*philosophers, sorry for mistake
Your thesis statement must include factual information plus your position/opinion/stance. Without your position on the topic, it isn't a true thesis statement. So think of this sentence as the angle you want to take on the topic and what you intend to prove by the end of your paper. (If your statement is simply factual, then there's nothing to prove!)
Read carefully and follow ALL directions.
This is one of the very best places I've seen online to help students write good thesis statements. It shows you sentences that aren't thesis statements and how to turn each one into real thesis statements.
Simplify what you have written AND make sure you have both parts included (fact and opinion). Then re-post once you have rewritten your thesis.
Ok here is a new one. I tried to follow all five of the tips.
On multiple occasions, Thrasymachus is too quick to offer his definitions of justice and does not consider the implications that they put on society but Socrates is present to shed light on the weaknesses in terminology and present a counter argument so that the true definition of justice can be achieved.
Which part of that is YOUR STANCE on the topic?
my stance is that he gives his opinion too quick.
also, that he doesn't consider what his definitions really mean before he says them otherwise socrates wouldn't be able to prove him wrong as quick
OK, then, make your thesis focus on your stance re Thrasymachus. Try this --
Revise this into two sentences: one about Socrates and one about Thrasymachus. Then re-post.
Revise very little if at all, and make this the last sentence in your introductory paragraph - it's your thesis!!
On multiple occasions, Thrasymachus is too quick to offer his definitions of justice and does not consider the implications that they put on society
Revise and make this the next-to-last sentence in your introduction:
but Socrates is present to shed light on the weaknesses in terminology and present a counter argument so that the true definition of justice can be achieved.
Throughout the discussion with Socrates, Thrasymachus jumps to conclusions about what the definition of justice really is and does not consider the implications that he is making. This makes it easy for Socrates to shed light on the flaws in Thrasymachus' definitions and for an accurate definition to evolve out of the previous attempts.
Socrates' role in the discussion is to derive an accurate definition of justice by using counterexamples against Thrasymachus' multiple renditions. Thrasymachus makes it easy for Socrates to prove him wrong because he is too quick to offer his definitions of justice and does not consider the implications that they put on society.
Excellent!! Your latest post is perfect! Only the last sentence is the thesis, but the other ideas need to be in the intro, too! Super!!