Textbook Notes (280,000)
CA (160,000)
UTSG (10,000)
Chapter Study Questions

POL200Y1 Chapter Notes - Chapter Study Questions: Glaucon, Nonverbal Communication, Frenemy

Political Science
Course Code
Clifford Orwin
Study Questions

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 2 pages of the document.
I. After Thrasymachus' powerful speech at 343a-344c, Socrates rescues the situation by floating once
again the "artisan in the strict sense" (345b-347e). This time, however, he must also introduce a new
art, the money making art. Has he succeeded in refuting Thrasymachus? Or has he only seemed to
do so?
I think that although he may not have solved the question at hand, he has successfully refuted
Thrasymachus’ point as beforehand the idea that the just man is fueled by the honour and compensation
provided by actly justly was never brought up, and so this brings forth the idea that a just man isn’t just for
the sake of being a just man, but for the sake of receiving its benefits.. Socrates proves Thrasymachus
wrong in claiming “no one wishes to rule voluntarily, but they demand wages as though the benefit from
ruling were not for them but for those who are ruled” (pg. 23. 345 e), and later that “no art of kind of rule
provides for its own benefit, but…it provides for and commands the one who is ruled - considering his
advantage - that of the weaker - and not of the stronger.” (pg. 24. 346 e).
II. At 350cd Thrasymachus, who entered the discussion so fearlessly, engages in some non-verbal
communication: he blushes. (Socrates never blushes, in this dialogue or any other.) What does this
blush teach us about Thrasymachus? Why does he blush at just this point in the discussion?
I believe that Thrasymachus blushes here because his original point, which he claimed not only to be
irrefutable but that Socrates could never create a well-cultivated response and instead was only able to
listen, has been proven wrong in both respects. Socrates here appeals to ethical consistency, embarrassing
Thrasymachus for contradicting himself in his own propositions.
III. Dissatisfied with both Thrasymachus’ critique of justice and Socrates’ defense of it, Glaucon derides
Thrasymachus’ claim that justice is the advantage of the stronger. What is it in fact, according to
him? And what does he demand that Socrates show that it is? Glaucon is a complicated guy. Is he
the enemy of justice, or its friend? Its frenemy?
Glaucon plays the devil’s advocate, essentially claiming that since “the seeming overpowers even the truth
and is the master if happiness, one must surely turn wholly to it.” (pg. 42. 365c). He essentially claims that
good comes in three forms: 1) a good that everyone likes for its own sake, 2) a good everyone likes both for
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version