Cicero's Just War Theory Analysis

the Republic, Socrates argues that justice ought to be valued both for its own sake and for the sake of its consequences (358a1–3). His interlocutors Glaucon and Adeimantus have reported a number of arguments to the effect that the value of justice lies purely in the rewards and reputation that are the usual consequence of being seen to be just, and have asked Socrates to say what justice is and to show that justice is always intrinsically better than is acting contrary to justice when doing so would win you more non-moral goods. Glaucon presents these arguments as renewing Thrasymachus’ Book 1 position that justice is “another’s good” (358b–c, cf. 343c), which Thrasymachus had associated with the claim that the rulers in any constitution frame

1) In this week’s reading, Marshall explains several forms of Christian war ethics: just war theory, pacifism, just insurrection, and nonviolent resistance. Personally, I admire the pacifism and nonviolent resistance as it seeks to emulate Christ. Knocking a violent system of balance through opposing violence with non-violent forms of defense (p. 153) seems to me a more effective statement then even pacifism. However, as realist and as a member of a family with several military veterans I appreciate the construction of ethical parameters when engaging in war.

Rome’s foreign policy lay with the senate and their military arm. “In all the preparations that are made for war, as well as in the whole administration in the field, they possess an almost absolute

“Beyond Vietnam-A Time to Break Silence” Rhetorical Analysis Over the years there have been many great speeches said by very good orators, but few of them had the effect that Martin Luther King, Jr. had on his audience, and none were as famous as his “I Have A Dream” speech. What made Dr. King’s speech so compelling was the fact that he was preacher and was very good at capturing the audience’s attention. The way he presented his arguments to captivate the audience and to get them to agree with whatever he was saying was a technique called the Aristoliean rhetoric, a device that helped him persuade his audience to accomplish his goals. But when he made the “Beyond Vietnam-A Time to Break Silence” speech on April 4, 1967, it was not recognized

Citizens gain an understanding and appreciation for the sacrifices people in the military make. However, despite this… without the recognition of human rights, peace still can’t be achieved, whether its individual, cultural, or gender based rights. Even though forced labour is considered a violation of human rights, the practice of compulsory military service isn’t. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights only moved towards recognizing the right of individuals to object to military service in 1987.

When all the functions of society are performed by the rightful class, the resulting outcome will be justice. Each class has a duty to perform the responsibilities they are naturally best fit for and should refrain from executing another’s job. The state will be unjust if meddling occurs as it directly goes against the true definition of justice according to Plato. When the auxiliaries try to perform the role of the rulers or the workers attempt to be a guardian, the state is damaged and the exchanging of roles in the society will lead to the ultimate destruction of the state. The fourth virtue of a just city is justice because when each component of the state performs its main purpose, justice can be

Socrates presented justice as a way for a better life through the steps that can take someone there. He mentioned the steps as wisdom, courage, and moderation. He stated that these things will lead to justice, however he did not define what justice is. Socrates might have never known himself and wasn’t serious about defining the word. They stat that “after having considered moderation, courage, and prudence, this is what’s left over in the city, justice” (Bloom 111; 433c).

Plato's Republic is centered on one simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? This is something that Socrates addresses both in terms of political communities and the individual person. Plato argues that being just is advantageous to the individual independent of any societal benefits that the individual may incur in virtue of being just. I feel as if Plato’s argument is problematic. There are not enough compelling reasons to make this argument.

According to Socrates there are two types of justice, the political justice and the justice of a particular man. As we know, city is bigger than a man. Socrates believes that it is easier to find justice at the political level which means in the city, thus he tries to define a just city from scrap, and will see in which stage justice enters. Also, Socrates tries to find justice in the city before finding justice in the individuals because individuals are not at all self-sufficient. We humans have similar needs such as food, clothing and shelter and in order to accomplish these goals human beings form unions, where each and every individual specializes in a field.

Honor in the world gives people a reason to fight for the things that they believe in. Throughout The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, Brutus has had to make many tough decisions that display the great honor within him. In The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare's, it is made very obvious that Brutus is an honorable man. Brutus preserves his honor by taking care of Rome’s issues with good intentions and without going too far.

(II, i, 53-55) which allows to say that he wants Rome to be just and do whatever it takes to maintain it away from any threat. Indeed, Brutus states this very clearly when he says, “If it’s for the good of all Romans, I’d do it even if it meant my death. Let the gods give me good luck only as long as I love honor more than I fear death.” (I, ii, 86-88), he explicitly says that the good of the majority is over any feeling or personal benefit which in this case is the love of Caesar for him and viceversa, and the throne. To conclude, Brutus is a complex character that is characterized by three recurrent traits: his well-intention, his hypocrisy, and his naivet.

In Book 1 of the republic, by Plato, we are introduced to two central figures in the argument of justice, Socrates and Thrasymachus. Thrasymachus claims that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Socrates then asks if his understanding, that what is beneficial to the stronger is just and must be beneficial to the weaker people, to which Thrasymachus replies that no, this is not so. He explains that justice is that which obtains the advantage of the stronger.

What is justice? This is the crucial question that Plato attempts to answer in his dialogue, The Republic. He conjures up an allegory that justice can be found in a person, and a person can represent a city. Thus, his entire dialogue focuses on this ‘just’ city and the mechanics of how the city would operate. His dialogue covers a myriad of topics about justice in addition to the human soul, politics, goodness and truth.

In Plato’s Republic, Socrates comes to the conclusion that we need to have a strong just society that is in the right order. In Books IV, V, and VI, Socrates explains that every society needs to be built on justice, everyone needs to have an occupation, and what a male and female household should look like. These are my prerequisites to what I consider essential to create a just society. Because without these qualities in an established society, you can hurt an entire civilization. And to Socrates argument, with an ideal king will come forms of co-operated citizens of a city.

Due to the violent civil war, society made lawlessness a synonym with just action. Without the constructs of justice, human nature tends to lean towards self-interest and self-destruction. The civil war demonstrated that unrestrained human nature leads to the destruction of civilization and citizens with reject the necessity of restraint and found new laws and societal norms. In addition to this, in the Melian dialogue, the Athenians completely ignore justice when addressing their expansion campaign. For the purpose of self-interest, honor, and security, the Athenians decide upon the policies of power and their representative