Socrates:Acting justly
Socrates strives to bring a clear meaning of how to be just. In addition, he mentions some of the unjust practices that should be ceased in order to get full rewards and reputation of acting justly. However, Socrates words are highly criticized by the two brothers; Glaucon and Adeimantus. Apparently, Glaucon and Adeimantus strongly differ from Socrates words by highlighting some of the major challenges from the Socrates argument. At first, Glaucon disagrees with Socrates’ argument that arranging of goods is one of the ways to achieve justice. Reason behind this is that, some of them come unexpectedly, are appreciated but finally leave without sign of just. A good example is enjoyments and harmless pleasures.
According to Glaucon, most people believe that justice is only reckoned in a troublesome class. He argues that practices such as caring of the sick are wrongly understood as disagreeable but in reality, they add up to reward and reputation. In addition, Glaucon disagrees with Socrates that acting justly leads to good results and reputation with the point that knowledge, health and sight are desirable, come automatically but lead to good results and reputation. On the other hand, Adeimantus, Glaucon’s brother put it telling children to act justly for the sake of reputation and character is what should be emphasized (Plato, 2016). In addition, he emphasizes on honesty as one of the ways to achieve justice rather than use of Socrates opinions for ensuring justice. Finally, Adeimantus proposes that embracing justice and faithfulness in life will encourage a transition from one generation to the other.
Reference
Plato. (2016). The Internet Classics Archive | The Republic by Plato. Classics.mit.edu. Retrieved 18 September 2016, from http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.3.ii.html