The Republic Analysis

In Book I of The Republic of Plato Socrates encounters three arguments with three different interlocutors. The first of the three is Cephalus, a business man who has obtained his wealth working in the market. Given his background, Cephalus’ definition of justice is that all men must be truth tellers and give what is owed to others. Shortly after Cephalus passes the argument down to his son Polemarchus. Polemarchus inherits the argument from his father and goes on to give his definition of justice, that it is just to give to each what is owed. After a short debate Thrasymarchus jumps into the argument and gives his definition of justice as being nothing other than the advantage of the stronger. All three interlocutors present their arguments, but all fail to find the true meaning.

When Cephalus gives his defintion of justice we must ask ourselves; what has this man witnessed in his lifetime that has lead him to believe that this is the true definition of justice? To answer this we must look at how this man made a living, in this case it was through trade and commerce. Being the business man that he was, Cephalus dealt with many buyers in his lifetime. He knew that it was not just to lie about a product that he was selling in order to charge more for it. He also discovered that his business was successful because his customers paid what was owed to him and in return he gave them a product that was equivalent to the price they were paying. With this alone it is clear to see why Cephalus was sure that this was the true meaning of Justice. As we later come to discover though, Cephalus is only dealing with the non-life threatening case and this is where his definition of justice ceases to be the true meaning. Socrates then presents to him the example of a friend that comes to him and leaves a weapon in his care, promising to return for it at a later time. When this friend does return he has become a madman and enraged is demanding that Cephalus return his weapon....