Due Tuesday, 3/20 Republic Assignment

Due Tuesday, 3/20

…. We should be able to start this in class

Read The Republic pp. 15-29 (that’s 14 pages)

Answer the following questions in your blog. Remember to cut/paste the question in your blog and highlight the question. Also, remember to print out your response so you can reference them in class.

There are two sections, you only have to do one of them, you choose.

Section One has short answers and an interpretive question response.

Section Two has the same, but you create your own interpretive question.

Section One:

Short answers, questions 1 and 2 (at least 2-5 sentences or bullet points, maybe more, per question)

1. Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?

2. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?

Paragraph response, or more, question 3:

Note that we might revisit some of these questions in a Socratic Seminar or as an essay prompt. Consider your response here as a rough draft of initial ideas that could be developed in more detail.

3. You can choose from one of the following prompts to write one paragraph or longer:

In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

OR

In your opinion, does injustice pay? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer.

OR

The implication of Socrates argument against Thrasymachus is that justice lies outside the government – it is “above” the physical world of political activity (in other words, it is “metaphysical”). What are the political and/or moral consequences of Socrates implication that justice is not a matter of the government? What are the political and/or moral implications of what Thraymachus says? Do you think there another way of looking at it, one that Socrates and/or Thrasymachus have not thought about?

Section II.

Short answers, questions 1 and 2 (at least 2-5 sentences or bullet points, maybe more, per question)

1. Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?

2. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ main points in response?

Paragraph response, or more, question 3:

Note that we might revisit some of these questions in a Socratic Seminar or as an essay prompt. Consider your response here as a rough draft of initial ideas that could be developed in more detail.

3.Write your own interpretive prompt/question:

Criteria for writing your own prompt/question

1) It must be related to the text and you must have to refer/cite the text in your answer

2) It must be interpretive, or “open” – there must be multiple ways of answering it ( of course you only have to write about one response.

3) You must demonstrate that you read the text and that you have thought about it, not necessarily that you are “right”, but that you thought about the text.