Western Philosophy

Plato's Republic centers on a simple question: Is it always better to be just than unjust? (Stanford College, 2003, para. 1) I believe the argument in the Republic was always imminent, after all when someone is constantly trying to interrupt someone, that usually leads to a quarrel. According to section 336b, there was already an argument in progress, that Thrasymachus was being restrained and quieted from joining the argument at hand. (" Thrasymachus. Justice as the Interest of the Stronger [336b]," n.d.)

I believe Socrates took control of the argument when Thrasymachus lost what composure

he had and lashed out like a spoiled child. Throughout the argument Socrates keeps the

argument in control with his quick wit. Thrasymachus became upset, and defensive and

offended by Socrates. Thrasymachus poses his own definition of justice, the interest of the

stronger. Thrasymachus unleashes a long rant, asserting that injustice benefits the ruler

absolutely. Thrasymachus can barely control himself. He wants to burst forth to speak.

"He coiled himself up like a wild beast about to spring, and he hurled himself at us as if

to tear us to pieces." (" Thrasymachus. Justice as the Interest of the Stronger [336b]," n.d.)

The basic reason Thrasymachus is like a caged or restrained animal is because,

Thrasymachus feels that Socrates deliberately takes the easy road with his constant

questioning to humiliate people, and that he isn't, in fact is interested in truth after all.

He tries to draw Socrates out to tell all what he thinks justice is. However, Socrates

cleverly perceives that Thrasymachus would rather speak than listen at this moment.

Socrates manages himself with distinction during Thrasymachus’ rant, which also helps

Socrates take...