Justice - Plato

Justice is considered to be a very important concept in term of political science and social science in general. It has been inventing and debating in political theory or philosophy theory since early modern Greece until nowadays. Justice also was adapted to be the center of explaining about the right regime that is appropriate for human society.

Justice and injustice refer to the conflict in political, social, economic, equality, opportunities, and ownership, especially in the present. So, the concept of justice or injustice is the root of both political science and social science that it is necessary to know "what actually the meaning of justice is?" And "How a justice people should behave?" Based on the concept of Plato from the Republic.

In the Republic, Book I, Plato showed that Socrates argued with other political theorists on the meaning of justice. He indicated that Cephalus had defined, justices are to speak the truth and to keep the promise as said, "It is the truth and giving back what a man has taken from another." which Socrates argued but does not say what justice is. After that, Thrasymachus had defined justice as an advantage of the stronger (Parents), which means justice depended on what the stronger determines that what is right? What is wrong? To let people do it. Justice has become the benefit of the stronger, and Socrates disagreed with that. Also, Polemarchus had come up with the idea that justice is doing good to friends and harm to enemies with proposed that justice has the benefit of preserving money, which Socrates had argued against again.

In book II, Glaucon proposed that justice is the law, and consider that does justice comply with the law? If the results are good, it is justice. Adeimantus was discussing support for Glaucon. In this point, Plato did not write about Socrates would deny or argue the views of Glaucon and Adeimantus, but he mentioned that Socrates would like to explain about it after the considering of justice from various aspects. In the view of Socrates, justice was characterized by the fact that people work in accordance with their abilities and aptitudes.

From my perspective, I totally disagree with Thrasymachus and Polemarchus because what they had defined the meaning of justices seems non-justice to me. As Thrasymachus

defined that justices are an advantage of the one who is stronger, it already shows that this is not justices at all. Justices should be equal, it is not important who has more power or stronger, and agree with Socrates said, "Justice, it provides for and commands the one who is ruled." Also as Polemarchus defined the definition of justices, is to do good to friends, and harm enemies, it is absolutely injustices to me, and I agree with Socrates why he argued. At the same time, I totally agree with Cephalus because it sounds very real and makes sense in the society nowadays. Both of