Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Plato/The Republic. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 5 page essay that examines the arguments put forth in Plato's Republic, books 1 and 2, concerning morality and the nature of justice. Plato has both Thrasymachus and Glaucon argue that what the concept of "Good" has no political relevance. But as Socrates' reply to this argument demonstrates, this premise falls through when examined closely. Because Thrasymachus states his position so emphatically, all that is necessary to refute his position is to demonstrate that "Good" or virtue has a degree of political relevance. Bibliography lists 2 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_khplar2.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
premise falls through when examined closely. Because Thrasymachus states his position so emphatically, all that is necessary to refute his position is to demonstrate that "Good" or virtue has a
degree of political relevance. The following examination of the examination of the political relevance of Good in Platos Republic will, first of all, outline the argument proposed by Thrasymachus and
Glaucon, which is the position stated in the prompt; then, discuss Platos response to this argument; and, lastly, discuss a more pragmatic stance to Platos position. Platos Republic is
generally perceived as Platos attempt to solve the problem presented by the death of Socrates, and, in so doing, reconcile the interests of philosophy and politics (Lecture #1, 2002). In
accomplishing this purpose, Plato has Thrasymachus and Glaucon espouse the concept of political might, which was popular in Athens at that time and evident in the message of the Athenian
envoys to Melos, as quoted in Thucydides in The Peloponnesian War (Lecture #1, 2002). Thrasymachus becomes enraged at the philosophical stance presented by Socrates (whom the reader can logically
assume represents Platos opinions). He states that he will not hear that "justice is duty or advantage or profit or gain or interest," pronouncing these as "nonsense," rather Thrasymachus advocates
"clearness and accuracy" (336d). He elaborates in section 338c that while there are different forms of governments, each one "defines justice in its own way and always in its own
interest." Clearly, Thrasymachus believes that all governments, regardless of form are amoral. The strong have the power to do as they please and the weak will suffer accordingly. Socrates
counters this argument by pointing out the holes in this form of thinking. He asks Thrasymachus if a lawmaker erred concerning what might be taken to be the interests
...