    

Discuss In Detail The Plato’s Concept

Of Justice

 Amber Nayyab  January 31, 2023

 CSS Solved Political Science 2,393 Views

CSS Solved Political Science Past Papers |

Discuss In Detail The Plato’s Concept Of Justice.

The following question is a!empted by Amber

Nayyab, the top scorer in CSS Political Science
papers. Moreover, the answer is wri!en on the same
pa!ern, taught by Sir to his students, scoring the
highest marks in compulsory subjects for years. This
solved past paper question is uploaded to help
aspirants understand how to crack a topic or
question, how to write relevantly, what coherence
is, and how to include and connect ideas, opinions,
and suggestions to score the maximum.

Outline

Introduction
Understanding Plato’s Concept of Justice
Four Cardinal Virtues of Plato’s theory of
Justice
The cornerstone of Plato’s theory of
Justice: Philosopher-King
Similarity between Plato’s and Aristotle’s
views on Justice
Application of Plato’s concept of Justice in
the contemporary world 
Critical Analysis
Conclusion

Answer to the Question

Introduction

Justice is a core concept in every society, whether

ancient, medieval or modern. Justice has been the
most crucial part of a person’s morality since
immemorial. The ancient Greek philosopher, Plato,
held the same view. He considered it crucial to reach
a theory of justice. He wrote a book, “The
Republic,” describing the concept of justice.
Moreover, Plato wanted to discover the concept of
justice and its principles. In the Republic, he figured
out the universal definition of justice. Plato’s
Republic is a dialogue between his
mentor Socrates and other political philosophers
such as Cephalus, Polemarchs, Thrasymachus,
Glucagon, and others to accomplish the justice
definition. Finally, with his deliberate e#orts, Plato
provided the ideal concept of justice for all world
societies. He developed his theory based on the
imagination of the ideal state and not on actual
surveys of any particular area. It faced criticism, but
it became a torch bearer in the long run. Today, the
words “justice” and “fairness” are often used
interchangeably because they mean the same
thing. 


Justice was “one class, one duty;
one man, one work.” 

-Plato

Plato’s Theory of Justice

Greek philosophers believed that morality was a

crucial component of philosophy and that the state
was created and should exist for the sake of a
meaningful life. Plato trusted in the same dictum
and held the view that the core purpose behind the
existence of the state was to fulfil the necessities of
human life. Only the state holds the authority and
responsibility to fulfil human necessities.

Unlike other living things, humans primarily want to

live a good life rather than survive. Therefore, justice
is an essential requirement for leading a good life. A
person cannot lead a good life without meeting their
needs, and the only possible way to meet one’s
needs is through the prevalence of justice in the
state.

In the Republic, Plato discussed the concept of

justice through dialogue. It is known as
the Dialectical Method, which Plato borrowed from
his mentor, Socrates. The dialogue occurs
between Socrates, Cephalus, Polemarchus,
Thrasymachus, Glaucon etc.

Initially, Cephalus shed light on the notion of

justice. Justice, according to him, is returning the
items that were borrowed from others. Socrates
disagreed, arguing that it would be dangerous to
give a knife back to someone who is currently
insane. Therefore, giving him the knife back will hurt
him. And justice would not cause harm to anyone.

Then, Polymarchus gave another definition of

justice. He believed that justice was doing good with
friends and wrong with enemies. Socrate again
rejected this definition. He asked how a person
could know the other person was his enemy or
friend.

Then, Thrasymachus came and said justice could

be defined on the basis of power. Therefore, justice
is in the interest of the stronger. He held that justice
has no clear definition; it only depends on its
definer. For instance, A person, party or whoever
holds power will come under the definition of
justice. For instance, in North Korea, Kim Jong-un is
more powerful. Similarly, in Pakistan and India,
people have the power, and in China, one party-
Communist Party of China, has the power. So,
justice is defined by those who hold power. Socrates
again rejected it by saying that a person, party or
people cannot correctly define justice. Socrates
wanted to have one universal definition of justice.
Thrasymachus felt humiliated and left the
conversation by saying that


 “Injustice is superior to Justice. An
unjust person lives a happier life
than a just person”.

– Thrasymachus

To deny this concept, Glucagon joined the

conversation. He stated that there are three types
of goods

⦁       Goods that are desirable for their own

sake (Harmless Pleasure).
⦁       Goods that are desirable not for
themselves but for the consequences. 
⦁       Goods that are desirable for their sake
and consequences.

According to Glucagon, Justice is the second type

of good (Goods that are desirable not for
themselves but for the consequences).
But Socrates said that justice is the third type of
sound (Goods that are desirable for their sake and
consequences). To prove this, Socrates decided
first to define justice at the city level and then on an
individual level. Because “the city is the individual
writ large”, Socrate constructed an ideal city in
speech named- “Kalipolis.”

It was a simple city that originated on people’s

basic needs, centred around fulfilling basic needs
and organized around the division of labour. When
people get their necessities, they will not go further.
But Glucagon denied it and said it is a simple city.
Glucagon developed a city named “Feverish
City,” where people go beyond having necessities
of life to get luxuries and relishes in life. He asked
Socrates to describe justice in his Feverish City. 

In the Feverish City, people, in order to fulfil their

needs, want a class- Warrior class to contain the
lands of others. Similarly, a class is required to guide
this Warrior class on which land is to be a!acked
and which is not. Simply, a Ruling
class with Consciousness/ Reason guides them
toward the right goals. Another class developed in
the city with the desire/appetite, the Working
class.

So, a city is constructed and is called an Ideal

City. Socrate said just like a city, an individual also
has these three parts. Reason, Courage and
Appetite. A person driven by them in the same way
as in the city is an ideal individual. In this way, he
proved that a just person is superior to an injust
because a just person always does things in
sequence, and an unjust person has a
disharmonious soul. His parts of the soul are not in
proper order; either spirit, courage or appetite
dominate. A just person has a harmonious soul,
spirit, and appetite under the dominion of reason.

Plato held the concept that changing human nature

is di#icult, but the state can be changed to the ideal
state. Imperfect, just human being placed into an
ideal state to make the Human beings an ideal. 

Thus, a state has three parts, and when all the parts
are equal, it is said that there is justice. In this state,
every class perform its functions separately. No part
interferes with the working of the other part. 

Thus, justice is the Tripartite division of the city

soul.

  The correct ordering of the city (Each part

achieving its fullest potential)
  The proper ordering of the soul (Each part
a!ending excellence of perfection)
 A harmonious balance among all three
parts (Each part doing its work)

The state in which all the classes, Ruling, Warrior

and Working class, are organized in this particular
order is the ideal State of Plato.

Every human has all three emotions, but the degree

to which these are present varies. According to
Plato, restless and rapacious are fit for trade. Others
driven by their emotion or spirit are best suited to
become soldiers. Lastly, few find no pleasure in
worldly pursuits or victory and are satisfied in
mediation. Such beings yearn to learn. They
remained in search of truth, and according to Plato,
only these men of Wisdom are fit to rule.

Plato thinks that just like the perfect individual is the

one who has the ideal combination of desire,
emotion and knowledge, a just state is the one that
has individuals as its citizens for trade and soldiers
to rule. In the perfect state, individuals driven by
desire will lead to growth and production but would
not rule; the military armies would maintain security
but not rule. Only the individuals with no appetite to
gain material possession or power and are forces of
knowledge would become the rulers.

Thus, the dialogue ended, and if one were allowed to

suppress another, there would be complete
anarchy. Therefore, to save themselves from
su#ering and prevent injustice, men enter into a
contract to prevent injustice upon themselves or
others.

Four Cardinal Virtues of Plato’s theory of

justice

In his idea of justice, Plato identifies virtues that suit

each social class. In the social class of traders,
whose dominant trait is desire, the befi!ing virtue
of traders is temperance. In the social class of
soldiers, whose dominant trait is spirit or emotion,
the befi!ing virtue of soldiers is courage. In the
social class of Philosophers, whose dominant trait is
knowledge or intellect, Wisdom is the consistent
virtue of Philosophers. Hence, justice is the virtue
that befits the state, creates harmony in all three
social classes and is an essential aspect of human
happiness.

The first three virtues belong to the respective

three social classes; however, the fourth is a
manifestation of harmony between all three classes.
Therefore, these four virtues are also referred to as
the four Cardinal Virtues of Plato’s theory of
justice.

The cornerstone of Plato’s theory of Justice:

Philosopher-King

Plato is renowned for his unique concept of the

philosopher kings. He prescribed that the reins of
government should remain with a minimal class of
philosopher-kings who represent reason. According
to ‘The story of Philosophy’ by Will Durant, “The
industrial forces would produce, but they would not
rule; the military forces would protest, but they
would not rule; the forces of knowledge and science
and philosophy would be nourished and protected,
and they would rule.“

The similarity between Plato’s and

Aristotle’s views on justice

Both Plato and Aristotle worked on the concept of

justice because, according to them, if society lacks
justice, it will su#er. Justice requires both goodness
and a willingness to follow the rules. In human
relationships, justice represents the pinnacle of
perfection. Additionally, the spirit drove men to carry
out their responsibilities ethically. In his book
Republic Plato wrote that:


“Justice is a soul quality that
enables people to put aside their
irrational desire to experience all
pleasures and to derive a selfish
satisfaction from everything in
favour of adapting to the
performance of a single task for the
good of all.”

He further argued that:


“Justice is giving to each person
what they rightfully deserve, or, in
more formal terms, their due”. 

Plato drew a parallel between the three social

classes and the three elements of the human soul.
Each soul had a corresponding social class. A just
society recognizes and educates every individual
talent according to the dominant element in one’s
soul.

Giving each person what they deserve, or, more

formally, giving each person their due, is what
justice means—the application of Plato’s concept of
justice in the contemporary world. Plato regards
education as a man to achieve education; at
present, the one who unlocks the shekel of freedom
is justified. 

Application of Plato’s concept of justice in

the contemporary world 

Plato’s justice philosophy is still applicable to all

ages today since it is based on moral principles,
clarifies virtues, and divides social classes. However,
in the contemporary world, it is also seen that states
which are practising the virtue of justice are more
democratic and peaceful than those which are not
practising justice. For instance: In Myanmar, Sri
Lanka and Pakistan, people face hardships because
of no justice.

Critical Analysis

Plato’s concept of justice, as outlined in his famous

work “The Republic,” is one of the most widely
discussed and debated ideas in Western
philosophy. Plato argues that justice is a universal
concept that applies to both individuals and society
as a whole. He asserts that justice is achieved when
each person performs the role for which they are
best suited, leading to a harmonious and well-
functioning society. Some critics, though, say that
Plato’s idea of justice is too simple and does not
consider how complicated and nuanced people and
society are. Plato’s idea of justice may be seen as a
form of social engineering, where individuals are
expected to conform to a pre-determined societal
structure regardless of their desires or aspirations.
In any case, Plato’s concept of justice continues to
be a subject of much discussion and study.

Conclusion:

The Philosophy of Justice is well-known by the name

of Plato’s theory of Justice. He gives the concept
that each structural component is assigned to a
di#erent artisan throughout construction, but the
architect mixes them to contribute to the building’s
final design and enhance its beauty. The three
social classes in the state: Trader, Soldier, and
Philosopher would nurture the three cardinal
virtues of temperance, courage, and Wisdom. In
contrast, Justice, the fourth virtue, would serve as
the architect for creating an ideal society. Plato’s
idea is also known as the Architectonic Theory of
Justice because of the correlation between
architecture and the structure of society. Plato
believes that Justice is a prerequisite for living a
decent life, to sum up. It supports people’s
happiness. His most well-known work, The Republic,
illuminates his view of Justice.

CSS Solved Past Papers’ Essays


Looking for the last ten years of CSS
and PMS Solved Essays and want to
know how Sir Kazim’s students write
and score the highest marks in the
essays’ papers? Then, click on the
CSS Solved Essays to start reading
them.

CSS Solved Essays

CSS Solved General Science & Ability Past

Papers


Want to read the last ten years’
General Science & Ability Solved Past
Papers to learn how to a!empt them
and to score high? Let’s click on the
link below to read them all freely. All
past papers have been solved by Miss
Iqra Ali & Dr Nishat Baloch, Pakistan’s
top CSS GSA coach having the
highest score of their students. 


General Science & Ability
Solved Past Papers

CSS Solved Pakistan A"airs Past Papers


Want to read CSS Pakistan A#airs
Solved Past Papers and learn how to
a!empt them to score high? Let’s
click on the link below to read them all
freely. All past papers’ questions have
been a!empted by Sir Kazim’s
students, who scored the highest in
the subject.

CSS Solved Pakistan A!airs

CSS Solved International Relations’ Past

Papers


Have you opted for International
Relations in the CSS examination and
want to score above 150? Then, click
on the CSS Solved International
Relations’ Past Papers by Miss
Abeera Fatima, the top IR scorer and
the best IR coach in Pakistan. 

CSS Solved International Relations Past

Papers

Articles Might Interest You!