Plato’s republic, Socrates’ argument that it’s never just to harm.

Instructions:
Discuss only page 34, only section 335b-e. Do not include secondary sources.
A. Explain, step by step, the key premises of Socrates’s argument, the reasons he gives to support his conclusion that “it is never just to harm anyone”.
B. Present one possible critical argument of his view. Make it clear that this is not your view but a possible criticism.( for example: a critic might object to socrates by arguing that……”) Focus your Critcism on one premise( the “target premise”) in his argument, not on his conclusion. Give a specific, non controversial counterexample, explaining precisely how it shows the premises might be false. Say what kind of harm is involved and why it’s truly harm, then explain how it shows his conclusion that justice never harms may be wrong. Include brief quotations to support your Interpretation and cite their sources in a footnote or endnote.
C. Present a defense of Socrates from the criticism. Note that you don’t have to personally agree with him for example, you can write, “Socrates might answer the critic by arguing….” The reply to the critic should explain why the counterexample fails to show the target premise is false. You do not have to argue Socrates view is correct, only that it’s possible- that the critic had not proven its false.

Last Completed Projects