How could Thrasymachus have avoided his embarrassing defeat to Socrates in Book I of the Republic? What difference would it have made, if any, had been able to defend his position better?
2007-10-24 06:30:52 · 2 answers · asked by zr_sakkal 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
If you ask me, Thrasymachus' biggest mistake was involving the whole notion of the ruler's interests.
He might just as easily said "Justice is obeying the laws" and had a far more difficult proposition to refute, especially if he doesn't allow that laws necessarily serve any particular purpose (and I'm sure many of us can think of laws that don't seem to serve any purpose).
It wouldn't have ended the discussion, I'm sure, but probably would have shifted it to what laws SHOULD be made and why. Thus we would still see most of the discussion in the rest of the book, but at least Thrasymachus might have come out a little better.
2007-10-24 12:16:47 · answer #1 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing at all.
2007-10-24 06:55:42 · answer #2 · answered by Dr. Girishkumar TS 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋