Reflection On The Republic Of Plato

Reflection on the Republic of Plato

The first book of the Republic of Plato begins with the dialogue that Socrates establishes with céfal. He replies that the advantage it brings is to pay debts and that what worries human beings is to have been fair or unfair in life, they continue talking and in the end they reach an agreement, but the dialogue continues, in this case speakingof justice and at this time polemarco is added and zéfalo leaves, the definition that Polemarco gives in summary that justice is to favor the good and harm the bad. To which transimaco rebates saying that justice will be as it suits the one who has more power. I think about the first theme discussed, that old age brings many things, in addition to rewards, also has bad things, for example diseases and above all it is very common in advanced age loneliness, which I think is one of the worst sensations, becauseAn old man who has no family or who are not going to visit him has this problem, which brings things that do not like as much as the advantages that he also has. 

In addition, I agree with a cloth that everyone takes things as they want and that if someone takes it very bad it is because it is in it, because as you look you can enjoy or you can have a bad time in this last stage and I think like everythingIn life everything is a matter of perspective and a different vision about the world. On the dialogue that tried justice, I am less clear what I think, just like Socrates affirms the end of this book, I know nothing safely, but my humble opinion is that each one should obtain their justice to the extent that corresponds to him, because for example, like Trasimaco, he affirmed, there are people who do justice as they come to them well, without looking for the interests of others, and that is inevitable in today’s society, but on the other hand I think noYou have to reach the extreme, because there are always bad people in the middle of those who are good and like the dictators, the rulers of the tyrannies, etc.

They are, as Socrates, doctors, nurses, firefighters, captains of a ship … who do not do what everyone is appropriate because they suck them, and it is true that they pay them to do their job, but save the life of a patient, getting a family out of a fire or reaching port with the crew not only suits those people but all of whom they are working, with this I mean that not everyone is the same, nor do we all seek only and exclusively ourinterests at justice, nor do we all think of others. 

That is why I say that defining what the concept of justice is is more complicated and there may be many different points of view that not all have to be wrong, but that each one can have their part of reason and part of truth. Although I believe that justice is a virtue because doing something as fair as possible for all is something that not everyone can do and that for that reason if someone possesses it can become happy, because doing good,I think it fills you inside and makes you feel better. But of course the person who does not possess it is not very clear if he would be an unfortunate. Because maybe for that individual the concept of justice is not the same as the one who has the one that we think he possesses his virtue.