Glaucon describes the life of the unjust man with a good reputation to be better than that of the just man with a bad reputation. He claims that the life of the unjust has more worldly pleasures and that is what brings ones true state of happiness: to have anything you desire. Glaucon argues that no one would chose the life of justice if there weren’t any rewards attached to the just life. We act morally only out of fear of getting caught, according to him. He describes the unjust man as a distinguished master of craft and always able to recover himself if he fails at any point. He then describes the just man as noble and simple but wishing not to be seemed as just for he would be honored and rewarded, and that may be construed as seeking only for honor and rewards without the sole sake of justice. He is described as being clothed by justice only and having no other covering and to be seen in an unjust light despite that he is the most just. This is the argument Glaucon presents as to why the life of the unjust is more desirable than that of the just. He is supporting the views known as Egoism. The view that we are naturally predisposed to pursue our own interests over the interests of others.
Socrates counters his argument with the idea that to practice injustice puts one’s self into the path of self-destruction. He uses the example that if you practice injustice it begins to overtake your soul; our consciousness that makes decisions to do things that make us happy is overtaken by the evil poison that is injustice. It spreads inside of us until all that is left is just the shell of a man that once was. This is what Socrates describes as the life of the unjust and how it is the worst fate of all. And once you have succumbed to the life of the unjust it becomes harder and harder to turn it back around. According to Socrates, the life of the unjust is without a doubt the least rewarding and cannot support happiness.
Happiness, according to Aristotle, is an…