THE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE ACCORDING TO PLATO

2008

The search for the concept of justice in a multitude of forms has been the highlight of Platonic thoughts and scholarship. According to ancient and classical Greek jurisprudence, Socrates had made it the focus of his arguments to seek the quintessence of justice and after his death, that task became the raison d'être of Plato, the most renowned among the Socratic disciples. The creation of the ideal state based on the hallmark of justice was the Socratic dream, which Plato sought to achieve and substantiate in his own manner of arguments, characterized with an amalgamation of logical precision and philosophical brilliance. He traced the contours of complexities of the roles of the individuals and groups of citizens, created the allegory of the Cave in an erudite attempt to emphasize the necessity for virtues and by means of his Theory of Forms and Theory of Souls, laid down the framework of which on which the ideal city-state should rest. The paper also describes the modification made by Aristotle in Platonic theories and the manner in which the said theories have been subjected to changes in course of time. The paper concludes with the author's interpretation of Plato's primary and secondary goals in penning creations such as the Republic, degree of success attained by him in course of his quest and the criticisms leveled against his approach by contemporary and later scholars.

2024

This paper examines Plato's concept of democratic justice as presented in The Republic. It explores how Plato identifies various forms of government in ancient Greece—timarchy, oligarchy, democracy, and tyranny—and describes a degenerative sequence that arises as these systems move away from aristocracy. The discussion highlights how Plato critiques the vices and political deterioration of his time, proposing justice as a central value that governs both the state and the individual. By analyzing dialogues between key characters, the paper underscores Plato’s view that justice in a democratic regime is closely linked to the well-being and happiness of the polis, while injustice leads to societal decay. The paper also connects Plato’s ideas to later philosophical developments, such as Kant’s tripartite concept of freedom, justice, and power, and Habermas’s notion of the public sphere. These connections demonstrate how Platonic justice has influenced contemporary democratic thought, emphasizing the importance of preserving equality and preventing tyranny within a legal and ethical framework.

Forthcoming, 2023

Plato is not the author of the first political writings that have come down to us. Even in classical Greece he was preceded by such authors as Herodotus and Isocrates. Nevertheless, he can be considered the “father” of political philosophy, in that he tries to apply a higher standard—justice—to the experience and the political theory of statesmen and citizens, previously presented by rhetoricians and sophists as morally indifferent. Today it seems evident to us that justice should be the principle used in organizing a political society and that, if a society is too unjust, then it should be reformed through political means: either peacefully through legislation, or even through a violent revolution which turns everything upside down. From Plato we have inherited the idea that justice is something we should aspire to. The central theme of classical philosophy is the development of a doctrine of “the best regime,” which in essence means the most just regime. There is, however, a chasm between ancient and modern political doctrines. The “best regime”, for the ancients, doesn’t seem to be an ideal to be achieved, but rather a sort of “mental experience” which reveals the limits of what can be expected in political life. The goal of this experience is, according to Cicero, to make apparent the principles of political life, and not to give birth to an actual, real city. According to this interpretation, the most beautiful city, Calpollis—which Socrates proposes in the Republic and which raises countless objections from his interlocutors—isn’t a likely scenario, and perhaps not even a possible one. Socrates’ companions, among them Plato’s elder brothers, even ask themselves whether such a city would be desirable. The most famous of Plato’s dialogues should, therefore, be interpreted more like a comedy, rather than a sort of intellectual debate which seeks to find principles for an actual society. Pascal stated that the work wasn’t to be seen as a serious one, but rather a sort of demonstration through a reduction to the absurd. For the ancients, the best regime might not be contrary to nature, but it is extremely unlikely to be achieved. Justice is a virtue of the soul, but the systematic implementation of this standard in the city will always reveal itself to be paradoxical, in light of the ridiculous consequences that would result, such as the abolition of the family and of private property, the purging of the main Hellenic cultural works, the abolition of poetry, and a government by “philosophers”, who can’t even find their way around the public square (meaning that they lack practical experience). Even if their projects were implemented, they would meet so much resistance that it would be necessary to ban all persons older than ten years from the city. The conclusion seems to be that it is not possible to formulate a theory of justice which stipulates the best political institutions and the best laws, without relying to a great extent on the virtue of the citizenry. This perspective strikes us as alien, and it is almost incomprehensible that Plato wouldn’t at least try to put the conjectures of his characters into practice. The traditional view of the Republic in the twentieth century, on the contrary, is that Plato seriously proposes a reign by philosophers, equality between men and women in the military and in public life, shared property, and a communist totalitarian state, or at least a kind of kibbutz avant la lettre, which takes children from the family to ensure social equality. It is said, moreover, that in Plato’s opinion, philosophers should be the counselors of princes, prepared to manipulate the crowds with noble lies. To understand Plato’s political teachings, we are required to read his works as dialogues, in their dramatic context, detecting irony, and without assuming that Plato agrees with what Socrates says to his interlocutors. Whichever way we interpret him, it is undeniable that no political theory since Plato has been able to dispense with the notions of justice and of an “ideal” political regime, one “in accordance with our prayers”—and it was Plato who placed these notions at the heart of political philosophy.

University of the Philippines

Plato’s The Republic seeks to answer the question “what is justice?” and attempts to reflect the philosophical of views of his teacher Socrates. The book begins with some of Socrates’ friends trying to figure out what justice is: (1) Justice is telling the truth and returning what you received (Cephalus), (2) justice is giving each his due (Polemarchus), and (3) justice is the advantage of the stronger (Thrasymachus). Socrates rejects each of these definitions. He starts a discussion to find out what true justice is and to discover whether the just man or the unjust man is happier. I admire Plato’s philosophy. He seems to be saying that “just” human beings produce “just” societies. There can never be any justice or goodness in this world if there is no justice or goodness in the human heart. This is a profound concept. While many tend to focus primarily on structures, rules, and rewards, Plato brings us to the heart of the problem, which is the problem of the human heart.

There are numerous interpretations of Plato's theory of justice as it relates to the ideal state, deeply intertwined with his political philosophy. This complexity makes understanding his interlocking ideas challenging, as he seeks to construct a theory of the ideal state. Plato's philosophy of justice, particularly in its political dimension, emphasizes integration as a fundamental factor in grasping his theory. This paper aims to elucidate the original concept of justice in Plato's state by delving into the roots of the Republic, analyzing its historical context. Plato's predictions reflect values and truths connected to politics and philosophy, emphasizing integration as essential to understanding his theory of justice, which lies at the core of his philosophy. This essay compares the relationship between the functions and class structure of the state. Plato classifies human nature into three components: reason, courage, and appetite, which correspond to three major classes in the state. The ruling class, educated in philosophy, governs the state. The military class, characterized by courage and strength, defends the state, while the professional class manages the everyday affairs of governance. Plato's theory posits functional specialization across all classes as fundamental to his ideal state. In essence, while Plato's imagined city may lack historical existence, it holds significant relevance in the realm of speculative human thought. Keywords: Justice. State. Function. Class. Rulers. Guardians. Producers.

Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought, 2004

Although its title may suggest a narrowly focused study of Plato's attitude to democracy this book is, in fact, a comprehensive examination of his political philosophy with substantial sections devoted to the Republic, to the Politicus and Timaeus-Critias and to the Laws. In these Samaras develops a distinctive interpretation not just of Plato's views on democracy but of his political philosophy as whole. One major theme concerns questions of unity and development with reference particularly to the relationship between the Republic and the Laws. Samaras rejects unitarian interpretations, which, he thinks, treat the Laws as a mere appendix to the Republic. However he sees a fundamental continuity in Plato's thought, which he calls 'a dynamic unity', that is, 'a unity within which development stands in a discernible relation to the philosopher's previous position' (p. 1). Fundamental to this interpretation is a fairly conservative reading of the metaphysics and epistemology of the Republic. Plato distinguishes between forms and sensible particulars in terms of the degree to which they really exist. Only knowledge of the forms can legitimise political power. The 'ontological transcendence of the forms' thus supports the 'unchallengeable rule of the Guardians' (p. 105), who have perfect knowledge and (as a consequence) perfect virtue. According to Samaras, Plato never abandoned his belief in transcendent forms, but from the Politicus onwards he revised his views in important respects. Because he now doubted the possibility of finding anyone with the knowledge required of an ideal ruler, he became an advocate of strict obedience to written laws. These do not replace the wisdom of the philosopher but are imitations of the truth which enable the common people to govern themselves in the best way that is practically possible. At the same time Plato abandoned his view that an understanding of the forms is essential for virtue and, with it, his Socratic belief that virtue is one. He came to hold that true opinion could be an acceptable substitute for knowledge and could form the basis for a certain

A discussion of justice in democracies through an analysis of Plato's works