The concept of Justice is important for the good of the society. Plato argues that justice is the interest of the stronger in the society and Socrates uses provoking question and answers in order to get the truth of the concept of justice. In this paper I will look on the Socratic method, how the ‘might make the right’ and Plato’s idea of justice.
Socrates takes the control of the argument when he accepts to listen to diverse opinions in relation to his questions. He allows Thrasymachus and the rest to talk about their views and question him. This is what Socratic method is. One person takes the role of guiding the argument through asking questions and at the same time giving his or her answers, and allows others in the argument to answer and ask questions. By doing so people are able to get the truth, make right decisions and gain wisdom.
Socrates does not get tired of listening to answers that differ from his line of thought. He believes he can be on the wrong. He incites his interlocutors with questions and at the same time gives them his opinions. He does not give up keeping the discussion going on even when his panelists seem to give up. He pursues the with more questions and ideas in order for them to keep talking. This makes him be in control of the argument from the beginning to its end.
Might makes right. The idea is that people with resources that other people do not have are in a better position to make decisions that determines what the right is and dictate what their subjects will do and behave. Take a case of people in authority, for example, in school. The school administration can make a decision of what is right for students to do. But, they may make a mistake in the process due to the deficiency in their skill. Although, the decision may be to protect the interest of the school, if they get it wrong it may end up not protecting the interest of the school or benefiting the students and other school stakeholders.
The skill, might, power, the unique thing a person has is what in many cases carries the day. When you go to see your doctor, do you question him or her on the medicines he prescribes to you? In several occasion people do not even ask him or her they are for what. They trust the doctor is acting on their benefit but the doctor does so to protect his or her reputation and profession. If the doctor makes a mistake and prescribes a wrong medication that ends up harming the patient, then what was meant to benefit the medic profession and reputation fails to fulfill its purpose.
The skilled or the people in power do not make decisions to benefit citizens or allies but to benefit themselves. The weak are subjects and are only there to follow what the people with skills or authority have decided (Sadler G, 2012). If for instance, the United States decides to go to war with another country due to human rights abuses, will citizens question the move? How many people will think the congress will pass the law in its support to benefit the citizens? But, the top leadership of the nation does it to benefit themselves or other mighty parties. The normal citizens may think the government move is for their or the oppressed benefit but it is not. Might determines what is right but if they err they make others, the weak, to stumble.
Justice was viewed as the interest of the strong during the Socrates’ time. But this was as result of what was going on in the society. The stronger in the society were the ones who were to determine what justice was, and they could use self-interest to define it. For example, if business people decided to charge exorbitant prices on their commodities, they would justify their actions. Though, their reasoning may not be accurate, their financial muscle may make their actions to be regarded as fair (Coumoundouros A, n.d.).
Does it mean capitalism is right? The Americans views it as the normal way of life in business. The system is individualistic in nature. It can be a form of justice in America. But, what would happen if the American authority uses its economic strength to impose it to nations that are based on the communism concept? To the Americans it will be fair and to some parties especially the weak in the nation it will be imposed. But, it does not mean it’s the justice system. The strength of the American economy will make it appear as if its right, but, it may be wrong.
In conclusion, the Socratic method is better as it enables individuals to gather vital information which they may not know. It is also important in establishing truth and challenging existing ideas. The concept of justice is more of who is stronger in terms of unique resources like skills, financial muscles and ideologies. It is that might that people use to determine what is right but they are still prone to err.
Socrates takes the control of the argument when he accepts to listen to diverse opinions in relation to his questions. He allows Thrasymachus and the rest to talk about their views and question him. This is what Socratic method is. One person takes the role of guiding the argument through asking questions and at the same time giving his or her answers, and allows others in the argument to answer and ask questions. By doing so people are able to get the truth, make right decisions and gain wisdom.
Socrates does not get tired of listening to answers that differ from his line of thought. He believes he can be on the wrong. He incites his interlocutors with questions and at the same time gives them his opinions. He does not give up keeping the discussion going on even when his panelists seem to give up. He pursues the with more questions and ideas in order for them to keep talking. This makes him be in control of the argument from the beginning to its end.
Might makes right. The idea is that people with resources that other people do not have are in a better position to make decisions that determines what the right is and dictate what their subjects will do and behave. Take a case of people in authority, for example, in school. The school administration can make a decision of what is right for students to do. But, they may make a mistake in the process due to the deficiency in their skill. Although, the decision may be to protect the interest of the school, if they get it wrong it may end up not protecting the interest of the school or benefiting the students and other school stakeholders.
The skill, might, power, the unique thing a person has is what in many cases carries the day. When you go to see your doctor, do you question him or her on the medicines he prescribes to you? In several occasion people do not even ask him or her they are for what. They trust the doctor is acting on their benefit but the doctor does so to protect his or her reputation and profession. If the doctor makes a mistake and prescribes a wrong medication that ends up harming the patient, then what was meant to benefit the medic profession and reputation fails to fulfill its purpose.
The skilled or the people in power do not make decisions to benefit citizens or allies but to benefit themselves. The weak are subjects and are only there to follow what the people with skills or authority have decided (Sadler G, 2012). If for instance, the United States decides to go to war with another country due to human rights abuses, will citizens question the move? How many people will think the congress will pass the law in its support to benefit the citizens? But, the top leadership of the nation does it to benefit themselves or other mighty parties. The normal citizens may think the government move is for their or the oppressed benefit but it is not. Might determines what is right but if they err they make others, the weak, to stumble.
Justice was viewed as the interest of the strong during the Socrates’ time. But this was as result of what was going on in the society. The stronger in the society were the ones who were to determine what justice was, and they could use self-interest to define it. For example, if business people decided to charge exorbitant prices on their commodities, they would justify their actions. Though, their reasoning may not be accurate, their financial muscle may make their actions to be regarded as fair (Coumoundouros A, n.d.).
Does it mean capitalism is right? The Americans views it as the normal way of life in business. The system is individualistic in nature. It can be a form of justice in America. But, what would happen if the American authority uses its economic strength to impose it to nations that are based on the communism concept? To the Americans it will be fair and to some parties especially the weak in the nation it will be imposed. But, it does not mean it’s the justice system. The strength of the American economy will make it appear as if its right, but, it may be wrong.
In conclusion, the Socratic method is better as it enables individuals to gather vital information which they may not know. It is also important in establishing truth and challenging existing ideas. The concept of justice is more of who is stronger in terms of unique resources like skills, financial muscles and ideologies. It is that might that people use to determine what is right but they are still prone to err.
