CreateDebate


Debate Info

1
11
For the Motion Against the Motion
Debate Score:12
Arguments:9
Total Votes:41
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 For the Motion (1)
 
 Against the Motion (8)

Debate Creator

xMathFanx(686) pic



Plato's Republic is the Ideally Just Society

"Plato’s strategy in The Republic is to first explicate the primary notion of societal, or political, justice, and then to derive an analogous concept of individual justice. In Books II, III, and IV, Plato identifies political justice as harmony in a structured political body. An ideal society consists of three main classes of people—producers (craftsmen, farmers, artisans, etc.), auxiliaries (warriors), and guardians (rulers); a society is just when relations between these three classes are right. Each group must perform its appropriate function, and only that function, and each must be in the right position of power in relation to the others. Rulers must rule, auxiliaries must uphold rulers’ convictions, and producers must limit themselves to exercising whatever skills nature granted them (farming, blacksmithing, painting, etc.) Justice is a principle of specialization: a principle that requires that each person fulfill the societal role to which nature fitted him and not interfere in any other business."  -Sparknotes.com

For the Motion

Side Score: 1
VS.

Against the Motion

Side Score: 11
No arguments found. Add one!

The ideal society is not properly Just in my opinion. If you aren't unfairly biased towards people who pose a threat to the nation (like terrorists) and treat them inhumane compared to the rest of your nation then your nation will fall apart.

Therefore, the ideal society is not really 'just' but is indeed corrupt in order to maintain control over the masses and to ensure peace.

A truly Just society is very horrible, in a truly Just society the clumsy will cut their hand on a loosely guarded blender and we would blame their fallacy for being clumsy rather than the manufacturer for not making it fool-proof as possible.

You gotta learn to punish the tactical thing, not the 'right thing'. Justice is a lie, law and order are not.

Side: Against the Motion
1 point

Reading Response #5

“ ‘…Choose now for me who in your opinion is first in happiness, and who second, and the others in order, five in all-kingly, timocratic, oligarchic, democratic, tyrannic.’ ‘The choice is easy,’ he said. ‘For, with respect to virtue and vice, and happiness and its opposite, I choose them, like choruses, in the very order in which they came on stage.’ ‘…shall I myself announce that Ariston’s son has decided that the best and most just man is happiest, and he is that man who is kingliest and is king of himself; while the worst and most unjust man is most wretched and he, in his turn, happens to be the one who, being most tyrannic, is most tyrant of himself and of the city?’ (Socrates, 580b-c)

In the above passage, Socrates is in dialogue with Glaucon discussing the nature of the tyrannical man. They are attempting to ascertain whether the tyrannical man, due to previously agreed upon characteristics, can lead a happy life or is bound to a miserable existence. This is in an attempt by Socrates to prove that the unjust life is most unprofitable while the life of the just man is indeed most profitable. Socrates concludes that it is necessary due to ruling that the tyrant becomes envious, faithless, unjust, friendless, impious, and a host of all other vices. Moreover, it is decided that the real tyrant is a slave to himself, flatterer of only the most worthless people, and gets no sense of satisfaction from his/her desires.

Although I largely agree with Socrates’ analysis about the tyrant being internally corrupted, and thus externally displaying symptoms of the unjust “soul”, I do think however there are considerations missing in his analysis that are important to observe. For instance, it is possible for a tyrant to suffer from false beliefs about the nature of his/her leadership, considering himself to be a just King. Additionally, people could be faithful to a false King (tyrant) who also are mistaken about the nature of the tyrant’s leadership. In this scenario, the tyrant would not view himself as unjust but rather a just man full of virtues. In turn, the false King could be happy in modulo delusion, thus undermining the Socrates main conclusion that the tyrant necessarily leads a life devoid of happiness and is least profitable. One example I would give to this effect is that of Hitler and Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Hitler and his men perceived themselves to be carrying out a supreme justice with their “Final Solution” (even though it was anything but justice) and thus viewed themselves to be highly pious, just, all manner of other virtues. An example to support this is the infamous pictures of the Nazi’s smiling amongst each other, Hitler smiling and seemingly with a great sense of pride, and Nazi soldiers appearing happy with their families after returning home from “working” at Holocaust camps during the day. This is evidence that tyrants and the leaders of tyrants are capable of feeling satisfaction (however perverse) when under delusions about their own nature.

Side: Against the Motion
Spartacus(4) Disputed Banned
0 points

Why on God's Earth do you believe anybody except you is going to be interested in your 10,000 word pompous Plato wankathon? I'm not your teacher. Do you want a gold star or something, you boring windbag?

Side: For the Motion
xMathFanx(686) Disputed
1 point

The entire point of this site is to exchange ideas with others..

Not everyone is as simpleminded as you certainly appear to be..

I, for one, would like to have more people write essays that detail their views at length as I am interested in having deeper discussions

These papers were done for a Uni. Philosophy course on Plato's Republic, I had them saved still so I posted them as they contribute to the discussion on this topic

Side: Against the Motion
-2 points
-2 points
-3 points
-4 points
-5 points