Reading The Republic

Reading The Republic

1. He defines justice to mean friends’ help and owing enemies harm. This is in agreement with the definition by Cephalus. It is a perfect definition since the description is only encouraging people what is appropriate.
2. Owed is changed to what is rightfully somebody’s. Socrates sees immorality as being unjust and questions and asks whether an unfair life is worth living. He points to the harmful nature of the judgment that may benefit the wrong people.
3. They agree that people can be good at useless things and at the same time being unjust. We also cannot differentiate a friend from an enemy. Therefore it may be easy to think about our friends in a strange way.
4. The distinction between how to treat who a friend or an enemy is is hard to determine. They, however, agree that there is not just to mistreat anybody even for an enemy.
5. He redefines a friend to be a good man and an enemy as a bad man. That forms the basis of his claim that helping a friend and harming an enemy is justice.
6. Socrates forces Polemarchus to give a specific justice field, pointing out that justice field is taken over by crafts. This forces Polemarchus to concede into believing that justice does not have a particular area and is useless.
7. He sees his entrance as immoral and full of anger since he appears to reject everything that makes sense to them. This is based on his argument that one is happier without justice.
8. Thrasymachus’ initial definition was that justice is what is perceived stronger to one’s advantage rather than what happens to be to his advantage. The meant that no ruler is supposed to rule for their benefit but for that of his subjects.
9. Socrates counters this by arguing that he does not agree that injustice draws more profit than justice. He questions the logic behind supporting that rulers rule for free.
10. He claims Socrates speeches are exhortative. He tells Socrates that the story he is referring to is half true. He says that he critics and praises Socrates in equal measure.
11. Thrasymachus does not agree with Clitophon’s position that justice is right and justified to the ruling body. This a position he defends even amidst Clitophon’s hard-line stance.

Reading Questions: Bloom’s Interpretive Essay

1. This is because justice is giving others what is owed to them. This meant that an enemy required punishment since that is what he can offer.  Politics came in to mean selectivity in administering justice and that politics is about benefitting close cronies while ignoring opposes.
2. He moves to give people what is rightfully theirs. In essence, he comes out to say that justice is an art of stealing to benefit perceived friend and disadvantage enemies. He says unless justice is used to situations gainful to people, it will remain useless.
3. The Hippocratic Oath, according to Bloom, is important in holding one accountable for their deeds in the line duty. This ensures integrity and consent in the handling of duties. Concerning justice, the oath is the only way we can ensure justice when one takes responsibility to fir their own deeds.
4. He equates the aspect of justice to obedience. This is in reference to the existence of cities with different laws. It would mean that justice varies from one city to another. According to Thrasymachus, the difference of laws of different cities is not important to him at all.
5. The attempt by Clitophon to maintain that justice is the advantage enjoyed by the strong makes Thrasymachus reject his definition.