The Republic pp. 15-29

1. Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms.” In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?

• rulers may often be mistaken about their own interest
  
• rulers might be wrong
• rules might make bad laws

2. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?

T: --pursuing self interest and injustice pays better than justice and political power is exploiting one class over another

S: --true rulers pursue their subjects' interests but it is natural to pursue self interest

3. In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

In my opinion, you should only harm someone if they have harmed you because if a person starts something then the person needs to be taught a lesson through the same way you were injured. Then the person would know how you feel. Until the person learns the lesson, you should keep repeating the process. Socrates would probably ask me to clarify what I meant and he would think differently. He might ask me "do you think it is right to try and teach this lesson through hurting somebody or do you think you could solve it in a better way." Socrates would say that mentally solving things is a lot less damaging to others. Thrasymachus would probably say that I was wrong and that I shouldn't harm someone no matter what they do to you. You should always just do what is right. If the person did something wrong, they will pay for the consequences. You shouldn't take things into your own hands.