The conflict is that, while both believe in human equality, the natural rights philosophy stresses the fact that some men can excel, while the common good philosophy stresses that all men are equal in every way- socially, economically, etc. The natural rights philosophy also stresses behaviour with self-interest at heart, while the common good philosophy discourages such actions. I believe that the natural rights philosophy is far superior to the common good philosophy. I believe this because the natural rights philosophy allows people to move ahead in life and become successful, while the common good philosophy discourages that. It is necessary for people to excel, because without higher knowledge and higher achievements we would not have new inventions or new and better ways of
According to the story, the human understanding of justice is that it revolves around the actions assumed by the law rather than the actual outcomes. The idea of justice constructed upon the process accepted is based on the simple fact that it ensures that all the pertinent issues are addressed. Additionally, if the process is not followed correctly, it’ll become too complex to explain to the accuser how an action done good to them will now make up for an action done wrong to them before. This idea should be applied in today’s culture because the public is accountable for serving justice and it is obligated to follow the correct process in doing so appropriately. Much of the Assyrian law concept of justice is comparable to the Babylonian law because both had many very harsh punishments.
The Constitution is not an elitist document because of the equal benefits provided to man, the need of social classes, and the check of power. The Constitution is not an elitist document because the founding fathers made it for the good of all mankind. “They did not believe in man but they believed in the power of a good political constitution (Hofstadter 55).” This quote shows this document was needed to protect all men, not just the estates of the fathers. Man would destroy themselves if they were to rule each other. White men also benefitted from the rules set down by the founding fathers.
They both appear to have a strong sense over what is right or wrong and make the entirety decisions based upon their morals and beliefs of the time. Whether those decisions be as in Atticus’s case, inspiring, or in Proctor’s case, a mix of regretful and dramatic. Atticus shows he is a man of conscience primarily through sharing his morals and beliefs with Jem and Scout and wanting them to be able to recognise what’s wrong and what’s right. However Proctor shows he is a man of conscience through sticking to his morals, in specific wanting to keep his name keep his reputation as white as possible. Overall although Atticus and Proctor portray their good consciences in different ways they are both men of
Believing that to obey an unjust law was to condone unjust acts, and that right and wrong was more important than rules written by the government, both men chose to make their point through civil disobedience. By practicing civil disobedience they were able to take a stand, without carrying out violence, and, thus, causing more depravity. Truly, they believed, that reason was the only way to truly bring about good. Brute force only led to
Proceeding to symbolism which is something physical or concrete that author uses to embody an idea. Harper Lee uses Symbolism to represent the theme of moral courage. First of all, Atticus symbolizes justice to show moral courage because he believes that all men should be equal and there shouldn’t be any sort of inequality. This can be seen though Atticus, a model of morality for many readers, as well as an example of an honest
The truth is that through the nature of humanity, government is necessary to maintain control and peace. Societies are created by groups of people who find that living together and helping each other is better than attempting to live on their own. However, once a society gets very large with many different types of people it becomes necessary to implement some kind of government to suppress the inherent evil in man and to maintain peace and happiness. Humans need each other to succeed because it is more effective to work together than alone. This truth embraces all of human experiences because it is human nature to want to work together and this truth uses that part of humanity to justify the need for a government.
Throughout the history of mankind, society has defined itself by law and the order that law creates. “Laws are the binding rules of conduct or action which the vast majority of the society has to abide”. Justice on the other hand is rather an abstract concept. There is no right or wrong definition of justice, but is rather agreed upon the concept of being fair and equal. Many would assume that the sole purpose of law is to establish justice, which seems like a wonderful philosophical theory but is slightly difficult to follow.
By fulfilling his duties to the people, a just and benevolent ruler would then be justified to rule by the Mandate of Heaven. Although both Confucius and Mencius have a lot in common with regards to governance, the two do have varying opinions on certain matters such as the legitimacy when rulers are overthrown, and the relationship between the ruler and his people. In precedence to coming up with policies and administrative measures, one has to first consider the issue of human nature as it plays an essential role in the development of a state 's political system. In the Confucian philosophy, the belief is that goodness is innate in humans and that everyone shares this same trait [子曰：“性相近也，习相远也。”] (Analects, 17.2). Mencius further elaborated on this doctrine by stating that it is mankind’s natural tendency to be kind to others, just as water would naturally flow downwards (Mencius, 6A2).
Comprised by the laws that order the universe and that order us toward our telos. For human beings, something that is naturally just must be in accordance with right reason. This is only way to reach a natural and happy end. Aristotle admits, it may be difficult to see the existence of this natural justice since governments vary and no perfect regime exists. We know this because we can observe the different definitions of justice that are implied by the laws of different