Plato’s defense of justice: What is justice and why should we be just? (Republic, Books I–IV)

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Plato’s Defense of Justice
The society today has faced all forms of social, economic and political injustices. These include disparities in wealth distribution, genocide, human trafficking and corruption. All these prejudices have led to the suffering of people, death, and slow societal development. Due to these reasons, individuals, governmental and non-governmental organizations have tried to define the meaning justice and how it can be practical in the society today. People who defend justice are happier as compared to the unfair and corrupt in the society.
Plato in his book ‘The Republican’ gives out extended principles of the primary conduct of human being. Alternatively, he considers the value of justice and moral virtues as they occur in the world and also personal attributes of a person. In his discussion, he leads to the nature of human being, the accomplishment of basic knowledge, the discrepancy between reality and the required foundations of morality in the world. So as to unveil the real meaning of justice, Socrates engages a dialogue with Cephalus, Glacon, Thrasymachus, and polemarchus.
What is justice? The book I ‘The gives an ecumenical dialogue of the structure of truth. Cephalus seems to suggest that justice only means the ability of a person, to tell the truth, and also paying other people’s debts. However, Socrates, on the other hand, puts an objection. He argues that returning a borrowed item is an act of following the law and it is not a show of justice.

Thus Cephalus description is incorrect since its application does not anyhow relate the worldly notion of the word justice. People should pay debts, but it should not be implied as an act of justice (Republic 331c).
On the other hand, Polemarchus describes justice as the act of giving to each what is owed. In this definition, he only suggests that for there to be justice people should practice helping our friends and harm enemies. Alternatively, Socrates points out that to treat our enemies badly will make the case worse and unjust (Republican 335d). These simply mean that justice is only applied to those we are in good terms. It is not a function of a just human being to harm someone. The manner of practicing justice may bring about injustice. Hence it is not right for a person to harm his enemies. Socrates further argues that we can’t be in a position to know who our enemies are; those who we claim to be our friends could be our enemies. Many may pretend to be friends but if they are deeply analyzed they will prove to be the greatest enemies.
Thrasymachus introduces another definition of justice as the advantage of the stronger. The people who are in leadership positions use their power to rule what shall be right. To respond to him, Socrates introduces other ideas. He argues that those in leadership can legislate laws for their advantage and this is most likely to contradict the law of justice. Additionally, he claims that people in leadership must know how to rule, and also people, who understand leadership as a craft. Good leaders should not make laws for their interests but for the sake of surrendering justice to all in the society. Good leaders can only be compared to trusted shepherds who do all is best for the social and economic development of the society. However, this may not apply to many communities since the leaders make laws that benefit them hence ignoring justice for the society as a whole (Republic 342e).
Socrates criticism to Thrasymachus lashes out bitter feelings, and hence the latter shifts the focus of the debate completely. He declares that a life that is devoted to injustice is more advantageous as compared to the one devoted to justice in the society. Moreover, human beings tend to benefit more from injustices as compared to the justifiable way hence injustice is better than justice. Many people may opt to be unjust so as to acquire material wealth as proposed by Thrasymachus. Socrates, on the other hand, themes out that the unjust may think that they are truly happy since Meanwhile, they have all they need in life. However, their past unfair life will always judge them harshly. In this, he suggests that it’s happier to lead a truthful life since it gives internal peace.
Socrates defines justice as being fair, wise, to have self-discipline, reasonability, and also the universal standard quality. In an ideal society, justice is manifested in various forms, for instance, performing responsibility as required by law without interfering with others. In execution these duties individual should make fair and wise decisions, have self-discipline so as to produce expected quality work.
In his argument, Socrates believed that justice is the proper telos of the human nature and it is integrated depending on those who are in leadership positions in the society. Therefore for there to be justice in the society, people have to pay so much attention to the type of leaders they elect. If the society has the right leaders, they are most likely to come up with policies that promote fairness for all. Socrates sees leaders as an instrument of enhancing justice in the society; hence they should be wise, reasonable and self-disciplined (369a).
In book II Glacon divides good things into three categories: Things that are good for themselves, goods ideas and their consequences, and finally products that are good for their final results or consequences (357b). Hence according to Glacon justice can be measured depending on the consequences of the action, if the consequence is good, then the action was right. Additionally, he defends injustice saying that unjust individuals with excellent reputations of being justice are always happier when compared to a reasonable person with a corruptive reputation. This simply means that the status achieved from justice is better than justice itself.
Socrates defends justice in an analogy of a city which is composed of people with different needs. He further argues that people enter in the political life because they are not able to satisfy their daily necessities. Thus he finally says that in politics everyone has his or her obligation, justice comes in when everyone works best to fulfill the societal expectations. Furthermore, he describes how leaders are chosen to from the class of guardians who are older, wise, resilient and always ready to do all that is right for the prosperity of the city. Hence these leaders selected from the community are used to promote fairness and equitable distribution on necessities in the society. Justice, in governance, means the proper allocation of resources (415e).
Socrates argues that poetry should be a tool that the guardians use, to tell the truth to the younger ones. Also, the poetry should not be boring, but it should be framed in such a way that everybody will be able to learn from it. The mode of narration should be an imitation to capture the attention of the audience. Written art is a paramount tool that can be used to shape good character and also to make human beings to follow their principles (Pherran, 73). The guardians should also insist on physical education to the young children so as to grow and undertake future responsibilities.
In book IV Socrates continues to explain how the ideal city should be, there should be no so much wealth in the hands of a few people. Additionally, the leadership should ensure that everybody upholds the virtues of wisdom, courage, and moderation. Knowledge is used by rulers to be able to make the right decisions; courage is essential in helping the military to fight their enemies and fairness contribute to knowing who should rule and who should be ruled.(430d)
Socrates introduces classless society in that there should be no separate families for the guardians and members of the political class. There should be intermarriage between the Guardian and other members of the society. Children who are born from such marriage should be taking to a rearing house, and no couple will be permitted to know their families. The children growing together will be useful in ensuring all parents own children born in the society as their own. The above system of rearing Children will ensure that there is unity among the members of the society. In this case, Socrates views justice as the ability of the people in the society to live together happily (423e).
However, Socrates admits that it is very hard to establish a just city. A just society can only be established if philosophers are elected as leaders or kings become philosophers. Only philosophers can achieve happiness when working in both private and public life of the society. Consequently, philosophers can love, pursue wisdom and at the same case love the prospect of the truth.
Plato gives several illustrations on why we should be just; first, he demonstrates a just man is wise while the unjust man is ignorant (349b). Wisdom, in this case, is used to show that such a person can make crucial decisions. The wise should be elected in leadership positions so as to promote transparency in governance and fairness. Secondly, a just man lives a better and a happier life. His soul and body are at peace hence bringing joy and happiness. Another advantage upholding justice is that injustice brings internal disharmony that inhibits effective decision making (352b).
Justice builds good reputations towards other members of the society. Fair people are more consulted before making certain crucial decisions and people build trust upon them. Moreover, justice helps in the subdivision of labor where everyone has his or her responsibility. Socrates uses an analogy of a city built by people with diverse necessities. It is the obligation of each and every one to ensure that he performs his duty so as to bring harmony and unit. (369b).
Justice promotes harmony unity in the society. According to Socrates peace and unity can only be realized if justice is followed accordingly. In a state where leaders make transparent decisions the others members of the society fell more comfortable and work towards the realization of both social and economic development. Furthermore, there is the effective distribution of resources among all the members of the society (462a).
Justice promotes virtues of wisdom, moderation, and courage. Wisdom will help the leaders to rule the city and to make a proper decision; Courage is essential in helping the military to fight against the enemies while moderation promotes self-discipline and to enhance good relation between the ruler and the subjects (428b).
Justice also lay down fundamental principles in which the society should be governed. All the leaders in the state should uphold discipline, integrity, and obedience so as to set a good example to the subjects. There are two types of political injustices, first is injustice towards the state, then justice towards an individual. The leaders who possess these fundamental principles ought to protect the state and individuals from any form of injustices
In conclusion, Socrates in his argument tries to give a demonstration of how ideal society should be like. Leaders have the biggest responsibly of making decisions that in one way or the other promote transparent and accountable leadership. As they make decisions, they are supposed to look at the welfare of the community at large. Most importantly, they should ensure there is equity in the distribution of the resources to all the subjects. This is crucial to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor. Thus there should be no rich or poor people in ideal society. The subjects also have been given the responsibility of performing their duties maximally so as to promote economic and social development. This, in the long run, will promote unity among all the members of the society.
Works Cited
Pherran, Mark L. Plato’s Republic: A Critical Guide. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.
Plato, G. R. F. Ferrari, and Tom Griffith. The Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. Print.