Preview

Justice Through the Eyes of Plato and Hume

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
929 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Justice Through the Eyes of Plato and Hume
Name
Course
Instructor
Day Month Year
Justice through the Eyes of Plato and Hume
The philosophic debate of justice goes back millennia with many points of view on what it actually is and why we have it. Both Plato and Hume had ideas on justice and both differed. Plato, in his Republic, searches for justice by building a city from the ground up in our imagination. He starts with merely five to ten people each with their own job and states that justice is the virtue of the soul. David Hume tells us that “public utility is the sole origin of justice (Hume, 15).” David Hume sees Socrates’ approach to justice as misguided due to the abundance of resources in his “simple city,” the lack of advantage to justice in a group as small as Socrates’, and the lack of necessity for laws of foreign justice.
The abundance of resources in Socrates’ city is apparent. With a town of ten people there ought to be enough resources to go around in excess. There is no need for justice when there is no need to fret about your supply of resources. If everyone has more than enough of everything than no one needs to protect what they have. When a resource then becomes limited then we impose justice to protect the supply we have. We impose justice on theft of a neighbor but not on breathing in a neighbor’s home because his valuables are limited in supply but air is not.
Now, some people may argue that all people, no matter the amount of resources will instinctively protect the product of his work. This may be true to an extent of self-preservation as well as a family, but if the resource is so abundant, than a person does not need to protect a certain amount of it for himself. Rather he is able to use it freely without concern for supply and he will not impose justice to protect that resource for himself. Only as he starts running out of a resource will anyone start using justice to ensure the security of his supply. Air is a good example of this, that no man has laid a



Cited: Hume, David. "Section 3: Of Justice." An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. 2nd ed. La Salle: Open Court, 1966. 15. Print. Plato. The Republic of Plato: Transl. with Notes and an Interpretative Essay by Allan Bloom. Trans. Allan David Bloom. New York: Basic, 1991. Print.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Even though he had classified justice as one of the artifial virtues, he later identifies it, along with benevolence, as a social virtue. He argues that although benevolence is necessary for self-enjoyment, it cannot be reduced entirely to self-interest as the Hobbesians think but tends rather to promote social welfare. While benevolence is an original principle in human nature, justice is not. The need for rules of justice is not universal. It arises only under conditions of relative scarcity, where property has to be regulated to preserve order in society. For Hume the language of morality implies some sentiment common to all mankind, which recommends the same object for general approval. It also implies some universal and comprehensive…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In many societies, including our own, we labeled the meaning of the word “justice” for the sole purpose of maintaining social and political stability and order for the good of many instead of the few. However, what we believe to be just and unjust in regards to what Plato’s Republic explains about what is actually just and unjust are inadvertently blurred from a somewhat conflicting (if not unintended biased) perspective. These concepts of thought originate in a hierarchical group of knowledge: understanding, thought, belief, and imagination (Socrates 511e); most of which we use for measuring the ideal implementation of practical and critical forms of theory. What we portray justice in the United States today mostly consists of both opinionated…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    What is justice? Today, where it is common for people to only look out for themselves, justice is an extremely important tool. But what exactly is justice? What is right, what is wrong, and who decides that? To find an accurate definition, we as a society should not just focus on one opinion, but the views of many. Similar to how our society is today, the society in The Republic, lived the same, struggling to determine what the correct definition of justice was, and how to pursue the right answer. In the paper, I will be discussing all aspects of Plato’s Republic, including the Philosopher King and his nature, and justice in that time.…

    • 114 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    If a man was not subjected to law or punishment would he choose to do what is considered just? In Plato’s The Republic, Glaucon, one of Socrates’ students, states a common view on justice. Justice is simply a lesser evil when compared to the two extremes which are suffering injustice without power to retaliate and doing injustice without suffering consequences. According to Glaucon, all men are inherently unjust, and only do what is just when forced to do so by law. This view of justice can be seen throughout history when leaders, like Nero, do unjust actions for their own personal gain simply because they are free from any consequences.…

    • 462 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    What is justice is a question that has plagued philosophers since the time of Plato when he wrote The Republic to present day. In the book, Plato uses the dialectic, between Socrates and other Athenians like Polemarchus, Cephalus, and Glacuon, to try and find the definition of justice. Through the voice of Glaucon, Plato defines justice as a compromise of sorts between advantage and fear, and injustice as the things that we wouldn’t…

    • 962 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In his philosophy, Plato places a large emphasis on the importance of the idea of justice. This emphasis can be seen especially in his work ‘The Republic’ where, through his main character Socrates, he attempts to define the nature of justice and to justify this definition. One of the methods used by Socrates to strengthen or rather explain his argument on justice is through his famous city-soul analogy, where a comparison between a just city and a just soul/individual is made. Through this analogy, Socrates attempts to explain the nature of justice, how it is the virtue of the soul and is therefore intrinsically valuable to the individual, but it becomes apparent in the analysis and evaluation of the analogy that there may have been several purposes behind it. Inconsistencies within the analogy itself also raise questions to the validity in Plato’s definition and justification of justice.…

    • 1949 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Socrates meets with some of his friends and begins discussing the meaning of justice and whether the just life is better than the unjust life. First, they contemplate the meaning of justice. Cephalus stated that justice is as simple as telling the truth and returning what you receive, Polemarchus stated that justice is giving each his due, and Thrasymachus stated that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Socrates proves each of them wrong and embarks on a discussion to find out what true justice is, and to find out whether the just man is truly happier than the unjust man, or vice versa.…

    • 627 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When Socrates is asked to defend justice on its own, but not for the reputation that it brings, he suggests that justice should be found in the city before starting to use the analogy of finding it in an individual. He then uses an example of a just city that aims at satisfying the basic human wants. Some citizens enter into political welfare as no one is independent. Nevertheless,…

    • 879 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Back in Hume’s time, there were mainly three schools of thought regarding the nature of morality. This debate was initiated by Thomas Hobbes’ view that moral obligations and duties came from self-regarding motives. In response to Thomas Hobbes’ argument, there are two schools of thought, namely rationalism and sentimentalism. Rationalists such as Samuel Clarke argued that morality could be explained by pure reason , and acting morally is just the same as acting rationally. Hume is on the side of the sentimentalists, as he rejects reason as the basis of morality . Hume argues, rather, that it is our moral sentiments that serve as the basis of moral approvals and disapprovals . In Hume’s picture, each action produces certain feelings in the recipients, be it pain or pleasure, and it is through sympathizing with the recipients which we have an impression of the resulting pain or pleasure in the recipients, and thus approve of or disapprove of the active person’s character trait which led to the action.…

    • 216 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hume believes the root of morality is emotion. He believes emotions, or passions, as he calls them, are the driving force behind our actions. Hume believes that how we feel about things determines what we determine is moral or immoral. There is no logical reason for keeping one’s promises if there is no benefit to you. However, we as a people have decided that keeping one’s word is moral because we would like someone to do that for us. We keep our promises because we want people to think kindly of us. There is no logic behind it, but there is emotion. Even when there is nothing to be gained for us by keeping our promises, we still maintain its moral to keep them because of how it makes us feel. This means, even when it is illogical to do something, if we feel it is moral, we should do it. Reason is not enough to change how we behave. It can give us some direction but it cannot compel us to do…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Cave and Apology

    • 1784 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The Collected Dialogues of Plato: Republic. Trans. Paul Shorey. The Collected Dialogues. Eds. Edith Hamilton and. Huntington Cairns. Bollingen Series 71. New York: Pantheon, 1961.…

    • 1784 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The theme of justice however is first presented in Book 1; which is composed of a discussion mainly between Socrates, Cephalus, Polemarchus, Thrasymachu. The goal of this discussion is to define what justice really is. Firstly Cephalus suggests that justice involves nothing more than telling the truth and repaying one’s debts. But Socrates proves him wrong with a counter-example that shows that following this rule could end up being disastrous. For instance, if you give back a a borrowed weapon to a madman, you would therefore put in danger lives.…

    • 1592 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cited: Plato, Crito, Trans. Benjamin Jowett. The Internet Classics Archive. Web Atomic. Web. 4 Feb. 2014…

    • 1070 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Plato and Aristotle, arguably the most important philosophers of their time, both made attempts to define justice. Being that Aristotle was a student of Plato, their ideas share many similarities. Both viewed justice as the harmonious interaction of people in a society. However, Plato defined his ideal of justice with more usage of metaphysics, invoking his Form of the Good, while Aristotle took a more practical approach, speaking in terms of money and balance. Although Aristotle's ideal of justice may seem superior, upon further inspection, Plato's ideal of justice is the stronger.…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Socrates often debated on the definition of justice, but in essence it was to not cause harm or commit unjust actions upon others. Those who have performed unjust actions have caused self-harm by corrupting their body and soul. “One should never do wrong in return, nor do any man harm, no matter what he may have done to you” (Plato 52). This harm leads to the destruction of one’s virtue, and the destruction of virtue is the loss of understanding what is just. The obligation to adhere to the concepts of justice by following the laws of the state is yet another aspect of the arguments. Even though the laws are often written by a majority who does not understand the true meaning of justice it is still just to follow these laws. When someone voluntarily decides to live in a city or state they therefore agree to abide by the laws of said city. One is obliged to follow the laws when, “So decisively did you choose us and agree to be a citizen under us” (Plato 55). This argument is referring to Socrate’s refusal to flee Athens after he is sentenced to death in a court of law for corrupting the youth of Athens and for his supposed impiety. He decided to be a citizen of Athens and will adhere to their laws and decisions in a court. Even though many…

    • 2061 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays