Republic

Glaucon and Adeimantus have refined Thrasymachus' argument and have augmented it. Now they want a more profound argument proving that, infinitely, justice qua justice is preferable to injustice as injustice. Furthermore, the two older brothers want Socrates to eschew any discussion of reputation of justice in his answer; for it has already been established that mankind generally mistakes the appearance of justice for justice. The ideally unjust man is no simpleton, and he becomes adept at concealing his injustice under the guise of justice; no matter how hard he has to work at it, the rewards are great, and he is doubly rewarded in that he can enjoy the fruits of his injustice and at the same time he can enjoy the reputation of being a just man. Thus it is that appearance is all, and, to coin a phrase, the unjust man hereby profits both from the injustice and the appearance of justice, thereby selling his fellows both a doughnut and the hole in the doughnut. And, even if a truly unjust man perceives himself to be a hypocrite, he is finally a happy hypocrite. Besides, it is common knowledge that the hypocrite is recognized as such only by himself and by the gods. Further, it is common knowledge that the gods can be propitiated by sacrifice, so it follows that the clever unjust man may go merrily through life, alternately sinning and sacrificing to the gods, enjoying the best of both worlds. And, if we strip the just man of his reputation and honors for being just, then he finally stands naked in his simplicity: He is a just man, but only that.