Book I comes to an end with all of the conventional arguments concerning what justice is having been stated, refined, and rejected, and with justice having been shown to be always more profitable than injustice. Why does the book continue? Why does the dialogue not end here, and the feast begin? After you finished the first book, were you convinced to be forever just? Were you persuaded that the just life is superior and more choice-worthy than the unjust life?
© 2025 Underground University
Substack is the home for great culture