Introduction
Socrates, one of the greatest philosophers of ancient Greece, presented his statement about crafts, arguing that they are all selfless and directed only for the advantage of what they operate on. However, in Thrasymachus in the Republic, I used a shepherd as a counterexample to refute this claim. In response to this example, Socrates rejected Thrasymachus’ tale, arguing that shepherding was sheep care for sheep. However, how plausible Socrates’ analysis of shepherds is is a fascinating question.
The First Argument
Socrates offers an interesting argument, arguing that the shepherd’s care for his flock is only for the good of the animals. After all, the shepherd cares about feeding, protecting, and the general well-being of sheep (Everson). However, it can be observed that the shepherd has personal interests related to his profession. The shepherd benefits from selling sheep’s wool, milk, and meat. This raises doubts as to whether shepherding is an exceptionally selfless activity.
In contrast, Socrates, citing the shepherd as an example, emphasizes the principle of caring for other beings (Everson). He calls for selfless activities in which a man puts the appeals of others above his own. In this case, even if the shepherd receives some benefit, his main motivating principle will still be related to the well-being of the sheep.
The Second Argument
Concerning Socrates’ argument about rulers, the principles that govern rulers can be criticized. In some cases, rulers pursue only their interests or those of a narrow group rather than those of their subjects (Everson). This is evident in many historical and contemporary examples. However, to continue his argument against Thrasymachus, Socrates could make additional arguments based on the principles of justice, social responsibility, and ethics to show that the ideal of a ruler should be the service of society as a whole.
Conclusion
As a result, Socrates’ analysis of shepherds presents an interesting view on the concept of unselfishness and care for others. However, his argument could be more convincing, as there are arguments that pastoralism may also be self-serving. As for the rulers, it can be said that Socrates’ statement about the welfare of his subjects can be continued based on the principles of justice and public responsibility.
Work Cited
Everson, Stephen. “Thrasymachus on Justice, Rulers, and Laws in Republic I.” JOURNAL OF ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY, vol. 14, no. 2. 2020, pp. 76–98. Web.