Sarai Gonzalez Merrill Ethics Sept.19,2016 Plato’s Ring of Gyges I would have to say the point of Plato’s Ring of Gyges, in my opinion, is that we are the same in a logical reason. This story is to layout that a ring would corrupt a moral person and the reason why they are acting morally is that are scared of being caught. For reasons that will justify that to do injustice is good, and to suffer injustice is evil. We have done both, experienced both, and cannot avoid it even if we try. I have to say Glaucon is right, he says we (humans) act normally because we are scared of punishment. Say a sense of punishment was not at existence, then we would do whatever we please when we pleased. Imagine living in a world without rules, I honestly will …show more content…
We should then catch the just man in the act of following the same path as the unjust man on account of the advantage that every nature is led by its very nature to pursue as good, being diverted only by force of law toward the esteem of the equal. The license I am talking about would be supremely such if they were given the very same power as is said to have been given in the past to the ancestor of Gyges the Lydian. (http://plato-dialogues.org/tetra_4/republic/gyges.htm) Basically, we must do injustice to know what justice is, doing as you wish finding out which will lead to what. The just does not always appear “good” or “fair” and “just”, whatever brought you to justice could be “bad” or “unfair” and “unjust”, depending what was led before. Egoism is egoism is “the theory that one’s self is, or should be, the motivation and the goal of one’s own action.” (http://www.iep.utm.edu/egoism/) Egoism is a persons self-interest. Plato’s point is that an ideal society that is made up of three main classes of people and they each must perform their appropriate function. He says every soul of every individual
Ethical egoism is a moral theory focused on improving a person’s well-being. There are many arguments for ethical egoism such as the Self-Reliance Argument and the Best Argument for Ethical Egoism, both presented by Shafer-Landau in The Fundamentals of Ethics. However, in this paper I will discuss how objections presented by Shafer-Landau and Dr. Thomas Carson are fatal to ethical egoism, while keeping in mind arguments for this moral theory. I will discuss objections such as ethical egoism permitting or sometimes requiring murder, theft, or rape, in order to promote oneself’s well-being, egoists subconscious belief of their lives being more important than others, and an argument presented in class that if egoists must do what is best for their
Throughout the last five weeks, I have read three of Plato’s dialogues: the cave allegory, Euthyphro, and the Apology. While reading them, I was able to see Plato’s view of a philosophical life. To live philosophically is to question appearances and look at an issue/object from a new perspective. In this essay, I will explain Plato’s cave allegory, Socrates’ discussion with Euthyphro, and the oracle story in the Apology.
If the opportunity arose, where no consequences were given for someone’s actions, do you think that individual will still commit an unfavorable action such as killing for his own personal need? In “The Ring of Gyges” the disposition of justice is called into question. As humans continue to live we must contemplate the true driving force for our morality. A discussion between Socrates and Glaucon is one main focal point into explaining the differences in how humans truly established their morality. Glaucon believes humans are restrained by consequences and human’s happiness comes from being an unjust person rather than Socrates’ belief of being just truly leads to happiness.
This essay tries to answer two philosophical points of view the Platonic which is more about living a good and just life or the Machiavellian which is summed up by; the means justify the ends. Both of these views have their own ethical way to bring about justice in the beholders eyes. The scene I’m going to use portrays the final part of the trial of Private Santiago's murder, Colonel Jessup is testifying and being cross examined by Lieutenant Kaffee, from the film A Few Good Men.
Justice is not the conception of the strong, while the weak are ruled by unjust rulers how Thrasymachus thought. Instead the ruler, rules accordingly establishing just laws even if they seem unfair. Rulers are infallible, thus creating just laws because if a ruler were to make an unjust law for the strong that would place the weak at an advantage creating a flaw in the argument. The ruler would want to create laws that are filled wisdom so that nobody would want to choose the life where an unjust men would be more profitable than a just men. In addition, Socrates demonstrates that an unjust men will not be able to live a more virtuous lifestyle than a just men due to the lack of learning that the unjust men has no recollection of, thus the just men will not be able to get the better of another just men.
I believe that Plato believes that people are inherently good and they will do what is morally right and just for society. They will earn their right to power and ensure fairness for all to prevent the tyrants from trying to take control. Plato mentions three main arguments regarding
This message entails people's outlook on reality and the perception that is presented to them. Overall I believe that Plato’s allegory has proved to exemplify a more effective transition from illusion to reality due to its relatability to Socrates message depicting human perception and
He builds up to his final claim by first eliminating what justice cannot be, and then determining what aspects make justice a virtue. Firstly, Plato states it is never just to harm anyone, even if they truly are one’s enemy; if that were the case, justice would make others more unjust, and that defies itself (335d-e). Secondly, Plato denies that justice is law in the interest or advantage of the stronger. Rulers are not perfect, and often make laws to the advantage of those other than themselves (347d-e). Plato’s most controversial claim, however, is that justice is not the law at all, and even goes beyond the law.
Socrates bases this view of justice on the worth of living a good life. “And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted by unjust actions” (47e) If we corrupt our soul with injustice, our life would not be worth living, therefore one must never commit an injustice. “When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, one should fulfill it.”(49e) It is this agreement with the Laws that Socrates would be violating, if he were to
The allegory grants insight at the difference between the senses and the powerful mind. Plato’s allegory characterizes our understanding of mind and personality. He explains that the mind is powerful as we base our reality on our wisdom rather than on our beliefs. Socrates explains, “What our message now signifies is that
In Book 1 of the republic, by Plato, we are introduced to two central figures in the argument of justice, Socrates and Thrasymachus. Thrasymachus claims that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Socrates then asks if his understanding, that what is beneficial to the stronger is just and must be beneficial to the weaker people, to which Thrasymachus replies that no, this is not so. He explains that justice is that which obtains the advantage of the stronger.
What is justice? This is the crucial question that Plato attempts to answer in his dialogue, The Republic. He conjures up an allegory that justice can be found in a person, and a person can represent a city. Thus, his entire dialogue focuses on this ‘just’ city and the mechanics of how the city would operate. His dialogue covers a myriad of topics about justice in addition to the human soul, politics, goodness and truth.
Plato had a great expectation of humans to purely seek the good and righteous. However, human nature has flaws that create cracks in Plato’s ideal
The Myth of Gyges Ring is a very intriguing story, it leads to the soul of human nature and rather we are innately good or evil. I think that as individuals our environment and our belief in something greater or lack of belief in something greater would influence our answer to this question. I believe there are good people in this world and they would use this ring no matter how poor they were for the good of there cities, friends and neighbors. I also see where it could be a double edge sword and be used in the manner of a "Robin Hood", doing injustices to help the poor and trodden citizens. Then there are those people that would use it to their benefit alone and do all kinds of things without ever appearing unjust.
1 What is the moral of Plato’s story of the Ring of Gyges? Is he correct in his basic assumption? The moral of Plato’s story is that when a person has the opportunity to be unjust they will be unjust. If there were no laws people would act in unjust ways and I would tend to agree with this train of thought.