From Adam S. Miller and his book “Original Grace”, Under the above title:
If the purpose of justice isn’t punishment, then what is justice? And what has justice to do with grace?
In the opening pages of Plato’s Republic, a young man named Polemarchus defines justice as the art of “giving each man what is proper to him.”1 Socrates doesn’t object to this definition, but he wants Polemarchus to unpack what it means. In reply, Polemarchus offers a definition of what would appeal to most of us, most of the time. He gives a natural, common-sense definition of justice. What properly belongs to each, Polemarchus argues, is only and exactly what each deserves. Or, as Polemarchus puts it: “Justice is the art which gives good to friends and evil to enemies.”2
According to this definition, justice is a kind of mirror. It reflects back whatever we are. It balances the books. It demands an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. It returns good for good and evil for evil. It loves friends and hates enemies.
Socrates, though, is skeptical of Polemarchus claim that justice returns evil to enemies. If justice is good—perhaps even the greatest good—how can it return evil? Moreover, wouldn’t doing evil to evil doers just make them more evil? If so, then justice would be responsible for both doing evil to evil doers making evildoers more evil? And this, Socrates thinks, is absurd. It’s like claiming heat makes things cold or water makes things dry. “To injure a friend or anyone else,” Socrates concludes, “is not the act of a just man, but of the opposite.”3 ~ Adam S. Miller (Original Grace: Deseret Book, 2022), 33-34 (Continued with Logic II)
