Question2 Tanieka Kargwal comments NW
Hume argues that ‘it is only from the selfishness and confin’d generosity of men, along with the scanty provision nature has made for his wants, that justice derives its origin’. Is he right?
Name: Tanieka Kargwal
Words: 1524
In this essay I will contend and try to persuade you that the origins of justice do not require both ‘selfishness’ and ‘scanty provisions’ but rather one of the two conditions is enough in order to derive justice. This is because we are able to create property rights by with one of the two present, whereas Hume argues that both, the selfishness of man and the scarce resources that we have present in the world are essential in order for justice and property rights to be derived. This is a relevant topic because it describes how our current society has been brought about and how we have developed markets and institutions within society. I will firstly define what Hume means by selfishness, confined generosity, scanty provisions and justice, and from this I will identify Hume’s viewpoint regarding the derivation of justice. It is from this establishment of Hume’s derivation, I am able to provide examples where only one of the two conditions is required to fulfil the institution of justice. I will do this by providing an example of where there is unlimited benevolence but limited external goods and where there is limited benevolence and unlimited external goods. I will look at both Hume’s viewpoint on the derivation of justice and mine from the notion of game theory—to see where payoff would be greater and hence why we see the development of justice.
This is an excellent introduction with all the three key elements: a) motivation of the essay prompt, b) clear claim, and c) structure of your paper. Well done!
Hume describes humans as being self-interested creatures. It is through this idea that Hume defines our limited benevolence and the ‘self-love’: one will love one-self the most and from here the love for another being diminishes
Name: Tanieka Kargwal
Words: 1524
In this essay I will contend and try to persuade you that the origins of justice do not require both ‘selfishness’ and ‘scanty provisions’ but rather one of the two conditions is enough in order to derive justice. This is because we are able to create property rights by with one of the two present, whereas Hume argues that both, the selfishness of man and the scarce resources that we have present in the world are essential in order for justice and property rights to be derived. This is a relevant topic because it describes how our current society has been brought about and how we have developed markets and institutions within society. I will firstly define what Hume means by selfishness, confined generosity, scanty provisions and justice, and from this I will identify Hume’s viewpoint regarding the derivation of justice. It is from this establishment of Hume’s derivation, I am able to provide examples where only one of the two conditions is required to fulfil the institution of justice. I will do this by providing an example of where there is unlimited benevolence but limited external goods and where there is limited benevolence and unlimited external goods. I will look at both Hume’s viewpoint on the derivation of justice and mine from the notion of game theory—to see where payoff would be greater and hence why we see the development of justice.
This is an excellent introduction with all the three key elements: a) motivation of the essay prompt, b) clear claim, and c) structure of your paper. Well done!
Hume describes humans as being self-interested creatures. It is through this idea that Hume defines our limited benevolence and the ‘self-love’: one will love one-self the most and from here the love for another being diminishes