Thrasymachus' view of human nature Thrasymachus' view of human nature is that we all seek to maximize power, profit and possessions. He makes the argument that morality is not an objective truth but rather a creation of the stronger party (in power) to serve its own advantage. Therefore, the definitions of “just” and “unjust,” “good” and “evil,” “moral” and “immoral” all depend on the decree of the ruling party. Thrasymachus argues that acting “morally,” in accordance with the party in power, benefits the party in power, while acting “immorally,” harms the party in power and benefits oneself. Thrasymachus sees human nature as our ruthless drive toward superiority. He believes that unless we are foolish “moral simpletons,” we will act according to what is best for us, which is to live immorally in order to become master of the world. He believes that our human nature has no qualms about committing immoral actions. In describing human nature, Thrasymachus says: “Immorality has a bad reputation because people are afraid of being its victims, not of committing it. » (Republic 344c) When we have finally achieved the goal, the ideal of human nature, we will be able to practice "immorality in its most perfect form", by stealing "that which does not belong to [us] - the objects consecrated and unconsecrated, private objects. public possessions and goods - and [we do it] not on a small scale, but on a global basis. (Republic 344a-b) Thrasymachus assumes that we are all driven to acquire as much power, profit, and possessions as possible. His argument for living an immoral life is based on the assumption that the craving of our human nature is to obtain more of the three P's (power, profit and possessions), and that there are more... middle of the paper...... ity is created by those who hold power, and therefore, there is no true absolute morality, he concludes that the best way to satisfy one's human desire is to acquire as much power as possible and to take from others as much as he can. Because his view of morality is not fixed but created by those in power, he defines words like “moral,” “just,” and “just” based on whether the party in power follows the rules. He claims that acting “morally” serves the party in power because the party in power designed the legal structure for its own benefit. Socrates raises certain criticisms, notably that people behaving immorally would not be able to act in concert with others and would fall out with others, which are convincing and discredit Thrasymachus's position. From this it is conclusive that Thrasymachus did not fully capture the essence of human nature..