Callicles and Thrasymachus are the two great exemplars in Plato in all of ancient philosophy of contemptuous challenge to conventional morality. In the Gorgias and Book I of the Republic respectively, they denounce the virtue of justice, dikaiosunê, as an artificial brake on self-interest, a sham to be seen through by the wise. Together, Thrasymachus and Callicles have fallen into the folk mythology of moral philosophy as the immoralist' (or amoralist'). This is probably not quite the right word, but it is useful to have a label for their common challenge more generally, for the figure who demands a reason to abide by moral constraints, and denies that this demand can be met.[1] Because of this shared agenda, and because Socrates' refutation of Callicles can be read as a sketchy, perhaps deliberately unsatisfying rehearsal for the Republic, it is tempting to assume that the two figures represent a single philosophical position. But in fact, Callicles and Thrasymachus......
Join Now or Login to view the rest of this paper.
Approximate Word Count: 304
Approximate Pages: 2 (260 words per double-spaced page) |