Philosophy & Ethical Life
In Plato's The Republic I and II, Socrates argues with many men of what is just and unjust. The argument came to the conclusionthat one of the definitions of justice was the virtue of soul. Therefore, Socrates' arguments in the Republic show us that what he questions and argues is only the result of how the person he isarguing with reacts. In other words, he is responding arguments that of which he knows they will continue to argue about. As if he would have been playing with their thoughts. I believe that althoughSocrates' arguments are somewhat convincing, and his strategy may be good, of course, he is not a completely just man. Socrates states a few ideas which we find unjust, so therefore, he is not just. Theseare two examples which imply unjust ideas in the first two books; the one man one job theory; and thinking it be unjust to teach children of certain ideas in Homer's¹ poetry. As mentioned before, hisideas may be convincing and supported by legitimate evidence, however, they are arguments not proven to be the completely true and just arguments which would have virtuous results.
For one man tobe destined to only one skill contradicts Socrates’ thoughts of life. The definition of skill is the ability to do something well. Most people of that time needed to have a skill in order to survive.They had no time to practice another skill, so that given skill became a job. A skill is something one wants to do, like in a skilled career of a professional, an expert, while a job is something onehas to do. Now, a job being something one has to face daily, it fails to be a quality, but just an ability alone. So where is the virtue in fishing all of your life? Where is the virtue in makingshoes all of your life? Just because a man failed to have the time for another skill, it means he must remain with only one? Or just because someone failed to have to money to dedicate their time to an...