Plato's Republic: An Essay on Glaucon's Challenge and Socrates' Reply

This essay delves into Plato's Republic, focusing on Glaucon's challenge to Socrates' definition of justice. Glaucon presents arguments questioning the inherent value of justice, positing that individuals only practice it to avoid punishment and weakness, and challenges Socrates by dividing goods into three categories. The essay analyzes Glaucon's points on the origin of justice, its instrumental nature, and the perceived superiority of an unjust life. Socrates responds by arguing that a just city is more successful than an unjust one, drawing parallels between individual and societal justice. However, the essay highlights that the arguments presented by Socrates fail to fully answer Glaucon's challenge, relying more on a persuasive account of justice as a personal virtue rather than strong logical claims, ultimately leaving the central questions unanswered. The essay concludes that both Plato and Socrates accepted the definition and elements presented by Glaucon.

The Republic

Table of Contents
ESSAY.............................................................................................................................................3
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................5

ESSAY
Republic is a book written by Western philosophers over justice or injustice, moral or
immoral and in this Glaucon defines that “Justice is not a thing which is to be practices for own
sake but something in which an individual get involves to get out of fear and weakness”.
Glaucon challenges consists of three main point in which first point challenges over the
conception of justice and it origin which is presented by the Socrates and making it more
difficult to disapprove. The second point state that the justice was only an instrumental good.
The final point he provide also holds main thesis where Glucon's challenge state that the unjust
life of an individual is better than the just one.
The Glaucon's challenge which he present over Socrates like a trap where if one get
agrees with a statement then he/she would have to get agree with rest of the arguments. The
arguments provided by the Glaucon are in a manner that it is a manner of asking Socrates to
define justice in some another way (Fanning, 2018). Further expanding his argument, Glaucon
divide good things in three classes such as things an individual desire only for consequences,
things that one desire for own sake only and things one desire for own sake and what they get
from them (Kuo and Ranis, 2019). This is mainly mentioned by the Glaucon to defend against
the statement of Socrates and prove that justice is not only desirable but also related with highest
class of desirable things which involves the desire of both i.e. for own sake and its consequences.
The challenge that Glaucon's give to the Socrates regarding the definition he presented within the
Republic for the justice was accepted by him in order to prove the Glaucon wrong. In order to
continue with this challenge the Socrates present his views that just city always viewed to be
most successful as compare to unjust city. He further explains that there is a kind of intelligible
relation that is present between what make a particular city successful and what make an
individual successful i.e. justice (Pegg, 2019). At this time Socrates seems to say that same
account of justice must be implemented to both the person as well as city because the F-ness of
whole is for the F-ness of its part. But on the other side the Socrates prefer to use the F-ness of a
city as a heuristic for locating F-ness within a person. At this Plato right over thinking that there
is some kind of relation between the structural feature as well as values of society and
psychological feature as well as value of person. But it also holds up much controversy about
whether this relations is really that much strong that it can sustain all of the claim which Socrates
makes for it within the Republic. But this discussion performed by the Socrates not become able

to clearly answer the challenges that Glaucon and Adeimantus has asked to the Socrates as the
answer provided does not depend logically on any kind of strong claim which is mentioned on
the ground of analogy between the person as well as cities (Fanning, 2018). Instead it more
depend over the persuasive account of justice as a kind of personal virtue and persuasive reason
that why a person always remain happy while being just as compare to one who found unjust. So
these arguments end up without clearing the challenging questions made by Glaucon and
Adeimantus and also not able to make a remark over the successful city which Socrates has
claimed as a result of justice (Pegg, 2019). Hence it can be said that the Socrates and Plato has
accepted the definition as well as element presented by the Glaucon.

REFERENCES
Books & Journals
Fanning, B., 2018. Racism and social change in the Republic of Ireland.
Kuo, S. W. and Ranis, G., 2019. The Taiwan Success Story: Rapid Growith With Improved
Distribution In The Republic Of China, 1952-1979. Routledge.
Pegg, S., 2019. International society and the de facto state. Routledge.