Socrates’ treatment of justice in Plato’s Republic has long been a subject of scholarly debate, with many commentators pointing to apparent inconsistencies in his various accounts. Some interpret these variations as signs of confusion or contradiction, while others seek a deeper, unifying explanation. This essay challenges the view that Socrates’ discussions are incoherent, arguing instead that the differences reflect a deliberate rhetorical strategy. In this paper, I will offer an alternative interpretation of Socrates’ treatment of justice in Plato’s Republic. I contend that by reading the Republic through the lens of Plato’s Apology, a clear distinction between justice and virtue is revealed, showing that Socrates’ ultimate aim is to awaken a concern for human excellence rather than to provide a fixed definition of justice. Through analysis of Socrates’ dialogues with Thrasymachus, Glaucon, and Adeimantus, and his cave analogy, I demonstrate that Socrates seeks to inspire care for virtue tailored to his interlocutors’ characters. I then conclude that Socrates’ shifting positions reflect a unified purpose: to motivate reflection on virtue, justice, and the good, trusting that such reflection will lead others to his perceived definitions independently. This research offers a novel framework for understanding Socratic pedagogy, highlighting how Plato uses rhetoric not to dictate truth, but to cultivate intellectual and moral self-discovery. It enriches our appreciation of the Republic’s dynamic philosophical method.