Plato: Socrates? Analysis Of Human Nature And Justice Essay, Research Paper
In my opinion, Socrates? analysis of human nature is very true as it ultimately brings us
his definition of justice. I agree with his theory of human nature but not his
social-political theory. In order to understand Plato?s theory of human nature and his
social-political theory, we must examine each one of them closely. Plato believed that no
one is self-sufficient enough to live individually. Human beings are not created equally;
some of us are born wiser then the rest and some of us are just born stronger. For this
reason, only the select few (which would be the guardians) among us are supposed to
know what is best for the society and therefore becomes the ruler of everyone else. Our
reasoning, spirit, and natural wants are all part of human nature. In book 1 of The
Republic, Plato had several detailed discussions on the nature of justice with other
speakers in a dialogue form. The process of discussion involves Socrates? questioning,
arguing against various inadequate theories that attempts to define the true meaning of
justice. From the rich old man Cephalus, we learned that justice involves telling the truth
and repaying one?s debts. However, Socrates points out that this definition of justice is
inadequate because it cannot account for the instances of certain circumstances. The
simple example of returning a borrowed weapon to an insane friend who demands the
return of his weapon, would be an instance of following the rule but would not seem to
be just. Then Polemarchus, Cephalus?s son attempts to define justice by proposing that
justice means ? one should pay what is owed?. Not returning or refusing to return the
borrowed weapon would clearly benefit one?s friend. Socrates said that harming our
enemies is only likely to make them even more unjust than they already are and cause
them to make more unjust choices. After that, Thrasymachus came up with his own
definition of justice which is nothing more than the advantage of the stronger; those in
positions of power use law to decide what is right. The kind of justice practiced
anywhere depends on the type of government they have in power. Socrates does not
disagree with this view if the facts about the society are as Thrasymachus says they are,
however, he argues that sometimes rulers make mistakes. In that case obedience to the
law maybe leads to its own disadvantage, therefore Thrasymachus?s definition is also
inadequate. Furthermore, Socrates says that the best ruler must always know how to rule.
They should rule for the art of ruling, but not their own interest alone. Later, Glaucon
suggests that human beings, given an opportunity to do injustice without being caught
and therefore without suffering any punishment or loss of good reputation, would
naturally choose a life of injustice, in order to maximize their own interests. Glaucons
definition of justice is that it?s an equal contract, an approach between what is the best
(doing injustice without paying the penalty) and the worse (suffering injustice without
being able to avenge one self). Adieamantus narrows the discussion further by pointing
out that to have a good reputation of justice is more important than justice is itself,
whether or not that person really does have a good reputation of justice. In an attempt to
provide an adequate, satisfying definition of justice, Socrates tries to make an analogy
between the justice of individual human beings and of an entire society or city. Since the
crucial elements of justice may be easier to observe on the larger scale like a city than on
a smaller scale like an individual. Socrates focuses on the perfect city, because the city
will represent the human soul. Socrates began with a detailed analysis of the formation,
structure, and organization of this ideal city. He argues that since individual human
beings are not self-sufficient; no one working alone can acquire all of the necessities of
life by themselves. In order to resolve this difficulty, we gather together into society for
the mutual achievement of our common
a specific art, we can work more efficiently. To make this ideal city healthy (opposite of
a feverish city), Socrates states that the fundamental needs of human beings in the society
are food, shelter, and clothes. From these fundamental needs, some additional
requirements emerge that become necessary only because these needs are a part of the
defense of the city against external attacks or internal disputes. Socrates proposed an
additional class of citizens, the guardians which are responsible for guarding the city and
keeping the city in order. In order to fulfill their proper functions, the guardian then must
have a philosophy that gives them the ability to distinguish the true and false, friend and
foes, and to avoid turning against their own kind due to external influences. I think
Socrates? social-political theory does follow his theory of human nature, he believed that
an ideal state, embodying the highest and best capabilities of human social life, could
really be achieved, if the right people are put in charge. Since the key to the success of
the whole is the wisdom of the rulers who make decisions for the entire city, Plato held
that the perfect society would occur only when kings become philosophers or
philosophers are made kings. Guardians would need the virtue of courage to carry out
their orders in the face of danger without regard for personal risk. The rest of the people
in the city must follow its leaders instead of pursuing their private interests. Plato held
that guardians should own no private property, should live and eat together at
government expense, and should earn no salary greater than necessary to supply their
most basic needs. Under this regime, no one will have any corrupt motive for seeking a
position of leadership, and those who are chosen to be guardians will govern solely from
a concern to seek the welfare of the state and what is best for all of its citizens. Education
in the city is needed to promote the achievement of a proper balance of society. Physical
training and musical performance along with basic intellectual development and the
ability to get rid of human natural desire would be needed to fill this position as a
guardian. On Plato’s view, it is vital for a society to exercise strict control over the
content of everything that children read, see, or hear. By excluding all the poets and
actors, there will be only one stimulation allowed in the city which is education. The
highest goal in all of education, he believed, is knowledge of the ?Good?; that is, not
merely an awareness of particular benefits and pleasures, but acquaintance with the
actual form of ?good? itself. Glaucon and Adeimantus pose some of the arguments
against the kind of life style Socrates promotes. They question Guardians? happiness
when they are separated from the general public. Socrates said that the happiness of the
guardian must be put aside for the sake of the city. However, he points out, the guardian
class should be the happiest group under such a system. Socrates? definition of justice is
when each of these classes performs its own role appropriately and does not try to take
over the function of any other class, Plato believed that the entire city as a whole will
operate smoothly, exhibiting the harmony that is justice. Then, a human being is only
properly said to be just when the three souls perform their proper functions in harmony
with each other, working in agreement for the good of the person as a whole. In
conclusion, it was found that the education of the guardians was necessary to keep the
city running and with their education you must devote their lives to persue the common
goals and good of the city. Once the individual and the other individuals in the society or
city were working in complete harmony only then would the circle be complete and
everything would run smoothly. However, in order to achieve this the guardian had to be
trained right and raised accordingly. The people must cooperate. Everyone would reap
the benefits from a perfect society.
36f