|
Length: 1000 words minimum (~4 pages double spaced, but please pay attention to the word count rather than the page count).
In Plato’s Republic, Book 1, Thrasymachus makes the argument that “justice is nothing other than what is advantageous for the stronger” (Plato 2004, 15 [338b]). Argue for or against this idea. Are concepts like “justice” mere arbitrary conventions, or do they have some fixed essence or reality?
You must include at least two quotations from the discussion between Socrates and Thrasymachus in Book 1 of the Republic to support your analysis.
- Please include a citation of these. You can use any one of the major citation styles (Chicago, APA, MLA), but the simplest thing to do is just to include the author, title, and page number in parentheses after a quotation, similar to what I have in the slides (which is the Chicago Author-Date style).
- E.g. Socrates asks Thrasymachus: “doesn’t it necessarily follow that it is just to do the opposite of what you said, since the weaker are then ordered to do what is disadvantageous for the stronger?” (Plato 2004, 16 [339d-e]).
- Quotations should be kept to a reasonable length. Don’t include unnecessarily long quotations to pad your essay, but make sure that they are long enough that they make sense (both grammatically and logically) when they are removed from the context of the original source.
- It is not necessary to read or refer to texts or sources besides the ones assigned in the course. But if you do, you must cite your sources (see previous point for details). Failure to do this may constitute plagiarism.
|
