In Plato's Republic, Socrates acknowledges that he knows only one thing for certain; he knows nothing. This is a crucial part of his understanding of human nature because he lacks problematic assumptions based on assumptions that trick others into thinking they know. This allows him to freely explore and develop his philosophies, which is the goal of The Philosopher. We can get a sense of Socrates' idea of ​​human nature by examining his dialogues relating to Justice, The Good, Division of the Soul, The City, The Nobel Lie, The Allegory of the Cave, The Divided Line, and The Kingdom of perfection. Reality or Forms; All this forms his metaphysical vision of the world. The idea of ​​intersubjectivity is an important theme in Socrates' discussions because everything must be in relation to each other. This may explain why Socrates seeks truth through the investigation of questions and perhaps also through the investigation of others. Socrates typically investigates together with others with equal mutual respect to preserve dialogue and discussion from being limited by the linguistic power struggles of one's character. Some, however, are not so civilized in their ideas and might even be considered savages. We can see an example of this through Plato's description of Thrasymachus, an antagonist of Justice, coiled like a wild beast who crouches and approaches Socrates as if to tear him to pieces. This suggests the animalistic character of Thrasymachus before any dialogue even begins and that any dialogue to follow will likely be limited by his uncontrollable desire or appetite for his idea of ​​justice on an individual scale to be correct. Thrasymachus first defines justice, in the form of a "right action", as doing what is in the interests of the strong and then follows cl... middle of the paper... in the truest sense. However, in the City, where the individual is in relationship with others, a lie or a Nobel myth can be used to attract people towards the Good. This cannot be used on Thrasymachus because he takes a different stance based on his perceptions that he has constructed, which leads to him being seen as someone beyond the City with a more animalistic conception of justice. This makes me believe that Thrasymachus has a certain Darwinist aspect that causes many of his problematic assumptions such as overshooting. Today we see that it is exaggerated and we know that it creates imbalances, which lead to injustices. Inside the City the individual is protected by a sort of moral shield of ignorance, but the City itself will become more and more corrupt until even the individual soul is distanced from the Good. Therefore the just life is preferable to the life of perfect injustice.