Justice is to the advantage of the stronger, and if justice is simply fattening the sheep (the weak) i think thrasymachus is saying injustice (not following the mandate of the ruler) would be to their advantage
I think people who want to rule are the best candidates not because they are seeking power but because they are accepting responsibility. Stepping into a position of leadership is not just about enjoying money, honor and power but putting yourself at the forefront of blame and abuse when things inevitably go wrong.
Wrong, they don't accept any responsibility because they can only think of the benefits when taking on such an endeavor, they don't even register the possibility of a great calamity falling on their subjects during the time of their government, therefore we see that there isn't enough awareness and critical thinking employed in this decision to take a position of leadership, only the desire for easy access to special benefits and access to the treasures of the nation.
It seems that Socrates is taking every word of Thrasymachus literally. For example, Thrasymachus claims that unjust men have an advantage. By the thief analogy, it seems that Socrates proves that 100% unjust men (every action they take is unjust) never have an advantage, and that makes sense. It seems that the right thing would be to focus the discussion on how much unjust does one have to be such that they have an advantage. Then the answer to this should be 0 unjust if Socrates is right. Generally, it's difficult to come up with a conclusion about this part of the discussion, the two subjects never managed to communicate properly.
In regards to your question. Since I'm not in school and believe that without council plans fail I shall Adress my view to the latter question since the previous is more linear. It seems to me that In the current time we live there are less problems for those who are wise with there time. Politics in my opinion are the most difficult and stressful of professions and so someone who is to rule contrary to there time and effort is going to be more morally sound, less bias and more just. Although more naive but it's hard to teach someone unless there humble.
The problem is that it takes two very different kinds of skills to govern on the one hand and to take power on the other. The good man cannot govern if he does not have the unconditional support of the people and that of the administration. The power grabbers always win. This is the predicament today's dysfunctional democracies find themselves in.
Isn’t Thrasymachus’ inverted justice the foundation of the state? The only craft that is practiced for the benefit of yourself instead of your subject, besides tyrannical governments, would be sports.
I find thrasymachus' definition of justice to be the most fascinating part of the book. Justice is just what the people in power say it is.
We think of it as a modern view, but it goes back centuries.
Either that or there is a cosmic sense of justice and harmony that Socrates refers to.
Bruno Pires if only an idylllic quintessential definition of anything existed
Not only does power corrupt, but the corrupt are drawn to power. So yes, the people who least want to rule are the most suited for it.
Justice is to the advantage of the stronger, and if justice is simply fattening the sheep (the weak) i think thrasymachus is saying injustice (not following the mandate of the ruler) would be to their advantage
I think people who want to rule are the best candidates not because they are seeking power but because they are accepting responsibility. Stepping into a position of leadership is not just about enjoying money, honor and power but putting yourself at the forefront of blame and abuse when things inevitably go wrong.
Wrong, they don't accept any responsibility because they can only think of the benefits when taking on such an endeavor, they don't even register the possibility of a great calamity falling on their subjects during the time of their government, therefore we see that there isn't enough awareness and critical thinking employed in this decision to take a position of leadership, only the desire for easy access to special benefits and access to the treasures of the nation.
Thanks for shooting this videos. It is really useful to listen to smart people
This is a Plato video, youre in the wrong place ;)
The way a teacher teaches knowledge to the student would be an example of one of these arts
Thanks for sharing your video!! really helpful
You're welcome. I'm glad you liked it!
It seems that Socrates is taking every word of Thrasymachus literally. For example, Thrasymachus claims that unjust men have an advantage. By the thief analogy, it seems that Socrates proves that 100% unjust men (every action they take is unjust) never have an advantage, and that makes sense. It seems that the right thing would be to focus the discussion on how much unjust does one have to be such that they have an advantage. Then the answer to this should be 0 unjust if Socrates is right. Generally, it's difficult to come up with a conclusion about this part of the discussion, the two subjects never managed to communicate properly.
Thank you Prof. Great summary 😊
In regards to your question. Since I'm not in school and believe that without council plans fail I shall Adress my view to the latter question since the previous is more linear.
It seems to me that In the current time we live there are less problems for those who are wise with there time. Politics in my opinion are the most difficult and stressful of professions and so someone who is to rule contrary to there time and effort is going to be more morally sound, less bias and more just. Although more naive but it's hard to teach someone unless there humble.
the GOAT
Is Thrasymachus changing arguments an example of shifting the goal posts?
Elite content here, i am a muslim and have discovered philosophy recently.
philo my best subject in high school, how I wish u have the means to further this subject
The problem is that it takes two very different kinds of skills to govern on the one hand and to take power on the other. The good man cannot govern if he does not have the unconditional support of the people and that of the administration. The power grabbers always win. This is the predicament today's dysfunctional democracies find themselves in.
Talk about corporate cultures!
Why do all of you who summarize this text on RUclips blueball me with the rest of the discussion? Just give me the rest of the damn text!
Isn’t Thrasymachus’ inverted justice the foundation of the state?
The only craft that is practiced for the benefit of yourself instead of your subject, besides tyrannical governments, would be sports.