Thrasymacus' argument
Premise 1: A just shepherd takes care of his sheep for the sheep’s well-being.
Premise 2: An unjust shepherd takes care of his sheep for his own advantage.
Conclusion: The just man directs the advantage to the weaker, and the unjust man takes the advantage for himself.
Premise 1: Shepherds care and fatten the flock.
Premise 2: Shepherds make more of a profit for themselves of a fat flock.
Conclusion: Therefore the art of a shepherd is for his own advantage.
Premise 1: Ruling is an art.
Premise 2: The ruler's art is to care for his people
Premise 3: The better the people the more the ruler benefits from caring for the people.
Conclusion: Therefore a ruler rules for his own benefit.
Socrates' counter argument
Premise 1: The best doctor takes the best care of all of his patients.
Premise 2: The best shepherd takes care of his sheep without killing.
Conclusion: The best people of their art only care for their art.
Premise 1: Justice is an art
Premise 2: An art cannot be just if it is for personal gain.
Conclusion: Rulers cannot be just because they use power for their own purpose.
Premise 1: People who are good at an art take care of the weaker in a specific situation.
Premise 2: All arts have a reciprocation with benefit for the master.
Conclusion: The best of an art will receive a benefit while still providing an advantage to the weak.
Premise1: Shepherd's art surely cares for nothing but for providing the best that it has been set over.
Premise 2: Rulers demand wages to balance it out because what they are getting is for the benefit of others.
Conclusion: No art or kind of rule provides for its own benefit.
Premise 1: People do not do the art on free will, but demand wages as compensation.
Premise 2: wages are not attached to the art itself. A true shepherd is a shepherd also if he does not get compensation.
Premise 3: The wage-earners art does not furnish anything, while other arts have a direct intent that is not the wages but that what it is supposed to achieve.
Conclusion: Therefore no art or kind of rule provides for its own benefit, but for the advantage of the weaker
Premise 4: Ruling is an art
Concusion: Ruling is for the advantage of the weaker.
Premise 5: Ruling is establishing a form of justice.
Conclusion: Therefore justice is for the weaker.
A later argument
A later argument
Premise 1: Rulers rule from necessity.
Premise 2: Rules must maintain rules for their own benefit, since otherwise everything would be chaos
Conclusion: Without rulers there would be chaos and thus no art could be established. This would also deny the art of money making.
