[andreyveritas]

I understand that the just come to light as wiser and better and more able to accomplish something, while the unjust can’t accomplish anything with one another – for we don’t speak the complete truth about those men who say we vigorously accomplished some common object with one another although they were unjust; they could never have restrained themselves with one another if they were completely unjust, but it is plain that there was a certain justice in them which caused them at least not to do injustice to one another at the same time that they were seeking to do it to others

[joypulv]

A lot of words that mean almost nothing. If Hobbes wrote it, you got a good response, and you need to be doing your own homework anyway. You have been told repeatedly that we don't do homework, only help.

[Tuttyd]

A lot of words that mean almost nothing. If Hobbes wrote it, you got a good response, and you need to be doing your own homework anyway. You have been told repeatedly that we don't do homework, only help.

Hi Joy,

This is actually a quote from Plato's Republic. In this respect you are right. There are a lot of words that probably mean very little in isolation.

My advice to the O.P. would be to read Book 1 from the beginning. In order to understand the selected quote ones needs to appreciate that Plato (through Socrates) is trying to tease out a definition of justice through some close questioning of various individuals including the Sophist Thrasymachus. The Sophist approach is to undermine any suitable definition of justice.

I think it is important to keep in mind that Plato is working towards an end. This is why I think it is equally important to understand Plato's theory of forms. I think Plato in the quote is saying that thus far we have at least established there are just people. Just people are better suited to justice than unjust people because unjust people accomplish very little.

So far in the debate Plato is willing to allow that most other people do have some modicum of justice that works to a certain extent. However, this is unsuitable in terms of a complete system of justice. This is basically the thrust of the quote.

I read this as Plato setting up the argument so as he can introduce his ideas on justice. I think the OP needs to start at the beginning of Book 1 and have a reasonable understand of Plato's theory of forms.

Just my opinion.

[joypulv]

THANK YOU Tuttyd! I never could get through Plato (on my own) although I do respect him for what I have gleaned from others such as you just now. I couldn't understand any of the famous philosophers, except in part the existentialists. I never took a philosophy course. If they need to be explained by a professor, I rebel.

[andreyveritas]

I just asked for translation of the quote. I been in America for 2 years so it's hard for me to understand some of the words. If you don't want to don't help, I will figure it out myself

[Tuttyd]

I just asked for translation of the quote. I been in America for 2 years so it's hard for me to understand some of the words. If you don't want to don't help, I will figure it out myself

Those rulers who know what justice actually is are more than likely to act justly. That is to say, their end goal is to act with the best interests of everyone in mind. Furthermore, if we don't get to the heart of the matter (what justice actually is) we will end up with a situation whereby we have unjust rulers who cannot accomplish any type of justice, or we will have rulers who from time to time implement justice.

The idea of rulers with a limited idea of justice is still largely unsatisfactory because we will still have many injustices remaining.

[joypulv]

'I just asked for translation of the quote.'

Actually you didn't ask for a translation, you asked for an explanation, and got more than you could usually hope for here.
Tuttyd deserves better than this...

[andreyveritas]

'I just asked for translation of the quote.'

Actually you didn't ask for a translation, you asked for an explanation, and got more than you could usually hope for here.
tuttyd deserves better than this...

My friend asked this question, but I would like to add something. Translation and explanation is almost the same thing. Also, 3 different people use this account. That's why there are so many different questions, for different subjects. In one year we asked only around 13 questions, that's not a lot. I believe that this site is for asking questions. If you can not help, then there is no need to write anything. Thank you. :-)

[Fr_Chuck]

No, translation and explanation are two totally different things.

Perhaps the 3 people, should have separate accounts, to avoid confussion.
Because you are judged by attitude and content of all of your posts