文章代写：Thrasymachus正义定义的论点
头法勒斯清楚地感知到外部行为的正义，外部行为描述了事物与其他人的适当行为，而不是考虑个体灵魂的健康。柏拉图明确建议，从审视Thrasymachus定义的角度来思考正义。根据这种观点，正义是为了尊重他人的利益而牺牲自己的利益。正如Thrasymachus所说，正义是强者的利益。这描述了不公正包括采取有利于当权者的行动。支持这一主张的关键证据是，为大多数人口提供利益的要素被称为公正的民主环境。另一方面，使精英受益的事物只在贵族的环境中才被提及。
文章代写：Thrasymachus正义定义的论点
苏格拉底在公元348年与Thrasymachus讨论了他的论点。据他说，如果不公正被宣布为更有利可图，那么这个问题就可以按照传统观念来讨论。这一点更为具体，因为不公正的可耻或邪恶本性中没有否认。简单地说，苏格拉底可以选择驳斥Thrasymachus，就像驳斥Polus和Alcibiades一样。他在就传统正义对他们的接受提出上诉时驳斥了他们。然而，Thrasymachus清楚地反映了他对不公正的可耻本质的否认。因此，需要高度复杂的反驳。他应该寻找对手所持有的一些价值，把它作为起草结论的前提。苏格拉底呼吁Thrasymachus对专家的正面评价。
文章代写：Thrasymachus正义定义的论点
Cephalus perceived justice clearly with respect to external actions that depicts the matter to properly behave with other, instead of considering the health of individual soul. Plato has clearly suggested thinking about justice in a manner of viewing the definition of Thrasymachus. According to the view, justice is to sacrifice one’s self- interest in order to respect the interest of others . As stated by Thrasymachus, justice is the benefit of the stronger. This depicts that injustice involves delivering actions for benefitting the ones in power. The key evidence supporting this claim is that elements providing benefits to the majority population are termed as just in a democratic setting. On the other hand, things benefitting elite are referred as just in aristocratic settings.
文章代写：Thrasymachus正义定义的论点
Socrates talks to Thrasymachus at 348 e regarding his arguments. According to him, if injustice is declared as more profitable, the matter could have been discussed in terms of conventional beliefs. This is more specific as there is no denial in the shameful or vice nature of injustice. In simple terms, Socrates had the option of refuting Thrasymachus similarly as refuting Polus and Alcibiades . He refuted them as he appealed their acceptance with respect to conventional justice. However, Thrasymachus has clearly reflected his denial about the shameful nature of injustice. Hence, there was a crucial requirement of highly sophisticated refutations. He should be looking for some value held by the opponent for using it like a premise to draft concluding points. Socrates is appealing to the positive evaluation of expertise by Thrasymachus.
