Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
The book under discussion is Plato’s Republic which is believed to be the best of Plato’s dialogues because the topics covered are related and still relate to many of the society in general and human life in particular. These themes are knowledge, human nature, arts, ethics, and politics as well as education. The main theme of the discussion is justice and the characters of the work think over what justice is. And when a good society is considered, it is supposed to be just to make all people living in it happy. The verses, 369a-370d of the Republic describe several political formations such as tyranny or democracy as well as others, and he states that none of these formations is perfect and thus, people cannot be happy living there. This opinion can be carried over to the modern society – and as far as according to Plato none of the social formations can be good, he still offers some arguments which could help the rulers and the society members to make the society a good one.
The society
First of all, Plato offers everyone in society to do what this person is inclined to do. If it is a worker, one should work, produce goods, sell – generally, do what suits him best. As well, the ruler will do his job in the best way if one does not abstract from one’s responsibilities. “Therefore, I suggest that we first consider the nature of justice and injustice as they appear in the republic, and then examine the individual” (Plato 369a) The society, according to Plato, is to consist of three classes – workers, warriors, and rulers. And each group is to perform certain functions. It is necessary to say that modern society requires more classes but the idea of every class caring about its functions without interfering with others is expedient. The three arguments about justice in the social formation offered in the dialogue are the following (Annas 32). The first lies in the question of justice and happiness – a just man is much happier than an unjust man. This can be argued as the understanding of happiness is individual, and for the unjust man, his way of life can seem happy. He does not abstract from his existence but considers only it on the other hand. The second argument asserts that the just life is the most pleasant. Plato is sure that just man is happy, healthy, and calm while a tyrant, for instance, is troubled by his passions and desires. A philosopher is the happiest person and is just because he has experienced all kinds of pleasures. The others in the society have to accept the philosopher’s judgments. Plato wants to prove that philosophers will make the best ruler. But it is not realistic, as in present to become a ruler a person has to be educated in many areas but not only be a philosopher. The third argument lies in kinds of kingship. People are weak and though it is good to behave according to one’s morals, often rational part is not strong enough to rule the soul and thus to control a person’s behavior. If this happens person becomes unjust. But, if justice is imposed from above in the form of laws this can help weak people to control their irrational part of the soul and to behave in a just way (Cross and Woozley 98).
He asks him to demonstrate that a person who is just but who has a false reputation for being unjust will truly be happier than an unjust person but through deceit has a false reputation for being just. If Socrates succeeds under these conditions, we can be sure that the person who is just is happier only because of the practice of justice for its own sake, and not because of its secondary benefits, since the just person’s false reputation for being unjust will deny him or her all the secondary benefits. Adeimantus adds a further element to the test by extending its conditions into the afterlife. Even if Socrates can show that the just person will be happier than the unjust person in this life, if their false reputations do not continue into the afterlife, we still cannot be sure that the happiness of the just person derives only from the practice of justice for its own sake. If the gods see through the false reputations and finally reward the truly just person and punish the truly unjust person, how do we know that the just person was not practicing justice all along for the payoff in the afterlife? Thus, Adeimantus says, Socrates must prove that just persons would practice justice and be happier even if a mistaken reputation for injustice before the gods denied them the secondary benefits bestowed in the afterlife. Prove that, Adeimantus says, and Socrates has proven something.
Concept of justice
Socrates suggests that the best way to discover real justice is to look for it first where it is easiest see One could look for justice in a single person or a city, he says, but the larger scale of the city might produce results more readily. After convincing the others of this strategy, Socrates sets off to construct a city in which real justice reigns. And most students sigh in relief that, finally, they are going to get to the real meat of the Republic. Socrates begins his description of the just city with the claim that individual human beings are not self-sufficient. Since most of us are not self-sufficient even in providing ourselves with the requisites of physical survival, Socrates begins by designing a city to produce them (369a-372b). The city incorporates a division of labor for the provision of food, shelter, and clothing. Arguing that we are all more productive if we specialize in one thing rather than try to excel at many things, Socrates sets up the city as a community of interdependent shepherds, farmers, carpenters, weavers, cobblers, blacksmiths, traders, shopkeepers, and so forth (Pappas 48).
What Plato also stresses in his work is the purposefulness of justice which consists in making people happy. When the person is just, the reason rules one’s spirit and appetites. As a result, this person lives a worthwhile life whoever he is. The conclusion can be made that for a society to be happy and perfect it has to be ruled by a just person (a philosopher, according to Plato) who cares not about one’s desires but the happiness of others. As well, the social formation is to be well-defined and divided so that every member of the society did what suits one. Every person has to live a decent life to be just oneself and bring justice around (Cross and Woozley 84).
The concept of an ideal state
When laying out his concept of an ideal state, Plato emphasized that this state should be ruled by a philosopher. He saw the philosopher as an ideal person encompassing virtue and wisdom and thus able to lead people in the right direction. Ad he says in his fundamental work The Republic, “because we have many wants people are needed to provide them” (Plato 369c). Plato defined a philosopher first of all as a kind of occupation – wisdom-lover (this is the literal translation of the term “philosopher” from Ancient Greek). After putting ahead this concept, Plato stresses a difference between one who loves true knowledge as opposed to simple sights or education. He asserts that a philosopher is the only man who has access to forms, which is the archetypal concept lying behind all representations of the form (such as a table in general as opposed to anyone particular table). This principle argument supports the idea that philosophers are the best rulers, and Plato creates the Ship of State metaphor, one of his most often cited ideas when we speak about his notion of philosopher-king. This metaphor embodies an ideal king as captain leading the ship (a symbol of the state) according to the respective route. Socrates comments: “as I understand it a Republic comes into existence out of human needs” (Plato 369c). Another allegory Plato used to describe this philosophy is the symbol of the cave (hard times) where the state dwells at the moment, and an ideal ruler has to lead all these people to light (better times) (Klosko 38). We do not want to see the leader who just talks about his or her plans and intentions – we want to see them done. It is also a common belief that a philosopher is a person who just makes some mental conclusions from time to time without bringing them to life. So it is not only the way of such ruling which is unacceptable nowadays but also the image of the philosopher which is deemed negative by the majority. People want not only basic foodstuffs but relish and other condiments, not just basic housing but fine furniture, and not just clothing but jewelry. In short, people want luxuries. Socrates agrees, but nervously, suggesting that the city he has described would be a truly healthy one and that to admit luxuries into it will lay the groundwork for injustice. Nevertheless, he allows for luxuries and traces the consequences (Pappas 48). The persons practicing the various crafts he has already included will have to grow in number if they are to provide luxuries as well as necessities. Second, new tasks arise. Doctors who can treat illnesses that result from eating exotic foods must be brought on the scene. Third, and more important, since a larger population entails a larger territory, there will need to be a professional army to acquire sufficient land through war and defend it once acquired. This whole new class of persons who specialize in soldiering Socrates initially calls the guardians. This is not the whole story, though, for the rationale Plato invokes to introduce the overseers does not begin to account for the function they play once they are on the scene (Pappas 23).
Conclusion
In sum, organized solely for the most efficient provision of the requisites of mere physical survival, it would be a sort of grand trough from which people obtain food, shelter, and clothing. Socrates is hesitant to allow luxuries into the picture, but Plato would be no more satisfied with a city of craftspeople alone than is Glaucon. Plato, too, believes that humans want not only to live but to live well. For him, however, living well does not mean having access to luxuries; it means living in the light of the truth.
Works Cited
Annas Julia. An Introduction to Plato’s “Republic.” Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press, 1981.
Cross R. C., and A. D. Woozley. Plato’s “Republic”: A Philosophical Commentary. London: Macmillan, 1964.
Klosko George. The Development of Plato’s Political Theory. New York: Methuen, 1986.
Pappas Nickolas. Plato and the “Republic.” New York: Routledge, 1995.
The Republic of Plato. Transl. by Allan Bloom. Basic Books; 2 Sub edition, 1991.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.