Introduction: ‘Turning the Soul Around’

Abstract

The subject-matter of the Republic is the nature of justice (dikaiosyne), and its relation to human well-being (eudaimonia).1 It is widely recognised that the work belongs to the ‘middle’ period of Plato’s writing career, even though Book I, the concern of this study, bears all the characteristics of an ‘early’ or ‘Socratic’ dialogue. Indeed, some scholars in the past thought it was an early dialogue, the ‘Thrasymachus’, which Plato had tacked on to the rest of the Republic as it has come down to us.2 Whatever the vicissitudes of the composition of Book I, it cannot be denied that it differs markedly in style from the rest of the Republic. Though the dialogue form is retained throughout, it is only Book I which presents strongly characterised interlocutors and elaborate dramatic setting. From Book II until the end, Socrates, the principal character of the dialogue, presents a positive account of justice, showing why, understood in the way he proposes, justice must benefit the individuals and communities which possess it. By contrast, Book I is fundamentally ‘Socratic’: it contains highly dramatic characterisation of Socrates’ interlocutors as they react to his method of critical examination (the elenchos). It ends on an inconclusive note: Socrates questions certain ways of thinking about justice because they cannot explain why it is a mark of excellence in individuals and communities. An understanding of the ‘true’ or ‘real’ nature of justice is required to show its links with excellence and human well-being. Yet, in Book I Socrates and his interlocutors fail to articulate such an understanding. The Republic, from Book II on, may be seen as making a fresh, positive, start to deal with this issue; resulting in a work which came to play an enormously influential role in the moral and political thinking of the West.3