The Socratic
Method: Dialogue on Justice between Socrates &
Thrasymachus the Chalcedonian
(From Plato, The
Republic, Book 1, ca. 390 BCE)
Thrasymachus defines
justice as what is beneficial to the
stronger (338c). Justice is
different under different political regimes according to the
laws, which are made to serve the interests of the strong
(the ruling class in each regime, 338e-339a). Socrates requires clarification of
the definition: does
it mean that justice is what the stronger think
is beneficial to them or what is actually
beneficial to them (339b)? And don’t strong rulers make mistakes
and sometimes create laws that do not serve their
advantage (339c)? Thrasymachus points out that the stronger are really only those who
do not make mistakes as to what is to their
advantage (340d). Socrates responds with a discussion
of art or craft and points out that its
aim is to do what is good for its subjects, not what
is good for the practitioner
(341c). Thrasymachus suggests that some arts, such as that of
shepherds, do not do this but rather aim
at the advantage of the practitioner (343c).
He also adds the claim that injustice
is in every way better than justice and that
the unjust person who commits
injustice undetected is always happier than the just
person (343e-344c). The paradigm of the happy unjust person is
the tyrant who is able to satisfy all his
desires (344a-b). Socrates points out that the shepherd’s concern for his sheep is
different from his concern to make money from the wool,
which is extraneous to the art (345c), and that no power or
art provides what is beneficial to itself (346e).
Socrates claims that the best rulers are reluctant to rule
but do so out of necessity: they do not wish to be ruled by
someone inferior (347a-c).
Thrasymachus' definition of justice as
the interest of the stronger falls apart under Socrates'
questioning. First, may not the rulers' actual interest be
other than what they think it is? Second, is not the
art of ruling directed to the good of the subjects?
Thrasymachus' error has been called "The tyranny
of the baby." A newborn may seem to get
everything s/he demands, but this is true only insofar as
the parents judge those things to be of actual benefit
to the child, since true parents are those whose concern is
for the child's welfare rather than their own.
As a contemporary example, a ruler who
wishes to cancel a trade agreement, or arrange for the
assassination of a foreign ruler, may be thwarted when the
order is removed from his desk by aides with a better
understanding of what is in the best interests of the
country.