Plato's Analysis: Why Be Moral
Why Be Moral
Grand Canyon University: PHI-305
Instructor: Dr. Cornell Horn
10/03/2014
Justice played a very important role in Plato’s philosophy. After chastising different theories of justice, he came up with his own theory, he said justice was a human virtue; it is what makes a person good. Individually, justice can make a person good and self-consistent, but socially it could bring harmony to society. Plato’s idea of justice was all about virtue and goodness. Plato also believed that justice was an essential part of an ideal society. Because it brought more light and could cure bad things.
Plato believed that philosophers had to rule the state and that they were the only ones that could judge what justice is because …show more content…
Glaucon argues that committing injustice is the best-case scenario and suffering injustice is the worst-case scenario, but the harm in suffering injustice far outweighs the good in doing it (Plato, 358e). Consequently, humanity came to a great compromise, agreeing to refrain from committing injustice in order to avoid suffering it. Humans would agree to this compromise out of fear of suffering injustice. However, Glaucon points out that a strong, smart person would not agree to this. Rather, if the negative consequences of injustice and the positive consequences of justice were removed, all humans would disagree with this compromise and act …show more content…
While the system may in fact be unjust, it is not entirely to blame for these actions. It is possible that because of the corruption of the system they would need to make additional cuts to the budget of the poor areas or reduce the taxes of the wealthy areas.
However, doing both simultaneously would decrease government spending on one hand and cut back on government income on the other hand, therefore conflicting with one another, making it highly unlikely that both were necessary actions. Because of these key points, the counterargument that the system, rather than the people working within it, is to blame, is not a sound one. Therefore it remains clear that Glaucon’s and Thrasymachus arguments that justice is merely a convention, rulers will rule to their own advantage and people act justly only for its consequences are supported by the events in Amazing
Grand Canyon University: PHI-305
Instructor: Dr. Cornell Horn
10/03/2014
Justice played a very important role in Plato’s philosophy. After chastising different theories of justice, he came up with his own theory, he said justice was a human virtue; it is what makes a person good. Individually, justice can make a person good and self-consistent, but socially it could bring harmony to society. Plato’s idea of justice was all about virtue and goodness. Plato also believed that justice was an essential part of an ideal society. Because it brought more light and could cure bad things.
Plato believed that philosophers had to rule the state and that they were the only ones that could judge what justice is because …show more content…
Glaucon argues that committing injustice is the best-case scenario and suffering injustice is the worst-case scenario, but the harm in suffering injustice far outweighs the good in doing it (Plato, 358e). Consequently, humanity came to a great compromise, agreeing to refrain from committing injustice in order to avoid suffering it. Humans would agree to this compromise out of fear of suffering injustice. However, Glaucon points out that a strong, smart person would not agree to this. Rather, if the negative consequences of injustice and the positive consequences of justice were removed, all humans would disagree with this compromise and act …show more content…
While the system may in fact be unjust, it is not entirely to blame for these actions. It is possible that because of the corruption of the system they would need to make additional cuts to the budget of the poor areas or reduce the taxes of the wealthy areas.
However, doing both simultaneously would decrease government spending on one hand and cut back on government income on the other hand, therefore conflicting with one another, making it highly unlikely that both were necessary actions. Because of these key points, the counterargument that the system, rather than the people working within it, is to blame, is not a sound one. Therefore it remains clear that Glaucon’s and Thrasymachus arguments that justice is merely a convention, rulers will rule to their own advantage and people act justly only for its consequences are supported by the events in Amazing