The question for Lesson 2 is: by the end of book 4, Plato believes he has demonstrated that Thrasymachus is wrong about justice. What do you think? Has Socrates succeeded in refuting him? Why or why not?
To receive full credit for this assignment, you must:
1) write a post of 6-8 sentences answering this question for yourself, then
2) provide 4-6 sentences of thoughtful feedback on each of at least 3 posts by other people.
https://www.gutenberg.org/
https://us-lti.bbcollab.com/
https://www.gutenberg.org/
https://us-lti.bbcollab.com/
Requirements: 6-8 sentences
Answer preview
, Socrates puts an analogy of a doctor and his patient forwards. He argues that a doctor’s chief interest is that of this patient’s welfare and that he receives payment for this service (“The Republic, by Plato”, 2008). Using this as his basis for argument, he says that the ruler’s interest should also be the welfare of his subjects and that he is entitled to payment since he is administering service to his people. Therefore, just as a doctor’s primary purpose is to attend to his patient and ensure the patient’s wellbeing, so should the ruler’s primary role be to attend to his subjects and provide the best outcome for his subjects.
Socrates succeeded in the argument since his arguments were based on factual evidence and not blinded belief. To argue that the rulers are immune from mistakes and thus cannot make mistakes would be nothing short of calling them perfect (“Bb Collaborate”, 2021). This argument is baseless and does not hold weight in any intellectual debate since no mortal being is immune from making mistakes. Socrates’s views, on the other hand, were based on facts that were evident
[383 Words]
