The following will be a major class exercise/debate for Thursday, October 6. 

Do the readings http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~jthomas/class/452/assigs452.html
(and review the old ones). We will have a short-answer quiz to start the
class, a semi-brief lecture, and then the debate in the second half of class.
The trick is to KNOW YOUR STUFF.

After Plato, we will move into the substantive issues and begin applying
what we've learned. The ultimate question: What is justice, on what grounds
do we defend our definition, and how can we then judge real-world situations.

Building Justice with Plato (DEBATE #1)

Throughout the Republic and other readings, several different notions of justice 
are expressed.  In the following exercise, each group will be assigned to argue 
a competing view of justice as put forth by one of the following characters in 
Plato's Republic: Thrasymachus, Cephalus & Polemarchus, Socrates, and Glaucon. 
Also, groups should be prepared to argue Marx's view of justice.  Each team is 
expected to present substantive arguments in support of their assigned view and 
to oppose the other arguments in the same manner as well.  Furthermore, each team
will seek to determine whether or not the view they are arguing is compatible
with Christian notions of Justice, and in particular, Liberation Theology.
Consider also Tyler's psychological view of justice and how PERCEPTIONS
of justice are consistent with, contradictory to, or overlap with,
Plato or Liberation theology (relative deprivation?).  

Part 1: (Argument)
Each team will be assigned a 'view' of justice as put forth by one very
old, dead philosopher.  All members of a group are to research this view
and to argue in favor of it and to oppose the others through supporting
evidence and logical reasoning. Since you don't know at this time what
group you'll be in, EVERYBODY must be prepared to argue everything.
Each group, through a group spokesperson, will present their view to the class.

Part 2: (Debate) 
The other groups will then be given time to critique the presenting group's
argument, drawing from all the readings. We will take about five minutes
after each group presents for other groups to gather their thoughts. This
means that you MUST come prepared!

Keep in mind that to truly argue a point, you must be able to understand
contrary viewpoints as well.  In other words, don't just simply present
your view without being able to defend it.  It will help to gain a firm
understanding of all of the views of the aforementioned philosophers
beforehand.

Return to JT's homepage