Socratic virtue is equated with justice and moral excellence. It is the doing of good and the refraining from evil. It is the desire to do what is right and doing ones best not to cause harm to others. It the wonderful things that one can expect from a good man and the opposite of what one can expect from a terrible character. Justice is most visible in the actions of leaders and those who had the power to good and harm. Socrates also hinted that virtue is displayed when a professional does an excellent job in discharging his duties.
In this regard it is inevitable that the discussion between ancient philosophers in The Republic drifted into the examination of what a professional leader such as a king must do to be considered as a good ruler. But in a sudden twist, Socrates’ rival challenged the idea that being just is less desirable than being unjust. Socrates disagreed with the opinion of Thrasymachus. But before he explained his reasons he first allowed Thrasymachus to elaborate on his ideas so that he can prepare a rebuttal at the end.
Thrasymachus’ proceeded to explain that the just had all the advantage in a society that rewards the strong and punishes the weak. Thus, Thrasymachus idea is strongly tied to rulers and how they behave in the real world while Socrates had an ideal view of the world or at least was not afraid to dream of a day when true leaders will rise up and govern the city, state or nation. Thrasymachus used his powers of observation to point out that an unjust ruler is usually the strongest ruler or the strongest individual in a given society. Thus, the ruler is able to do what he wants without fear of retribution from his subjects. The unjust ruler can establish rules that can be self-serving and force his subject to obey these rules.
Thrasymachus also pointed out that even in the lives of non-rulers, the unjust is more successful, has all the money and has all the influence needed to secure a comfortable life. But for the just struggles under the weight of unnecessary burden resulting from doing right. For instance an unjust person can easily get away with not paying the right taxes and therefore he profits significantly from such unscrupulous behavior. If the same person is a public servant then he can abuse his position to give favors to his friends and those who are willing to pay money so that he will look the other way.
Although at first there is no way of refuting Thrasymachus words, Socrates found a way to reduce his arguments into a pile of rubble. Socrates begins by saying that without justice the whole world will suffer from anarchy. Then he proceeded by saying that there could be no excellence without justice; there is no way of accomplishing great tasks without justice. Socrates went further by saying that at the end the most important thing is not riches and fame but the soul. Then he finalized his arguments by saying that happiness and blessedness is only possible in the lives of the just while the unjust reaps all kinds of misery and troubles. The ideal leader is therefore the just leader. Those who are in leadership must deal with the art of making money so that it will not be a stumbling block for them. It is inevitable that leaders who also love money will find it difficult to resist the temptation of riches but a sense of justice will guide the leader in the right path.