The Challenges of Thrasymachus and Plato's response(s)

As we did not get to questions 3 & 4 in the previous post here, be sure to closely reflect upon those questions as Plato's response to the challenges of Thrasymachus occupies a large portion of his arguments in Books II-X. As you are reading Book II and Book IV (427d-end), focus on Plato's notion of justice in the individual and in the state. We get an extensive conception of a complex society (producers, warriors and rulers) as well as a complex conception of what we take to be a simple idea (the individual).

You can consider the following questions as you read these sections, but also come next Tuesday prepared to offer your own questions for Plato's conceptions of justice in the individual and justice in the state:

1. Pay particular attention to the opening scene of Book II and to emphasize this point, consider the following questions: What do Glaucon and Adeimantus bring forward which frame Socrates' response to Thrasymachus in Book II (starting essentially at 368)? That is, before 368 in Book II, we have both brothers of Plato asking Socrates to include certain considerations in his response - what are these things? what significant concerns are raised for Socrates?

2. In relation to these questions above, are these concerns taken into account in Socrates' account of justice in Books II & IV?

3. Would you want to live in Plato's world as a craftsperson, guardian or ruler?

Plato's Republic

Plato's Republic is about as canonical as it gets for Western Civilization. As our first text for this course, you should familiarize yourself with the place this text has had within history, culture and politics to appreciate its breadth and depth. In addition to the Study Materials link above, to the right are a few useful sites to visit to learn more about philosophy and all our course texts.

Specific to our meeting this Thursday (01/18/11), consider the following questions within the opening chapter (which Plato calls "Book I"):

1. For each of the major characters, what is their perspective on the question "what is justice?" That is, to put it in Socratic terms, what is their own account of justice?
2. Related to question one, what are the similarities and/or differences between Cephalus' brief account and Polemarchus' two accounts of justice?
3. What role does Thrasymachus play within Book I - is he a skeptic? a nihilist? an ethical or normative relativist?
4. Are you convinced by Socrates' responses to Thrasymachus' challenges?

In addition to these questions, what are your thoughts on reading this text which was written over 2 1/2 millennia ago? Does it still raise issues relevant to us today?