Plato in his masterpiece, the Republic, reviews the then prevailing theories of justice representing
various stages in the development of conceptions of justice and morality and finally gives own
interpretations and meaning. The text opens with a discussion between Socrates and cephalous on
the subject of old age and wealth. Cephalous, old and prosperous, pointed out that wealth by itself
did not make one happy but provided comforts that made life easy. It is enabled one to lead a good
life and to do what was morally wrong. Cephalous defined justice as telling the truth, being honest in
word and deed and paying one's debts. Socrates dismissed the argument effortlessly by pointing
out that is some cases it might be harmful to speak the truth or return one's belongings, through
examples like returning weapons to a mad person, or telling the truth when it was better to conceal
it. He did not show that honesty in word and deed was not justice but rather that such honesty could
be harmful.
By altering the definition provided by Cephalous, Polemarchus pointed out that justice means
giving each man is due' or what was fitting', In short justice was doing the right thing which he
qualified to mean doing good to friends might also involve acts like stealing and telling a lie. Second
the idea of being good friends and bad to enemies was difficult to apply, because a person could
make mistakes about one's friends and enemies. A friend might not actually be a friend in reality.
Moreover, a person who could do the maximum help could also do the maximum harm. Third, a
person should not harm anyone because those who get injured become been more unjust. Justice was human excellence; a just person could not harm anybody, including the self.
Through a series of analogies, Socrates showed the justice was not the advantage of the stronger,for the ruler’s duty was to serve the interests of the people. A ruler’s position was similar to that of adoctor, teacher or shepherd. By defining justice as the interest of the stronger, Thrasymachusearned a place in the history of political theory.
There is another theory of justice advocated by two brothers - Glaucon and Adeimantus. Glaucon
held the view that justice is in the interest of the weaker and that it is artificial in so far as it is the
product of customs and conventions. Plato saw limitations in Glaucon’s theory by describing justice
as natural and universal as against Glaucon’s notion of it as artificial and product of conventions and
customs.
Platonic justice has two aspects - individual and social. According to Plato, every individual was a
functional unit, assigned a particular task with clear cut obligations and privileges, which one was
expected to perform diligently and meticulously. William Bernstein wrote in the discussion of justice,all elements of Plato's political philosophy are contained, In his theory of justice the relations of man
to nature, to the polis, and to his fellow men from an architectonic whole.
Plato explained his arguments for differing individual capabilities with the help of the theory of three
classes and three souls, an idea borrowed from Pythagoros. He pointed out that every human soul
had three qualities: rational, `spirit and appetite with justice as the fourth virtue balancing and
harmonizing the other three qualities. In each soul one of these qualities would be the predominant
faculties. Individuals in whom the rational faculty was predominant would constitute the ruling class
and the virtue of such a soul was wisdom. This soul, a lover of learning had the power to
comprehend the idea of good. Those in whom spirit was the predominant quality were the
auxiliaries or warriors and the virtue of such souls was courage, implying the ability to hold on to
one's convictions and beliefs in adverse times. Together the rulers and soldiers would constitute the
guardian class.
Individuals whose souls were appetitive exhibited a fondness for material things. They were lovers
of gain and money. They were the artisans, the producing class. The quality of such an appetitive
soul was temperance, though Plato did not see temperance as an exclusive quality of the artisan
class. Though Plato took into account the role of spirit and appetite in human behavior, he was
convinced that reason must ultimately control and direct emotions and passions.
Thus justice in the state meant that the three social classes (rulers, warriors and producers)
performed the deliberative and governing, defense and production without interfering with the
functions of others. Justice was “one class, one duty; every man, one work. Prof. Ernest Barker has
defined the Platonic theory of justice when he wrote that justice means ‘will to concentrate on one's
own sphere of duty and not to meddle with the sphere of others". all elements of Plato's political philosophy are contained, In his theory of justice the relations of man
to nature, to the polis, and to his fellow men from an architectonic whole.
Plato explained his arguments for differing individual capabilities with the help of the theory of three
classes and three souls, an idea borrowed from Pythagoros. He pointed out that every human soul
had three qualities: rational, `spirit and appetite with justice as the fourth virtue balancing and
harmonizing the other three qualities. In each soul one of these qualities would be the predominant
faculties. Individuals in whom the rational faculty was predominant would constitute the ruling class
and the virtue of such a soul was wisdom. This soul, a lover of learning had the power to
comprehend the idea of good. Those in whom spirit was the predominant quality were the
auxiliaries or warriors and the virtue of such souls was courage, implying the ability to hold on to
one's convictions and beliefs in adverse times. Together the rulers and soldiers would constitute the
guardian class.
Individuals whose souls were appetitive exhibited a fondness for material things. They were lovers
of gain and money. They were the artisans, the producing class. The quality of such an appetitive
soul was temperance, though Plato did not see temperance as an exclusive quality of the artisan
class. Though Plato took into account the role of spirit and appetite in human behavior, he was
convinced that reason must ultimately control and direct emotions and passions.
Thus justice in the state meant that the three social classes (rulers, warriors and producers)
performed the deliberative and governing, defense and production without interfering with the
functions of others. Justice was “one class, one duty; every man, one work. Prof. Ernest Barker has
defined the Platonic theory of justice when he wrote that justice means ‘will to concentrate on one's
own sphere of duty and not to meddle with the sphere of others". According to Plato, the justice of the state is the citizen's sense of duty. This conception of justice
goes against individualism because a man must not think of himself as an isolated unit with
personal desire. Plato's justice does not embody a conception of rights but of duties though it is
identical with true liberty. It is the true condition the individual and of the state and the ideal state is
the embodiment of justice. The state is the reality of which justice is the idea. According to Prof:
Sabine, Plato visualized society as a system of services in which each member both gives and
receives. What the state takes cognizance, of is this mutual exchange and what it tries to arrange is
the most adequate satisfaction of needs and the most harmonious inter change of services
Platonic justice leads to functional specialization. From the point of view of society justice means
self control on the of various classes of society which makes each class mind its own function and
not interfere with the functions of others. It also makes various members of each class stick to their
own allotted functions and responsibilities within the calls and not interferes with the function of
other individuals in the some class.
So this is all about it thanks for reading.
various stages in the development of conceptions of justice and morality and finally gives own
interpretations and meaning. The text opens with a discussion between Socrates and cephalous on
the subject of old age and wealth. Cephalous, old and prosperous, pointed out that wealth by itself
did not make one happy but provided comforts that made life easy. It is enabled one to lead a good
life and to do what was morally wrong. Cephalous defined justice as telling the truth, being honest in
word and deed and paying one's debts. Socrates dismissed the argument effortlessly by pointing
out that is some cases it might be harmful to speak the truth or return one's belongings, through
examples like returning weapons to a mad person, or telling the truth when it was better to conceal
it. He did not show that honesty in word and deed was not justice but rather that such honesty could
be harmful.
By altering the definition provided by Cephalous, Polemarchus pointed out that justice means
giving each man is due' or what was fitting', In short justice was doing the right thing which he
qualified to mean doing good to friends might also involve acts like stealing and telling a lie. Second
the idea of being good friends and bad to enemies was difficult to apply, because a person could
make mistakes about one's friends and enemies. A friend might not actually be a friend in reality.
Moreover, a person who could do the maximum help could also do the maximum harm. Third, a
person should not harm anyone because those who get injured become been more unjust. Justice was human excellence; a just person could not harm anybody, including the self.
Through a series of analogies, Socrates showed the justice was not the advantage of the stronger,for the ruler’s duty was to serve the interests of the people. A ruler’s position was similar to that of adoctor, teacher or shepherd. By defining justice as the interest of the stronger, Thrasymachusearned a place in the history of political theory.
There is another theory of justice advocated by two brothers - Glaucon and Adeimantus. Glaucon
held the view that justice is in the interest of the weaker and that it is artificial in so far as it is the
product of customs and conventions. Plato saw limitations in Glaucon’s theory by describing justice
as natural and universal as against Glaucon’s notion of it as artificial and product of conventions and
customs.
Platonic justice has two aspects - individual and social. According to Plato, every individual was a
functional unit, assigned a particular task with clear cut obligations and privileges, which one was
expected to perform diligently and meticulously. William Bernstein wrote in the discussion of justice,all elements of Plato's political philosophy are contained, In his theory of justice the relations of man
to nature, to the polis, and to his fellow men from an architectonic whole.
Plato explained his arguments for differing individual capabilities with the help of the theory of three
classes and three souls, an idea borrowed from Pythagoros. He pointed out that every human soul
had three qualities: rational, `spirit and appetite with justice as the fourth virtue balancing and
harmonizing the other three qualities. In each soul one of these qualities would be the predominant
faculties. Individuals in whom the rational faculty was predominant would constitute the ruling class
and the virtue of such a soul was wisdom. This soul, a lover of learning had the power to
comprehend the idea of good. Those in whom spirit was the predominant quality were the
auxiliaries or warriors and the virtue of such souls was courage, implying the ability to hold on to
one's convictions and beliefs in adverse times. Together the rulers and soldiers would constitute the
guardian class.
Individuals whose souls were appetitive exhibited a fondness for material things. They were lovers
of gain and money. They were the artisans, the producing class. The quality of such an appetitive
soul was temperance, though Plato did not see temperance as an exclusive quality of the artisan
class. Though Plato took into account the role of spirit and appetite in human behavior, he was
convinced that reason must ultimately control and direct emotions and passions.
Thus justice in the state meant that the three social classes (rulers, warriors and producers)
performed the deliberative and governing, defense and production without interfering with the
functions of others. Justice was “one class, one duty; every man, one work. Prof. Ernest Barker has
defined the Platonic theory of justice when he wrote that justice means ‘will to concentrate on one's
own sphere of duty and not to meddle with the sphere of others". all elements of Plato's political philosophy are contained, In his theory of justice the relations of man
to nature, to the polis, and to his fellow men from an architectonic whole.
Plato explained his arguments for differing individual capabilities with the help of the theory of three
classes and three souls, an idea borrowed from Pythagoros. He pointed out that every human soul
had three qualities: rational, `spirit and appetite with justice as the fourth virtue balancing and
harmonizing the other three qualities. In each soul one of these qualities would be the predominant
faculties. Individuals in whom the rational faculty was predominant would constitute the ruling class
and the virtue of such a soul was wisdom. This soul, a lover of learning had the power to
comprehend the idea of good. Those in whom spirit was the predominant quality were the
auxiliaries or warriors and the virtue of such souls was courage, implying the ability to hold on to
one's convictions and beliefs in adverse times. Together the rulers and soldiers would constitute the
guardian class.
Individuals whose souls were appetitive exhibited a fondness for material things. They were lovers
of gain and money. They were the artisans, the producing class. The quality of such an appetitive
soul was temperance, though Plato did not see temperance as an exclusive quality of the artisan
class. Though Plato took into account the role of spirit and appetite in human behavior, he was
convinced that reason must ultimately control and direct emotions and passions.
Thus justice in the state meant that the three social classes (rulers, warriors and producers)
performed the deliberative and governing, defense and production without interfering with the
functions of others. Justice was “one class, one duty; every man, one work. Prof. Ernest Barker has
defined the Platonic theory of justice when he wrote that justice means ‘will to concentrate on one's
own sphere of duty and not to meddle with the sphere of others". According to Plato, the justice of the state is the citizen's sense of duty. This conception of justice
goes against individualism because a man must not think of himself as an isolated unit with
personal desire. Plato's justice does not embody a conception of rights but of duties though it is
identical with true liberty. It is the true condition the individual and of the state and the ideal state is
the embodiment of justice. The state is the reality of which justice is the idea. According to Prof:
Sabine, Plato visualized society as a system of services in which each member both gives and
receives. What the state takes cognizance, of is this mutual exchange and what it tries to arrange is
the most adequate satisfaction of needs and the most harmonious inter change of services
Platonic justice leads to functional specialization. From the point of view of society justice means
self control on the of various classes of society which makes each class mind its own function and
not interfere with the functions of others. It also makes various members of each class stick to their
own allotted functions and responsibilities within the calls and not interferes with the function of
other individuals in the some class.
So this is all about it thanks for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment