I need to learn as much as possible about the first five books

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/hp/hpplato.htm#s3

I just realized that Socrates fails to refute Thrasymachus claim that might makes right and injustice is more advantageous to the individual. Really makes me think

>>8636809
Thanks!

>>8637452
well, it always was the true basis of politics, consider the melian dialogue

I have 55 pdf files of commentaries on The Republic.

>>8637452
Thrasymachus was not as spooked as Soc.

File: pluto.jpg (420KB, 1052x1172px)

420KB, 1052x1172px

Pic related is a very accurate synopsis imo

>DUDE FORMS LMAO

What do you need to know? I don't know if you'll be able to find torrents, but you may want to check out the Cambridge companion to the Republic, along with "Socrates' second sailing." Also the continuum companion to Plato has a 2-3 page overview of the Republic and the major themes addressed and avenues explored, and I know there's a torrent of that floating around.

>>8637452
>might makes right
Refuted by the "paradox" of the "weak" masses emerging (through a democratic system) as the "strong" faction, i.e., the one making laws and dispensing justice as they see it.

>injustice is more advantageous to the individual
Refuted by literally the entire text. Literally books 2-10 are devoted to (1) defining justice, and (2) comparing justice with injustice in their purest forms (see: hypothetical purely unjust man, and just man), with the investigations and comparisons of justice in the state merely being an exercise for the sake of greater ease, ultimately scaling down (with great care) to the scope of the individual, i.e., maintaining that the state is analogous to the individual soul.

The conclusion of the text, of course, being that justice is the best and injustice the worst possible thing in both the state and the individual, not only in terms of "proper" states of justice (e.g., the just man is recognized and honored as such), but even in the earlier hypothetical "extreme" states (e.g., the just man has only justice itself but none of its trappings or rewards, is thought purely unjust by his fellow citizens, and lives and dies being treated as one who is entirely unjust).

>>8636794
just remember that with any platonic dialogue, all arguments upon closer inspection contradict each other. however, this is doesn't necessarily show plato's ineptitude as a thinker but rather his prowess as one for contradiction is where real thinking occurs. what i'm basically saying is that plato did not place any of his strict, actual beliefs in the explicit arguments of the dialogues but rather through the currents running through the multiple texts which are only hinted at partly for pragmatic and intellectual reasons but also educational ones. at the end of the day, what a platonic dialogue does is to give you a view of the few "slippery" things plato holds as true through multiple vantage points (eg. republic through the lens of politics, euthyphro through the lens of piety, and so on). the single theme that i see the republic highlight the most, which is still very much present in his other texts (crito and apology come to mind), is the tension or relationship of politics and philosophy. for the sake of being platonic i wont give any strict answers but just keep that idea in mind

obviously this conflicts with the modern scholarly consensus of there being periods to plato as i've implied that plato was a consistent thinker throughout his life, so take my argument however you wish

>>8636794
A collection of pdfs of Republic commentaries, essays, etc.

https://mega.nz/#!KU5lDJoA!Ol1zX1V-I5fhAQ4F5dAALmhgYcqMmZq3q_4A230akgA

Rosen and Benardete are the subtlest.