He never found any answer that fully satisfied. But he felt that there was an unambiguous example of justice in the forms. His theory of recollection said that we were aquainted with it in our former life. So, we have a dim recollection of the form, and so we do have some conception of justice. This conception is imperfect, and so we can not answer the question "what is justice," which is what he set out to do. Since we have some dim recollection we can say some things about justice, about what it is and isn't.

__________________
Regards,

J.J.
PCA
Suffix