The novel was completed in 370 B.C., and it describes a strong debate between Socrates and five other speakers. The two main arguments that he illustrates in this novel are that a ruler cannot obtain more power than the state, and that a philosopher is best suited to rule a nation since he has the ability to maintain this balance. Also, Socrates claims that only the philosopher has traveled beyond the “cave” of worldly desires and temptations to discover what justice really is.

Socrates continues with his argument by saying that persons of worth should be given the greatest respect and authority, which includes the Greek gods as well. This act will most definitely lead to injustice. Socrates polishes off the remainder of his argument by stating that the way of life of a man should be a guardian of the State; for they have courage and are never too lazy to protect the city from an enemy. The men who have plenty of possessions, however, become greedy and turn against their fellow citizens. During Socrates’s argument, in my opinion, Adeimantus looks to be stupefied by Socrates’s great wisdom and knowledge, and how Socrates takes simple points and develops them to defend his argument. However, Adeimantus(unlike the cowardly Thrasymachus) continued to participate in the debate, although saying little much than phrases agreeing with Socrates’s arguments.

Socrates, after the previous argument, goes on to say that there is a difference between what the eyes see and what the mind sees. According to Socrates, the eyes “see both small and great, but in a confused manner.”(Book VII, section 524) What this means is that the eyes alone cannot distinguish what is right from what is wrong since they contribute to many sins, such as lust, coveting, and several others. After this statement, Socrates claims that the mind “was compelled to reverse the process, and look at small and great as separate and not confused.” (Book VII, section 524). What this means is that the mind, with the aid of wisdom and knowledge, can sense right from wrong easily. After all of Socrates’s arguments about justice, Socrates concludes his entire debate by describing what he calls “a perfect State.” This perfect land was The type of government in this State is democracy(where people rule the land) because then the people can obtain plenty of freedom to achieve their own pleasures without being pushed around by a superior force. In democracy also is equality, since people rule the government, and there is no reason for a man to be treated as an inferior by a fellow citizen. What the State does not have is a tyrant, which Socrates goes into great detail about in Book IX. The tyrant, as Socrates describes, is unable to satisfy anyone but himself. Therefore he has few, if any, friends. The tyrant is also a ruthless ruler; he is hard-hearted and will not forgive anyone of doing wrong to him. Finally, Socrates points out that, in his perfect State, philosophers will always have the advantage over other types of rulers because they have wisdom and knowledge, wh

Some topics in this essay:
Adeimantus Glaucon, God Supreme, , Finally Socrates, Thrasymachus Book, Book VII, Socrates Socrates, According Socrates, Thrasymachus Injustice, Glaucon Socrates, wisdom knowledge, socrates’s arguments, modern world, claim philosophers, wisdom understanding, socrates goes, claim philosophers actually, justice socrates, socrates builds, socrates’s argument, injustice justice, philosophers actually philosophers, vii section 524, section 524 means, socrates continues argument,