the rules. At 350d, Thrasymachus blushes because of the embarrassment he gets from Socrates on the questioning of his role as a teacher. Thrasymachus realizes he cannot account for being a teacher if he does not care about the students. Through his specialty in communication, Thrasymachus taught people who were interested in obtaining political power. He taught people to be persuasive in their quest for attaining power. His teaching on how to get power in order to enjoy justice is against the essence of justice which should be for all regardless of status. The aspect of justice has been controversial for the two sophists. According to Socrates, a good teacher should always care about the students and their welfare.
The aspect of justice should be for all but not for the powerful in the society. The definition of justice to be an aspect of the stronger deflates the role of Thrasymachus as a good teacher. The perception created to the students is that they cannot attain justice if they are not stronger. They are supposed to be the group that follow the rules and cannot participate in developing these rules. This develops a lot of criticism from Socrates as a sophist who holds a diverse opinion.
The wisdom of Thrasymachus is in doubt due to his perception that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Justice should be equally practiced among all individuals in the society. Individuals should be treated in a fair means without discrimination in terms of status. Socrates holds that an individual who is just should never take advantage of another person. This goes against the definition of justice by Thrasymachus who perceives justice as an advantage of the stronger. The role of Thrasymachus as a teacher is flawed due to the perception he holds on justice.
Apart from justice serving the stronger, Thrasymachus also makes another assertion about the aspect of justice (Plato & Benjamin, 29. He portends that just action is being obedient to the state law. The two assertions may not be taken to be true as definitions according to Socrates. There is a contradiction in the two predicates. Obedience in regard to the laws is not always in the rulers’ interest. The only way that the position of Thrasymachus can be maintained avoiding inconsistency is only if one of the assertions is not taken as real definition. Socrates asserts there are no confusions in the aspect of conventional morality. Thrasymachus maintains that the behavior of individuals is supposed to be lead by self-interest. The aspect of self-interest taking centre stage negates the aspect of collectiveness and to some extent promotes individualism. This may also create segregation within the society. This identifies the two groups in the society that Thrasymachus defines.
Socrates argues that injustice is a cause of strife and disunity by nature and, therefore, disempowerment. He argues that even a gang will only function successfully if they are just among themselves. In the same way, justice harmonizes the soul within the domain of the human soul making the person effective. Justice is seen to be the virtue of soul that enables the soul to perform well (Plato, 63).
Socrates view on justice is that it should be for all regardless of the status in the society. Justice causes harmonious living among people within a state, and it enables integration of individuals. Justice should not work for the interest of the strong and powerful in society but for all. Sophist should teach on the value of equal and just treatment amongst all members of the community. The association of justice with the strong individuals in the community by Thrasymachus only serves to create selective justice. This against the perception of Socrates regarding justice and what should be taught.
Works Cited
Plato, Plato's Republic, Trans. by A. D. Lindsay. S.l: s.n., 1906. Print.
Plato, & Benjamin Jowett. Plato's the Republic. New York: Vintage Books, 1960. Print.
