Plato week 1 secondary info

[QUOTE ] Annas on why Thrasymachus isn't actually refuted

'Socrates argues his interlocutors into silence, but nothing replaces their previous beliefs'

Annas on T's idea that injustice pays

'is not far-fetched or unconvincing'

quick: what are Socrates' three arguments

1) skills and crafts are not self-interested 2) justice is stronger than injustice because it doesn't lead to division 3) function

What are the official names for the two views Thrasymachus puts forward?

1. Legal positivism: justice is nothing but obeying the laws. Reductive account of justice. Referring to realities of power. 2. Immoralism: Justice and injustice do have real existence independent of human institutions, and we should make a commitment to injustice. 37 The conventionalist tells us that justice is not what we think it is. Immoralist tells us that it is exactly what we think it is but we are wrong to think of it as a virtue.

outline Irwin's summary of S's function argument

A good knife is good at cutting, a good eye is good at seeing, etc. The virtue of the soul depends on the soul's essential activity, which is ruling/deliberating/living. Follows that virtuous soul is one that lives well since justice is agreed to be the virtue of the soul. However, S gives us no reason to accept the claim that justice guarantees happiness

What is Annas' response to Socrates' point that unjust man is in constant internal conflict?

Argues this is 'merely unconvincing rhetoric'

What does Callicles say in the dialogue Gorgias?

Callicles claims that by nature it is just for the strong to rule and exploit the weak; it is only by convention that it is just for the weak to restrain the strong. the admirable life is the life of the person who disregards justice and goes ruthlessly and unjustly after his own interests

How does Thrasymachus change his argument?

First says justice is in the advantage of the stronger. Then clarified w Socrates to say justice is in obeying the laws.

How does socrates roughly show that ruling does not involve the exercising of self-interest?

If ruling is a skill, then the ruler doesn't exercise his own interest. • Ruling is not in self-interest. People might rule in a selfish way so much as to avoid punishment for not ruling, but the business of ruling itself doesn't appear to have notions of self-interest o T is assuming that all ruling is exploitative.

What is Plato's point about skill and what is Annas' response?

Justice is like a skill in involving intellectual mastery of the material involved. Experts do not compete against experts. Only ignoramuses do. Therefore the analogue to the unjust man is the ignoramus, not the expert, for the ignoramus tries to outdo both the experts and other ignoramuses, and the unjust man was agreed to be the man who tries to outdo both the just and other unjust men • Our reaction: seems fallacious. Based on ambiguity of what it means to outdo someone. The unjust wants to outdo the just in sense of having more than he does, whereas the ignoramus tries to outdo the expert in the sense of doing better than he does. The unjust man is greedy: the ignoramus is over-ambitious. The analogy doesn't work. The unjust man simply has different priorities generally.

What is Annas' issue with Plato's 'ergon' argument?

Plato argues that just soul and the just man will live well, but no proof for assumption that there is no gap between the soul and the person • If we allow Plato to move between talking about a person and talking about his soul, major problem is: if living is the function of the soul, what is the virtue/excellence? T and S both agree that 'justice is the excellence of the soul' but never says how they reached this agreement. o So in 'the end the argument is futile, for it depends on a premise which there is not the faintest chance that anyone would accept unless they already accepted the conclusion

In what way does T.H. Irwin think Socrates is right? In what way is he wrong?

Socrates is right to argue that if justice is laid down by a ruler exercising the ruling craft, it does not follow that justice is laid down in the interest of the ruler goes too far in claiming that the ruling craft must be properly concerned with the interest of the subject. Thrasymachus points out that even if every craft is concerned, as such, with the perfection or improvement of its object, this does not show that every craft is designed primarily for the benefit of the object rather than the practitioner of the craft; shepherds fatten their sheep, not in the sheep's interest, but in the interest of the shepherds who hope to sell them

On 'stronger' vs 'ruler'

Socrates makes the point about bad laws and rules: so is Justice what's actually in force and legal or not the ruler so much as the stronger? It's the latter. T was only using ruler when he assumed the rules would always be in ruler's interest. T rebuffs Cleitophon's helpful offer by saying, 'do you think I call someone who is making a mistake ''stronger'' just when he is making a mistake?'; and once he has done this he is committed to rejecting any form of conventionalism, for he has chosen to stick to the notion of the stronger rather than that of the ruler, i.e. the actual authorities at any given time in any given state

Annas' conclusion on Plato's argument

Socrates may be right, but his methods of discussion and argument are not adequate to deal with someone who disagrees with him in a basic and systematic way'

How does the style of writing show that T is not to be taken seriously?

T's longer speech: meant to show that he is using rhetoric and is not intellectually serious (in comparison to Socrates short questions to get to the truth of matters)

What is Socrates' point about Ergon (function)?

The soul has a function: directing and guiding the body and being its principle of life. The excellence of the soul is agreed to be justice. Therefore the good soul will live well, and to live well is to be happy. So justice will make us happier than injustice will. Justice is not only a better sign of intelligence than injustice, it is a better bet if you want to live well and be happy.

Irwin: what does Socrates not show in his general claim that injustice always provides division and conflict?

doesn't show that intrapsersonal psychic conflict follows from interpersonal conflict

What does Annas think is Thrasymachus' real view?

immoralist

What lexical issue does Thrasymachus create for himself?

in glorifying qualities generally thought undesirable, still calls them by the accepted unfavourable words, and so get involved in an attempt to revalue moral terms in which justice is praised. Ultimately led into a corner and has to commit to the idea that justice is a vice/defect T ultimately can't break with normal use of terms like good and bad and say that justice is a bad thing

How does Annas summarise T's view?

justice is another's good, whereas injustice is acting in the vigorous pursuit of your own interest.

T's formula is in ______ ______: justice exists in relation of government to governed, not how one ought to live. But for Plato and contemporaries, Justice covers both personal and civic dealings.

political terms

What does T. H. Irwin believe to be the most plausible part of S's argument?

something other than unrestrained injustice is needed for rational planning of one's own life. An unjust person's commitment to injustice seems to imply ignorance of what we need to know to achieve our own interests. However this falls apart if you see the unjust person as someone who just doesn't give priority to justice.

What does Annas see as the ambiguity in the presentation of Thrasymachus?

unclear whether meant to see him as fundamentally confused or just helpfully corrected/set straight by Socrates during questions when he makes revisions to his argument

tutorial notes

• Greek society structured into different polis - each place had different gods, etc. • New ideas began to arise: inc the idea to have a democratic rule. • Trial to condemn Socrates: corrupting youth and not believing in the gods. Sentenced to death. o Plato saw Socrates as one of the most intelligent/wise people. • Key concept of Republic: never harm anyone. Better to suffer injustice than to do injustice. (opposite of Thrasymachus) First definition of justice: returning what is owed. Second definition: we should treat friends well and enemies badly There was no government in Ancient Greece, the government didn't exist, was rulers. One view: Plato's views = Socrates and vice versa Another view: more complex than this Different readers may get different things out of The Republic. Text is not a static object Socrates must show justice is advantageous. Socrates: leaders must use some form of justice in order to get people to work with you. Leo Strauss: Socrates' argument is not better than T, it is just more elaborate. T and S ultimately flip roles. Simonides cited in earlier refuted definition. Socrates demonstrating that arguments from authority are weak. 'a man is only a wolf to another man' (common quote) - Thrasymachus' position. 'a man is a god to another man ' (common quote) try to help

What are the key differences in the form that book 1 takes?

• Rest of Republic doesn't have strongly characterised interlocutors, and Socrates basically gives monologue. • Book 1 more resembles early Socratic dialogues: talks to character about a moral quality and it transpires that beliefs he holds about it are inadequate. • Many scholars think book 1 was written earlier than the rest of the Republic: o Evidence, Cleitophon intervenes earlier to help T. There's a short dialogue called c in which C says more