[Side-note: Arguments of Sokrates--Injustice is a source of weakness--Every multitude must observe justice among themselves, in order to avoid perpetual quarrels. The same about any single individual: if he is unjust, he will be at war with himself, and perpetually weak.] Sokrates is represented as confuting and humiliating Thrasymachus by various arguments, of which the two first at least are more subtle than cogent.[25] He next proceeds to argue that injustice, far from being a source of strength, is a source of weakness--That any community of men, among whom injustice prevails, must be in continual dispute; and therefore incapable of combined action against others--That a camp of mercenary soldiers or robbers, who plunder every one else, must at least observe justice among themselves--That if they have force, this is because they are unjust only by halves: that if they were thoroughly unjust, they would also be thoroughly impotent--That the like is true also of an individual separately taken, who, so far as he is unjust, is in a perpetual state of hatred and conflict with himself, as well as with just men and with the Gods: and would thus be divested of all power to accomplish any purpose.[26] [Footnote 25: Plato, Republic, i. pp. 346-350.] [Footnote 26: Plato, Republic, i. pp. 351-352 D.] [Side-note: Farther argument of Sokrates--The just man is happy, the unjust man miserable--Thrasymachus is confuted and silenced. Sokrates complains that he does not yet know what Justice is.] Having thus shown that justice is stronger than injustice, Sokrates next offers an argument to prove that it is happier or confers more happiness than injustice. The conclusion of this argument is--That the just man is happy, and the unjust miserable.[27] Thrasymachus is confuted, and retires humiliated from the debate. Yet Sokrates himself is represented as dissatisfied with the result. "At the close of our debate" (he says) "I find that I know nothing about the matter. For as I do not know what justice is, I can hardly expect to know whether it is a virtue or not; nor whether the man who possesses it is happy or not happy."[28] [Footnote 27: Plato, Republic, i. pp. 353-354 A.] [Footnote 28: Plato, Republic, i. fin. p. 354 C. [Greek: ô(/ste moi ge/gonen e)k tou= dialo/gou mêde\n ei)de/nai; o(po/te ga\r to\ di/kaion mê\ oi)=da o(\ e)sti, scholê=| ei)/somai ei)/te a)retê/ tis ou)=sa tugcha/nei ei)/te kai\ ou)/, kai\ po/teron o( e)/chôn au)to\ ou)k eu)dai/môn e)sti\n ê)\ eu)dai/môn.]] [Side-note: Glaukon intimates that he is not satisfied with the proof, though he agrees in the opinion expressed by Sokrates. Tripartite distribution of Good--To which of the three heads does Justice belong?]