..

Ali Ihsan Naldoken

20102459

section

WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE JUSTICE

This essay will analyse the nature of the justice in two texts. Definition of nature is, in Oxford dictionary, “the essential qualities or properties of a thing; the inherent and inseperable combination of properties essentially pertaining to anything and giving it its fundemental character.”. Justice is defined, in Oxford dictionary, that “the quality of being (morally) just or righteous; the principle of just dealing; the exhibition of this quality or principle in action; just conduct; integrity, rectitude.”. through these definitons and meanings in the texts meaning of nature of justice is; what the justice is which the ways are to reach the justice. First of the texts is Republic which was written by Plato. Other text is Nichomachean Ethics which was written by Aristotle. Firstly, I will identify the texts and I will give textual context about these texts. In the textual context I will give information about types of the texts, author of the texts, date and place of composition, readers of the text, structure of the text and subject of the texts. Then I will mention the historical context of the texts. After this part, I will explain the purpose of the texts. Finally, I will focus on the style ofthe texts that how the style contributes the purpose of the text. In two texts both of Plato and Aristotle could not find that what the absolute justice is.  

Republic is a book that involves advices. Republic is a philosophical dialogue. The theme of the book is ‘justice’. Plato is destroying all of the false definitions by analyzing the nature of the justice in book-1. Plato was an Athenian Nobleman. He was a Greek poet and Aristocrat. He became a philosopher when he met Socrates. There isn’t any work that was written by Socrates. Information about Socrates is limited with the Republic, because there is no information about Socrates except the Republic. Because of this, we can not know ideas are belonging  to Plato or Socrates. Plato traveled very much and he used these government’s styles, while he was writing the Republic. He established the Gymnasium through philosophy to train governors in 380 BC. This book is formed by dialogues and these dialogues was set in a festival. It is written in the book that “ I went down to the Piraeus yesterday with Glaucon. I intended to say a prayer to the goddess, and I also wanted to see how they would manage the festival, since this was the it’s first celebration.”( P:1). Also, this dialogue was taken place about 410 BC. It is written in the book that “ The whole discussion is probably supposed to have taken place about 410 BC” (P:2). Readers of the text are the students who belong to Plato. These dialogues were told in lectures to the students to make the issues understandable. All of the book is formed through dialogues therefore, readers can understand the issue and readers can pay attention to the text. There are four man characters in the text. These characters are Socrates, Cephalus, Polemarchus and Thresmachus. Socrates talks with all of these to find the nature of the justice in this order. The book is divided into numbers and those numbers were divided into letters. You can find these numbers and letters. Republic is formed by 10 books and this is the first book of the Republic.

Plato lived in the boundary of the Athenian Empire. In this area, there were classes. For example “Polemarchus saw us from a distance as we were setting off for home he told his slave to run and bid us wait for him”(pg 2-b). Athens wants slaves to do their works instead of them, slaves works for Athenians. Therefore, the Athenian government is called an empire. In this period, there were cities that are governed like a government or an empire. For example “Then, in their celebration to the city; when taxes are to be paid, from the same income the just man pay more, the others less; but, when the benefits are to be received, the one gets nothing while the other profits much.”(pg 20-d) There is a city here instead of a government or an empire and people give their taxes to the governor of the city and people can benefit from sources of this city. These cities are independent and each of these cities have their own system. In this period there are also princes. For example “Yes, he said those who are able to carry in justice through to the end who can bring cities and communities of men under their power.”(pg 24-d) Princes govern the cities for empire and they govern the cities despotically. They can make decisions as they wished. Athenian empire was occurred by the sum of 150 Greek city-states. Athenian empire was governed through radical democracy. Athenian empire was radical democratic because people can participate to the politics directly. On the other hand, people, who are not male and citizen cannot vote to declare their own ideas about the city.

In the text, nature of the justice depends on having a good life. Peace and freedom provide having a good life. You have peace and freedom when you escape from plessure of sex, drink and feast. Generally, young people assume that   the plessure of the life and the aim of the life is having sex, drink and going to the feasts, also they assume that you should have these habits to have a good life. However, you should look for having a good life opposite side of these habits, because, Cephalus says that “ Socrates, I do not think they blame the real cause. For if old age were the cause, then I should suffered in the same way and so, would all others who have reached my age.”(P:4-b). People both young and old can have a good life, if they have moderated and contented life or they can not show patience against to the life. According to the Cephalus, “ Wealth has it’s greatest value, not for everyone, but for a good and well-ballanced man. Not to have lied to or deceived anyone even unwillingly, not to depart yonder in fear, owing either sacrifices to a god or money to a man: to this wealth makes a great contribution.”( P:6-b). Bearing old age in poverty is not a simple issue, because people have some necessities to be alive. They should eat something, they should stay somewhere, ect. , so they should have some money to pay their necessities. However, you may not solve your problems when you have wealth during he old age. If people spend money for having sex, drink and behaving harmly, this wealth does not help people to bear the old age. Wealth helps people only to sacrifice for god or to die without going into debt.

According to Polemarchus “ Justice is to give each man what is proper to him.” (P:7-a). Also he added that “ It is just to benefit the friend who is good and to harm the enemy who is bad.” (P:11-a). Polemarchus believes that one owes it to one’s friend to do good to them and not harm. Being good is to benefit only your friend and harming to your enemy does not affect your goodness. However, according to Socrates “ It is never justice to harm anyone” (P:12-a). A craft is being best in a particular issue. Goodness is a craft that people are the best in making good and behaving in a good way. If you benefit only your friends and harm to your  enemies it may not be goodness, because sometimes we confuse who are our friends and who are our enemies, so we may benefit our enemies and harm our friends while we are wanting just opposite of this situation. Also, the justice can not make injustice by the practice of the justice, because the duty and the feature of the justice is to make justice, not injustice; so just and good people can not make injustice. Injustice is the feature and the duty of the unjust and bad people. According to Thrasymachus “ The just is nothing else than the advantage of strong”(P:14-c). Each governments make laws to it’s own advantage. Governments make laws and declare these laws as they are necessary to be just for the subject, but these laws protect only the advantages of governors. Also, governors punish people who act against to the laws, as he is unjust. However, Socrates is against to this opinion and states that “It is just to do not only what is to the advantage of the stronger but also the opposite, what isn’t to their advantage.”(pg 15-d). Because governors are people and people may make mistake while they are legislate laws, which are suitable to their advantages. So, sometimes laws, which are assumed that they are suitable, are not suitable for governors’ advantages. Thrasymachus adds that “It is when the knowledge of his craft leaves him that he errs, and at that time he isn’t a practitioner of it. ”(pg 17-e) When you have craft, it means that you do not make mistake about this issue, if you make mistake about this issue you cannot say that you have a craft. So, if a person is a governor either he doesn’t make mistake about governing or he isn’t a governor. Therefore, all decisions and laws that are made by governors always advantageous of strongers. On the other hand, Socrates is against to this opinion and he states that “No governor in any kind of government in so far as he is a ruler, seeks what is to his own advantage or orders it, but that which is to the advantages of his subject who is the concern of his craft it is this he keeps in view.”(pg 23-a). Because existence of a craft is not because of the advantages of man who has this craft, existence of a craft is because of the advantages of subject, which is the concern of the craft. And no science of any kind seeks or orders it is own advantage, but that of the weaker which is subject to it and governed by it. So the just is nothing that the advantages of the governed people.

In ancient Greece sacrifice for god was very important and there was an idea of underworld. For example “when a man approaches the time when he thinks he will die, he becomes fearful and concerned about thing which he didn’t fear before. It is then that the story is we are told about the underworld, which he ridiculed before –that the man who has sinned here will pay the penalty there- torture his mind lest they be true”(pg 5-d). They were religious and they believed that there is a god or gods and they will be judged through their behaviors in the world. They want god to forgive their bad behaviors by sacrificing. Also according to Socrates “the gods too, my friend, are just”(pg 29-a) Socrates emphasizes that justice is relevant with religion. He cannot think the idea of justice is independent from the religion and he thinks that gods are absolute just. We will be judged underworld by gods because they see and know whatever we do in the world. So only they can judge us justly. In the text, Polemarchus criticizes the method of Socrates. For example, “What non sense have you two been talking, Socrates? Why do you play the fool in thus in giving way to each other? If you really want to know what justice is, don’t only ask questions and then score off anyone who answers, and refute him you know very well that is much easier to ask questions than to answer them.”(pg 12-b). Polemarcus use abusive language to criticize Socrates. Socrates asks questions to establish the meaning of the idea, because meaning of the justice is known wrongly and he wants to destroy all of the false definition of the justice. He learns meaning of the justice accepted by people and he collapses these ideas through finding the wrongs of their definitions. In the text, Socrates states that “justice is excellence of the soul and that injustice is vice of soul.”(pg 31-e). According to Platonic Dualism, there is an immortal soul and mortal body. He says in the theory of forms that idea of justice is always there before the existence. Justice is an absolute idea and universal idea.that cannot be changed. In the world, soul remember the justice and people makes decisions according to their soul. Soul is used to take care off things, to rule, to deliberate and if you have justice soul, you will do these activities justly, so you live well. On the other hand, if you have injustice soul, you will do these activities unjustly, so you will live badly. In the text, Thrasymachus said that “you must not only learn but pay the fee.”(pg 13-d) Thrasymachus is a sophist. Due to this, he used argumentative aggressive speech also he wants money to teach the truth, because sophist teaches to earn money. However, Socrates does not want money to teach, he only wants to find the nature of the justice, because he isn’t sophist.

Socrates use metaphors in his dialogues. For example “as from those who traveled along a road, which we too will probably have to follow, we should enquire from them what kind of a road it is, whether rough and difficult or smooth and easy.”(pg 3-e). Socrates use metaphor here to make his speech carefully. He compare the life with travel and he compare rough with the difficulties and sadness of the life and he compare the smooth of the road with the happiness of the life. Again in the text Thrasymachus said that “Bravely enjoy your feast of words.”(pg 29-b). he compare their dialogue with a feast that involves kinds of food and enjoyable activities and he wants Socrates to entertain himself in this feast. Plato use the interruptions and question in his book, because he wants his students to pay attention to the issue. For example “While we were speaking, Thrasymachus often started to interrupt, but he was restrained by those who were sitting by him, for they waned to hear argument to the end”. (pg 12-b). Socrates explained his idea Polemarchus and they understand each other, so they assumed that they found the nature of the justice. However, they missed some aspects of the truth and Plato use the interruption and question to continue the dialogue through another aspect and also Plato keep his students from the routine of the dialogue and maintain his students to pay attention. Socrates use humours in his book. For example “But you too, Thrasymachus have given an answer that the just is the advantageous where as you forbade that answer home. True, you have added the words of the stronger” (pg 15-a). Socrates emphasizes that Thrasymachus does not obey his rule. Firstly Socrates criticizes him because of his disobeying his rule, then Socrates defends him because of adding words ‘of the stronger’ and Socrates makes laugh his students by emphasizing the addition of the words as if this addition justifies Thrasymachus. Plato uses digression in his book. For example “I should gladly learn from you what you think about this, as you have reached in life which the poets call ‘the threshold of old age’, whether it is a difficult part of life or how your experience would describe it to us. ”(pg 3-e). Socrates wants Cephalus to explain what the nature of the justice is according to him, but he didn’t ask this question directly firstly Socrates wants him to explain how the life is then he wants Cephalus to explain his idea about the nature of the justice.

Nichomachean Ethics is a philosophic conservation. The theme of Nichomachean is happiness. Aristotle tries to explain what is happiness and how can it be achieved? Aristotle’s father, Nichamachus, was a master of the medical science of this time. Because of these, he can stay as a physician to the king, Amyntas, at the Macedonian court in Pelle Aristotle started to take lesson from Plato in 17 years old at Athens Academy. When he left this school he became the teacher of the Alexander the Great. His writing were divided into two parts; one of the is Acroestic which is learnt by students and the other one is Exoteric which is learnt by general public. Exoteric was written before Acroestic. Due to these, Greeks know only Exoteric, they don’t know Acroestic. Nichomachean Ethics-1 is divided into 13 chapters Aristotle explains different issues and replies different questions in these chapters, which are relevant, the main subject. Aristotle wants to make understandable his book by dividing the text into chapters. He gives the theme of the chapters at the top of the chapters, so readers can understand issue through these themes. Aristotle does not separate ethics from politics.

Aristotle says, “The masses take it to be something plain and tangible, like pleasure or money or social standing. Some maintain that it is one of these, some that it is another, and some man will change his opinion about it more than once. When he has caught an illness he will stay that it is health, and when he is hard up he will say that it is health, and when he is hard up he will say that it is money.”(Chapter 4). Aristotle states that good is created by human beings and it reaches to the best form at the end of the action. Because of this, people change their opinion about happiness during their life. Also, happiness is changeable people to people, because people create happiness and all of the people are in different situations and have different life aspects of life. Aristotle states that “You might as well say that a white thing which lasts long time is whiter than one which lasts only a day.”(Chapter 6) Also, Aristotle added that ”There is another condition of happiness; it can not be achieved in less than a complete lifetime… And one day, or indeed any brief period of felicity, does not make a man entirely happy ”.(Chapter 7) There is a love of infinity in this part of the book. According to Aristotle good should be infinite, because good is the best form of action When an action reaches to the goodness at the end, then it must be infinite if a thing is finite, it can not be good. Aristotle says that “For man is a social animal.” (Chapter 7) According to Aristotle happiness, the end to which all our conscious acts are directed is found to be something, final and self-sufficient. Aristotle studies man as a species, because according to Aristotle “a self-sufficient thing then we take to be one which on its own footing tends to make life desirable and locking in nothing.”(Chapter 7) Aristotle argues that “to call happiness he highest good is a truism. We want a more distinct account of what it is. We might arrive at this if we could grasp what is meant by the ‘function’ of a human being.”(Chapter 7) He wants to find function of human being, because he thinks that making your own function is the way of goodness and happiness, so If Aristotle find the function of human being he can find the way of happiness. In the text Aristotle make a quotation from a religious source that “it meet all these qualities which are separately enumerated in the inscription upon the temple at Delos:”(Chapter 8) According to this quotation, there is a connection about pleasure aspect of happiness and justice between Aristotle ideas and religious perspective. Both of them says that justice is the best thing for human being in the case of taking pleasure from the life. Aristotle states that “we are not prepared to call the living happy because of the chopping and changing of fortune and because we have got it into our head that happiness is something permanent and hard to change, although in fact the wheel of fortune is often turned full circle for the same people!”(Chapter 10) There is a belief of fate in this question. All of us will have the best form of goodness at the end of our lives. Also we have some difficulties in our lives, but these difficulties may change people to people, because everybody has different fate and everybody will have the best form of the goodness through their fate.

Aristotle says that “now it would no doubt be a waste of time to examine all these opinions; enough we consider these which are almost in evidence or have something to be said for them.”(Chapter 4). He makes generilaztion in his book so he can have proper and doubtless way to work is to draw an outline and fill in the details. Also he use metaphors to make people and his students understood. For example, “That is to make the happy man ‘a chameleon’ ”(Chapter 8). He emphasizes people as a chameleon, because feature of chameleon is to change its colors according to events and situations. Also, people change their opinions and senses according to situations. People sometimes may be happy because of the direction of the souls energy to the moral principles. And people sometimes may be un happy because of the direction towards evil. Aristotle’s book is more scientific contreory to Plato’s book, Republic. Aristotle use scientific definitions and he writes through the formal form. For example “Using technical language we may predicate good in the categories of substances, quality, quantity, relation, time, space,…”.

There are different in 2 texts. Plato says that “The just soul and the just man, then, will live well, and unjust men will live badly”(31-e). He claims that people should only be justice if they want to be happy and they want to live well. On the other hand, according to Aristotle that quantity, quality, relation place, date, posture, possession, action, justice affect the happiness. He claims that not only the justice is necessary for being happy, but also the other features are necessary for being happiness. Aristotle states that “happiness then, the end of which all our conscious acts are directed, is found to be something final.”(Chapter 7). Aristotle believes that justice is created through human action. There is an absolute good, but this good existed at the end of the human action. According to Aristotle, happiness is at the end of the life. However, Plato argues that “Justice is excellence of the soul”(pg 31-e). He believes that there is a universal idea of justice and this idea always there before existence. In Platonic dualism, there is only immortal soul and there is mortal body. According to Plato, soul remembers the justice and justice is always there. Plato does not like epic poetries, because he believes that these epic poetries stop to think. On the other hand, Aristotle likes epic poetries; because he wants to train politicians who are going to be govern the state in the future. Plato states that there exist metaphysical forms that explain all things. Through this conception everything, which is good, is appropriate to the form of the good. Aristotle does not accept this idea, because sees this like a form of mysticism. Forms of Plato are thing that cannot be comprehended from this world; they cannot be observed, but only thought by the intellect. The opinion of Aristotle that observation is the only way to understanding. Therefore he feels that Plato was incorrect to disagree sensory observations in obeying the theory of forms.

To conclude; both of Plato and Aristotle can not find the absolute justice, because it is written in republic that “I, before finding the answer to our first enquiry into the nature of justice, let that go on and turned to investigate whether it was vice and ignorance or wisdom and virtue.” (pg 31-e). Also, Aristotle was dealing only with the details. For example “…Yet he will do so only as far as his own problems make it necessary; to go into greater detail on the detail on the subject would hardly be worth the labor spent on it”(Chapter 13). It is an empty work to search the nature of justice, because everything, which belongs to world, is fuzzy. Everything depends on relativity. Because of this we cannot find absolute judgment like the nature of the justice. We can only compare 2 things and we can only find which is more just that the other.a”1risto ethics – plato – the republic

…