Just because a student cheats on a test or copies work doesn’t mean that they lack intelligence, it could simply mean that they are lazy so they choose to take a shortcut to get the grade that they are looking for. So, if they are an A average student and they cheat on one paper or test simply because they wanted the top grade but didn’t want to do the work they could get away with doing that injustice because they have a record of demonstrating ‘A Average’ work. If, however, they were caught they could plead that they simply forgot to cite their sources correctly and their teacher or professor may over look it. Now, the just student may have wanted to truly help out a friend who needed a certain grade so the student let them copy their homework. The just student was only helping a friend but such an action is frowned upon when both students turn in their homework with the same answers. The just students just reputation is then tarnished for something they thought would just help a friend out. At the end of the day, determining who is just or not is dependent on how a society as a whole views a person, not the individual. Considering the premises presented, I would say that the conclusion is true. When traveling the path towards a just life and reputation a shortcut may pop up, most likely the unjust path, and sometimes a person may detour and end up on that path but will easily jump back on track so no one see’s them cheating. Everyone wants to have a good reputation, and being just is a way of having that preferred reputation, and because this is something everyone wants it becomes a necessity. The structure of Plato’s argument is valid because his premises appear to be
Just because a student cheats on a test or copies work doesn’t mean that they lack intelligence, it could simply mean that they are lazy so they choose to take a shortcut to get the grade that they are looking for. So, if they are an A average student and they cheat on one paper or test simply because they wanted the top grade but didn’t want to do the work they could get away with doing that injustice because they have a record of demonstrating ‘A Average’ work. If, however, they were caught they could plead that they simply forgot to cite their sources correctly and their teacher or professor may over look it. Now, the just student may have wanted to truly help out a friend who needed a certain grade so the student let them copy their homework. The just student was only helping a friend but such an action is frowned upon when both students turn in their homework with the same answers. The just students just reputation is then tarnished for something they thought would just help a friend out. At the end of the day, determining who is just or not is dependent on how a society as a whole views a person, not the individual. Considering the premises presented, I would say that the conclusion is true. When traveling the path towards a just life and reputation a shortcut may pop up, most likely the unjust path, and sometimes a person may detour and end up on that path but will easily jump back on track so no one see’s them cheating. Everyone wants to have a good reputation, and being just is a way of having that preferred reputation, and because this is something everyone wants it becomes a necessity. The structure of Plato’s argument is valid because his premises appear to be