Class Notes (834,049)
Canada (508,296)
Philosophy (612)
PHL 101 (41)


4 Pages
Unlock Document

PHL 101
Julien Beillard

CPHL 101 Jan 24, 2011 Republic, Book I contdBook II Book I contd: Thrasymachus: Might is right T proposes his own definition: morality = the advantage of the stronger party. His argument: 1. The stronger party = the party with political power (i.e., the power to make and enforce laws). 2. The laws define what is moral in a given society. 3. The laws serve the interests of the stronger party. Therefore, 4. What is moral = whatever is in the interests of a given society. What exactly is T doing? Maybe this is meant as a cynical unmasking of high sounding talk about morality. Alternatively, he might be a kind of Nietzschean, inverting traditional values. On this view, he is appropriating the traditional concept of morality and applying it to something radically different just those things that would traditionally be considered immoral. * There may be two different things under discussion here. On the one hand, theres actual justice: the class of institutions or practices that are called just. Think of the Canadian justice system. On the other hand, theres the concept or ideal of justice. (At least, one might argue that there is such a thing. Certainly Plato or Socrates would say that there is or just assume that there is.) Is T merely offering a definition of actual justice (i.e., the things that are called just)? If so, its not clear that his definition is relevant to the discussion. Everyone would agree that actual justice falls short of ideal justice. Whats in question here, one might argue, is the nature of the ideal. Is T saying or assuming that actual justice = ideal justice? If so, thats a controversial assumption that needs an argument. * Notice the difference between meaning and reference. Facts about what people call morality or justice may not be enough to establish the nature of justice, i.e., the concept they have in mind. And they may even be wrong about what their concept refers to. (Think of the case of pre-scientific uses of the word water.) Maybe T is saying that theres actual justice, but no ideal justice. But that too would need an additional argument.
More Less

Related notes for PHL 101

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.