Unjust Life To Live In Plato's Republic
The Best Life to Live Book two of Plato’s Republic identifies the differences between and defines what it means to live a just life and an unjust life. This provides us with specific details of which life is actually the better life to live. I believe that in our society today, the unjust life can have many consequences where as the just life does not truly have many benefits like it should. Because of this, I think it leads people to be more inclined to do more unjust acts more often than just, but only if they think they could get away with it. If a person had the opportunity to commit an unjust act and knowingly get away with it, or live an unjust life, I believe that numerous individuals would commit the unjust act over the just
…show more content…
action and a just life, because people of our society seek to benefit themselves over others even though they should not. Although, the best life that an individual would choose to live is one that is not concerned with injustice or unjust action at all. Within the Republic, Socrates attacks one claim specifically, that the better life is that of the person who commits unjust actions but is viewed and know as a just individual (The Republic). This conveys that it is better to only appear to others to be just. Having the appearance of being just is more important than actually committing just actions, because in todays society people care more for what others think of them and how they are viewed in the public image. How a person in thought of by his or her piers is extremely crucial to his or her success in life. For example, a college graduate who is looking for a job must appear to possible employers as a just individual. No company would hire someone knowing that he or she is unjust and continually commits unjust actions. Along the same lines, any young individual entering the work force must be aware of their previous decisions such as people they associate with, things they choose to do, and especially the ever popular social networking. A persons image or reputation can be blemished by one unjust act and make it easy to forget all of that persons just actions. For instance, our 42nd President Bill Clinton, his one unjust action lead to the country to view him as an unjust individual. As president of the United States, we assume that he or she is a just individual and will not commit unjust action. Based on Socrates’ opinion, the best life being that of the unjust but to be viewed as just, I believe that for Clinton committing this act and not having the public find out would have been what Socrates is claiming. This goes to show that even the supposed most just individual of our country, the President, can even commit one unjust action that ruins his just reputation. In addition, this can also show that the ultimate goal is for a person to be able to get away with committing any unjust action and maintain a just reputation. If a person was able to commit and unjust act and knowingly have no consequence to pay, many people would commit unjust actions daily.
Being able to do anything without consequence would quickly lead to mayhem within a country. This is shown in the text with the story of The Ring of Gyges. The Ring of Gyges is a story of which the person whom wears the ring is invisible and able to commit any action (The Republic). In my opinion, if people in our society had access to this ring, I think every person would commit unjust acts. Even the most just individual would turn to unjust actions. With this ring, it would bring out the worst in every person and give him or her the ability to give into any desire. If a person knew no one could ever find out it was he or she who had committed any unjust action there would be no reason not to commit the act. I think that any person wearing this ring would give in to his or her own person desires and wants. They would do this because if we all knew of its powers we would look only help ourselves and attempt to possible better our lives. Compared to the actual story of the ring itself, the person wearing it kills the King in order to better his own life. He also gives in to sexual desires of his own at the same time. Both of these things I believe foreshadowing what it is thought of that people would do if they had the ring. Overall, I think people would commit unjust actions with this ring because he or she would not be able to avoid his or her true desires and wants in life. In addition, I am not saying that every person would be this way but in my opinion, most would. Although, I do believe that there is some people who are genuinely just individuals and even with this ring would commit some unjust acts. People like this would be ones who use the ring to helps others and benefit the greater good but also do give in to some of his or her personal wants and desires. I think it is possible to wear this ring and not
only be able to benefit oneself but also others around you. On the other hand, some people do choose to commit only just actions and do not intend to reap only the benefits from it but simply just to do the action. People like this I believe are rarely found but are the type of people our world depends upon. A person, who acts only to help others and leaves him or herself behind, is in my belief the best individual. People like this can commit just actions and sincerely look to help others and not want to commit unjust actions. Although he or she may contemplate unjust actions, he or she will not commit them. In The Republic, Socrates claims in the end of, that not only is the best life a truly just one, but that the one who lives justly is actually rewarded for living justly (The Republic). For example, this makes me think of many charitable organizations. Numerous charitable organizations are set up in order to benefit those in need or anything at all. The employees and founder of these organizations are individuals whom do they just things of forming organizations to help others simply to gain support for a certain cause. These are the type of people who do not do things only for the personal benefits but to sincerely support and help others. If we had individuals like this in our country I believe as a whole, we would have more of a community. In this sense community meaning that each person would have stronger and more sincere connections with one another and not look to hurt one another. If our world could be this why and inhabited by more people like this I believe we would not have the problems that we do.
Socrates’ definition of the best life also reflects that people who act justly are also rewarded. When he speaks of this reward, he does not mean with wealth or fame, but with intellectual satisfaction and virtue (The Republic). I think this also shows that he thinks that acting justly will not earn a person wealth or fame but at the same time would not be important to that person. If someone chooses to act justly and live a just life, then he or she is not focused on the possibility of anything other than living justly. This type of person would not be interested in any type of fame or financial success as long as they are acting justly, whatever that leads them to is what they deserve. Furthermore, when Socrates says they shall be rewarded with intellectual satisfaction and virtue, I think this means that he or she would simply feel to be a better person (The Republic). People would be rewarding themselves after committing just actions by bettering themselves and feeling like a better person. If people like this spend a lifetime of acting justly, he or she will know that they have been the best person possible and could not have acted any better. A person would choose this life because it is the most self-sufficient. People need to rely more and more on themselves and not have to focus on what others around he or she are doing. Any individual that lives a just life and choosing only just actions is one that would not have any reliance on others. They would also live this way because this is his or her reward, as Socrates says, the personal satisfaction that he or she always did the just thing and never acted wrongly. Also, that he or she lived a life of virtue and has nothing to regret and wish they had not done. This argument of Socrates’ is also the opposite of the opinion of Glaucon.
Glaucon thinks that if people would live a truly just life, he or she would only live this way due to the fear of being punished (The Republic). This conveys that people would only act justly or do the right thing because they are more afraid of what may happen if they do not. People act justly mostly out of fear of punishment, so if acting justly is not good, and if he or she thought they could get away with an unjust action, people would have no reason not to act unjustly. Both of these statements point out that when a person acts justly there is something that can be feared so what is the use of doing it at all. For example, this could be shown in the case of a person testifying in court. If there is someone on trial for murder and there is a witness, who has no prior connection to the alleged murderer, that witness is doing a just action of testifying but also has the fear of being punished (physically hurt) by the alleged murderer. In this instance if the person is still found not guilty, the individual who testified now has a life of fear that the other person may punish them. If you look at Glaucon’s argument in this manner, it does appear to make logic sense of why a person would act this way. Although, as previously stated, Socrates is able to easily refute this claim and state that acting justly is the best life and will lead to intellectual satisfaction and virtue (The Republic). Even if we examine the same trial example, the person who testified knows personally that they are doing the right and just thing after witnessing the murder. Since they would be aware of this, this is what gives them the sense of virtue and knowing that he or she did the just action. Overall, if individuals had the opportunity to commit and unjust action and know for certain he or she would not have any consequences to pay, he or she would commit that unjust act, even though, not every person would do so. In addition, people would choose the life of just actions over any other simply for the personal benefit. Through different examples and textual interpretations, I have argued how individuals would act and why they would choose these particular life styles. The Republic leads to the conclusion that the best life is a truly just one, but that the one who lives justly is actually rewarded for living justly (The Republic). Furthermore, based on the story of the Ring of Gyges, it also conveys that a person would have difficulty deciphering what actions they would actually commit whether just or unjust. Both of these concepts from the text show that it would be difficult to live an honest just life, but I think that it is possible for some individuals. All in all, I believe the best life is that of the person who lives the just life, and lives it with all they have to offer to any person willing to accept it.
Works Cited
The Republic, 37-120 (327a-592b)
action and a just life, because people of our society seek to benefit themselves over others even though they should not. Although, the best life that an individual would choose to live is one that is not concerned with injustice or unjust action at all. Within the Republic, Socrates attacks one claim specifically, that the better life is that of the person who commits unjust actions but is viewed and know as a just individual (The Republic). This conveys that it is better to only appear to others to be just. Having the appearance of being just is more important than actually committing just actions, because in todays society people care more for what others think of them and how they are viewed in the public image. How a person in thought of by his or her piers is extremely crucial to his or her success in life. For example, a college graduate who is looking for a job must appear to possible employers as a just individual. No company would hire someone knowing that he or she is unjust and continually commits unjust actions. Along the same lines, any young individual entering the work force must be aware of their previous decisions such as people they associate with, things they choose to do, and especially the ever popular social networking. A persons image or reputation can be blemished by one unjust act and make it easy to forget all of that persons just actions. For instance, our 42nd President Bill Clinton, his one unjust action lead to the country to view him as an unjust individual. As president of the United States, we assume that he or she is a just individual and will not commit unjust action. Based on Socrates’ opinion, the best life being that of the unjust but to be viewed as just, I believe that for Clinton committing this act and not having the public find out would have been what Socrates is claiming. This goes to show that even the supposed most just individual of our country, the President, can even commit one unjust action that ruins his just reputation. In addition, this can also show that the ultimate goal is for a person to be able to get away with committing any unjust action and maintain a just reputation. If a person was able to commit and unjust act and knowingly have no consequence to pay, many people would commit unjust actions daily.
Being able to do anything without consequence would quickly lead to mayhem within a country. This is shown in the text with the story of The Ring of Gyges. The Ring of Gyges is a story of which the person whom wears the ring is invisible and able to commit any action (The Republic). In my opinion, if people in our society had access to this ring, I think every person would commit unjust acts. Even the most just individual would turn to unjust actions. With this ring, it would bring out the worst in every person and give him or her the ability to give into any desire. If a person knew no one could ever find out it was he or she who had committed any unjust action there would be no reason not to commit the act. I think that any person wearing this ring would give in to his or her own person desires and wants. They would do this because if we all knew of its powers we would look only help ourselves and attempt to possible better our lives. Compared to the actual story of the ring itself, the person wearing it kills the King in order to better his own life. He also gives in to sexual desires of his own at the same time. Both of these things I believe foreshadowing what it is thought of that people would do if they had the ring. Overall, I think people would commit unjust actions with this ring because he or she would not be able to avoid his or her true desires and wants in life. In addition, I am not saying that every person would be this way but in my opinion, most would. Although, I do believe that there is some people who are genuinely just individuals and even with this ring would commit some unjust acts. People like this would be ones who use the ring to helps others and benefit the greater good but also do give in to some of his or her personal wants and desires. I think it is possible to wear this ring and not
only be able to benefit oneself but also others around you. On the other hand, some people do choose to commit only just actions and do not intend to reap only the benefits from it but simply just to do the action. People like this I believe are rarely found but are the type of people our world depends upon. A person, who acts only to help others and leaves him or herself behind, is in my belief the best individual. People like this can commit just actions and sincerely look to help others and not want to commit unjust actions. Although he or she may contemplate unjust actions, he or she will not commit them. In The Republic, Socrates claims in the end of, that not only is the best life a truly just one, but that the one who lives justly is actually rewarded for living justly (The Republic). For example, this makes me think of many charitable organizations. Numerous charitable organizations are set up in order to benefit those in need or anything at all. The employees and founder of these organizations are individuals whom do they just things of forming organizations to help others simply to gain support for a certain cause. These are the type of people who do not do things only for the personal benefits but to sincerely support and help others. If we had individuals like this in our country I believe as a whole, we would have more of a community. In this sense community meaning that each person would have stronger and more sincere connections with one another and not look to hurt one another. If our world could be this why and inhabited by more people like this I believe we would not have the problems that we do.
Socrates’ definition of the best life also reflects that people who act justly are also rewarded. When he speaks of this reward, he does not mean with wealth or fame, but with intellectual satisfaction and virtue (The Republic). I think this also shows that he thinks that acting justly will not earn a person wealth or fame but at the same time would not be important to that person. If someone chooses to act justly and live a just life, then he or she is not focused on the possibility of anything other than living justly. This type of person would not be interested in any type of fame or financial success as long as they are acting justly, whatever that leads them to is what they deserve. Furthermore, when Socrates says they shall be rewarded with intellectual satisfaction and virtue, I think this means that he or she would simply feel to be a better person (The Republic). People would be rewarding themselves after committing just actions by bettering themselves and feeling like a better person. If people like this spend a lifetime of acting justly, he or she will know that they have been the best person possible and could not have acted any better. A person would choose this life because it is the most self-sufficient. People need to rely more and more on themselves and not have to focus on what others around he or she are doing. Any individual that lives a just life and choosing only just actions is one that would not have any reliance on others. They would also live this way because this is his or her reward, as Socrates says, the personal satisfaction that he or she always did the just thing and never acted wrongly. Also, that he or she lived a life of virtue and has nothing to regret and wish they had not done. This argument of Socrates’ is also the opposite of the opinion of Glaucon.
Glaucon thinks that if people would live a truly just life, he or she would only live this way due to the fear of being punished (The Republic). This conveys that people would only act justly or do the right thing because they are more afraid of what may happen if they do not. People act justly mostly out of fear of punishment, so if acting justly is not good, and if he or she thought they could get away with an unjust action, people would have no reason not to act unjustly. Both of these statements point out that when a person acts justly there is something that can be feared so what is the use of doing it at all. For example, this could be shown in the case of a person testifying in court. If there is someone on trial for murder and there is a witness, who has no prior connection to the alleged murderer, that witness is doing a just action of testifying but also has the fear of being punished (physically hurt) by the alleged murderer. In this instance if the person is still found not guilty, the individual who testified now has a life of fear that the other person may punish them. If you look at Glaucon’s argument in this manner, it does appear to make logic sense of why a person would act this way. Although, as previously stated, Socrates is able to easily refute this claim and state that acting justly is the best life and will lead to intellectual satisfaction and virtue (The Republic). Even if we examine the same trial example, the person who testified knows personally that they are doing the right and just thing after witnessing the murder. Since they would be aware of this, this is what gives them the sense of virtue and knowing that he or she did the just action. Overall, if individuals had the opportunity to commit and unjust action and know for certain he or she would not have any consequences to pay, he or she would commit that unjust act, even though, not every person would do so. In addition, people would choose the life of just actions over any other simply for the personal benefit. Through different examples and textual interpretations, I have argued how individuals would act and why they would choose these particular life styles. The Republic leads to the conclusion that the best life is a truly just one, but that the one who lives justly is actually rewarded for living justly (The Republic). Furthermore, based on the story of the Ring of Gyges, it also conveys that a person would have difficulty deciphering what actions they would actually commit whether just or unjust. Both of these concepts from the text show that it would be difficult to live an honest just life, but I think that it is possible for some individuals. All in all, I believe the best life is that of the person who lives the just life, and lives it with all they have to offer to any person willing to accept it.
Works Cited
The Republic, 37-120 (327a-592b)