what philosopher would refute Glaucon's definition of justice in the Republic?

To find out which philosopher might refute Glaucon's definition of justice in "The Republic," we first need to understand Glaucon's definition. In Book II, Glaucon presents the argument that justice is simply a social construct created out of necessity and fear, and that humans would indulge in unjust behavior if there were no negative consequences.

A philosopher who might challenge Glaucon's definition of justice is Plato himself, the author of "The Republic." In the subsequent books of the dialogue, Plato presents his own theory of justice, which focuses on the idea of harmony and the inherent virtue of justice.

According to Plato, justice is not merely a socially constructed compromise, but a fundamental state of order and balance within the soul and society. He argues that justice is an inherent virtue that aligns with one's true nature. For Plato, being just is not solely motivated by fear of punishment, but is inherently fulfilling and beneficial for the individual and the community.

Therefore, it can be said that Plato, as the author of "The Republic," would refute Glaucon's definition of justice and present his own philosophical arguments in favor of a more intrinsic, virtuous understanding of justice.