Plato, Justice and the Case of Nancy

According to the judge, justice is the responsibility of individuals who fulfill the purpose or duty in an individual society. Farmers cultivate, builders build. Everyone has to complete tasks directly related to their class and only perform that task. Farmers should not paint, painters should not paint, and only rulers should rule. One problem is whether people think that their actions will be rewarded when they decide to act fairly, whether they are punished by avoiding tasks or have they acted to be their expectations . .

In Plato Republic, Plato investigates the question "What is justice?" Plato's goal is to prove that justice (or "virtue") is worthy of itself. To prove his theory, Plato mainly deals with social political justice, then he develops personal justice. As Socrates was a Plato teacher, Plato used Socrates as a republican philosopher. Some of the ideas mentioned in the book may have been developed by Socrates, some of which are the result of Plato's idea.

In the fourth part of Plato's "Republic", Socrates defines individual justice as well as state justice. I explained the definition of Socrates' s personal justice, then Socrates shows that he can not prove the correct definition of justice and raises further questions about justice. I assert that if we act according to this justice definition, we do not know when to take action. - In this article I will look into the Socratic argument of the Phaedo and Plato in the Republic of Plato in detail. First, I will first analyze the debate of human morality between the Republic, Socrates and the Glaucon. Discussion first defines a good community ethics and continues to apply this definition to humans. Then I will analyze Socrates' assertions about the immortality of the soul, the faedo.

The philosophical argument of justice began with Plato, where Plato treated the subject in various dialogues, the most important in the Republic. Plato provided the first continuing debate about the relationship between justice's nature (dikaiosune) and happiness, as a departure from three different levels of attention. First, there is a traditionalist concept of justice (to tell the truth and repay debt). Second, Plato asked Socrates to refute Sovist 's concept of justice. It is based on the distinction between nature (custom) and custom (noun). Justice is a "strong advantage" rather than tracking the value that traditionalists attributed to it, since Plato has the concept described by Trashimachos in the first volume. The last two issues pose the core problem of this book: Where is the advantage of justice? If it can escape it, will it really be unfair?