The consistency of Thrasymachus’ theses on justice in Plato’s Republic I
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_30_1Keywords:
Thrasymachus, Socrates, justice, injustice, téchne, governmentAbstract
The discussion between Thrasymachus and Socrates in Book I of Plato's Republic instead the question about justice started with Cephalus. Thrasymachus is an important character, who relates justice to the city government. This causes justice to leave individual sphere and enter public sphere. In our article, we want to verify how Thrasymachus' theses on justice and whether they are consistent with each other. The problem of consistency of theses is old among commentators and presents different solutions. Our intention is to propose a solution to the problem and to relate this to art of government proposed by Thrasymachus. This allows us to verify the manner in which Socrates and Thrasymachus differ in their proposals for government and types of ruler. In this way, our work intends to contribute with literature on the role played by Thrasymachus in Plato’s work.
Downloads
References
ADAM, J. (2009). The Republic of Plato. Edited with critical notes, commentary and appendices by James Adam. 2 vols. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. (1ed. 1902)
ALLAN, D. J. (ed.) (1940). Plato. Republic Book I. London, Methuen.
ANNAS, J. (1981). An Introduction to Plato’s Republic. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
BLOOM, A. (trans.) (1991). The Republic of Plato. New York, Basic Books. (1ed. 1968)
BORDES, J. (1982). Politeia dans la pensée grecque jusqu’a Aristote. Paris, Les Belles Lettres.
BOTER, G. J. (1986). Thrasymachus and ΠΛΕΟÎΕΞΙΑ. Mnemosyne 39, n. 3/4, p. 261-281.
CAMPESE, S. (1998). Misthotike. In: VEGETTI, M. (ed.). Platone. La Repubblica. Vol. 1. Traduzione e commento. Napoli, Bibliopolis, p. 257-268.
CHAPPELL, T. D. J. (1993). The Virtues of Thrasymachus. Phronesis 38, n. 1, p. 1-17.
CHAPPELL, T. D. J. (2000). Thrasymachus and Definition. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 18, p. 101-107.
DOBBS, D. (1985). The Justice of Socrates’ Philosopher Kings. American Journal of Political Science 29, n. 4, p. 809-826.
DORTER, K. (1974). Socrates’ Refutation of Thrasymachus and Treatment of Virtue. Philosophy & Rhetoric 7, n. 1, p. 25-46.
EVERSON, S. (1998). The Incoherence of Thrasymachus. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 16, p. 99-131.
GUINSBURG, J. (org.) (2006). A República de Platão. Rio de Janeiro, Perspectiva.
GUTHRIE, W. K. C. (2007). Os Sofistas. São Paulo, Paulus. (1ed. 1995)
HADGOPOULOS, D. J. (1973). Thrasymachus and Legalism. Phronesis 18, n. 3, p. 204-208.
HARRISON, E. L. (1967). Plato’s Manipulation of Thrasymachus. Phoenix 21, n. 1, p. 27-39.
HENDERSON, T. Y. (1970). In Defense of Thrasymachus. American Philosophical Quarterly 7, n. 3, p. 218-228.
HOURANI, G. F. (1962). Thrasymachus’ Definition of Justice in Plato’s Republic. Phronesis 7, n. 2, p. 110-120.
JAEGER, W. (2003). Paidéia. Trad. Artur M. Parreira. São Paulo, Martins Fontes.
JANG, I. H. (1997). Socrates’ refutation of Thrasymachus. History of Political Thought 18, n. 2, p. 189-206.
JOSEPH, H. W. B. (1948). Knowledge and the Good in the Republic. Westport, Greenwood Press.
JOSEPH, H. W. B. (1995). Plato’s Republic: The Argument with Thrasymachus. In: IRWIN, T. H. (ed.). Classical Philosophy: Collected Papers. Vol. 3 ”“ Plato’s Ethics. New York/London, Garland Publishing, p. 21-40.
KERFERD, G. B. (1964). Thrasymachus and Justice: a Reply. Phronesis 9, n. 1, p. 12-16.
KERFERD, G. B. (1976). The Doctrine of Thrasymachus in Plato’s Republic. In: CLASSEN, C. J. Sophistik. Wege der Forschung. Band 187. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, p. 545-563. (Pub. orig. 1947, Durham University Journal, v. 40, p. 19-27.)
KERFERD, G. B. (1981). The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
KLOSKO, G. (1981). The Technical Conception of Virtue. Journal of the History of Philosophy 19, n. 1, p. 95-102.
KLOSKO, G. (1984). Thrasymachos’ Eristikos: The Agon Logon in Republic I. Polity 17, n. 1, p. 5-29.
MAGUIRE, J. P. (1971). Thrasymachus ”“ or Plato? Phronesis 16, n. 2, p. 142-163.
NAWAR, T. (2018). Thrasymachus’ Unerring Skill and the Arguments of Republic 1. Phronesis 63, p. 359-391.
NICHOLSON, P. P. (1974). Unravelling Thrasymachus’ Arguments in The Republic. Phronesis 19, n. 3, p. 210-232.
NOVITSKY, D. (2009). Thrasymachus on the Relativity of Justice. Polis 26, n. 1, p. 11-30.
PENNER, T. (2009). Thrasymachus and the ὡς ἀληθῶς Ruler. Skepsis 20, p. 206-207.
PEREIRA, M. H. R. (trad.) (2001). Platão. A República. 9ed. Lisboa, Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
REEVE, C. D. C. (1985). Socrates Meets Thrasymachus. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 67, n. 3, p. 246-265.
REEVE, C. D. C. (2006a). Philosopher-Kings. The Argument of Plato’s Republic. Indianapolis/Cambridge, Hackett Publishing Company. (Reprint; 1ed. 1988)
REEVE, C. D. C. (2006b). Goat-Stags, Philosopher-Kings, and Eudaimonism. Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 22, p. 185-209.
REEVE, C. D. C. (2008). Glaucon’s Challenge and Thrasymacheanism. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34, p. 69-103.
ROMILLY, J. (2002). La Loi dans la Pensée Grecque. Paris, Les Belles Lettres.
ROOCHNIK, D. (1986). Socrates’s use of the Techne-Analogy. Journal of the History Philosophy 24, n. 3, p. 295-310.
ROOCHNIK, D. (1996). Of Art and Wisdom. Plato’s Understanding of Techne. University Park, The Pennsylvania State University Press.
SANTAS, G. (2010). Understanding Plato’s Republic. Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell.
SLINGS, S. R. (2003). Platonis Rempvblicam. Recognovit brevique adnotatione critica instrvxit. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
SPARSHOTT, F. E. (1966). Socrates and Thrasymachus. The Monist 50, n. 3, 421-459.
SPARSHOTT, F. E. (1988). An Argument for Thrasymachus. Apeiron 21, n. 1, p. 55-67.
VEGETTI, M. (ed.) (1998). Platone. La Repubblica. Vol. 1. Traduzione e commento. Napoli, Bibliopolis.
![Archai 30 (2020 [3])](https://periodicos.unb.br/public/journals/2/cover_issue_2020_en_US.png)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Luiz Maurício Bentim da Rocha Menezes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
