Glaucon presents interesting ideas on the origin and nature of justice. He affirms that this is an activity that people engage in merely for their own benefit. Based on the theory proposed by Glaucon, people engage in justice as a means of achieving personal or own interests. Therefore, the concept of justice did not appear out of moral good in society but, as a result, human selfishness. Within this framework, it means that people would not act in a just manner because they fear the resulting consequences of their actions. An example is the story on ‘Ring of Gyges’ presented by Glaucon. This story is an affirmation that people can act unjustly, especially when they would not be known or recognized for their actions. This aspect of acting justly just for the fear of consequences is an affirmation of the selfish nature of human beings. It means that given the opportunity, people would always choose to act unjustly (Pojman & Tramel, 2009).
List and Describe Three Parts of the Soul
Socrates describes three different parts of the soul. The first is the rational part. This is often associated with intellectual thinking and the making of logical decisions. Socrates considers this to be the highest and most important part of the soul, as it is driven by the pursuit of truth and knowledge. The second part is the spiritual or emotional part. This part is often associated with emotions that make people human. This is associated with different emotions, such as courage, fear, or pride. The ability of an individual to experience and experience these emotions is an important aspect of existence. Equally, the ability to experience emotions such as fear is what drives people to chase their goals and ambitions, including the pursuit of justice. It would be impossible to pursue justice without the emotional part of the soul. The third part represents the physical pleasures and desires of human beings. Generally, human beings have physical desires for things such as food and sex. The pursuit of these desires offers some sense of gratification to people. The pursuit of these bodily pleasures and desires is driven by this part of the brain. The three parts often work together to achieve some level of balance in the lives of human beings.
Part Two: Ethical Egoism
Thomas Hobbes’s statement linking moral philosophy to natural law is grounded on his argument that natural moral principles are founded on human nature. In his seminal work, ‘Leviathan,’ Thomas argued that human nature is driven by desires to seek self-preservation and self-sustainability, which dictates them to seek self-peace and security (Pojman & Tramel, 2009). Based on Hobbes, moral principles governing human behaviour can be derived from their natural attributes of seeking peace and security. Thomas Hobbes justifies his statement linking “moral philosophy to a science of natural law” by noting that human morality is founded on the fundamental principles of humanity, which can be understood through rational inquiry or scientific investigation (Pojman & Tramel, 2009). The understanding that natural laws dictate human natural conditions, Thomas Hobbes attributes that societal structures or authority do not govern human interactions but human inclinations defined by the pursuit of self-interests and security (Tran, 2023). Hobbes genuinely argued that in the absence of a caching authority, the perpetual natural state of humans to seek self-interests would result in war, endangering human life. Nevertheless, Thomas Hobbes argued that the very nature of human inclinations for peace and security places the need for a sovereign authority.
Hobbes and Rand’s views of how moral principles govern human behavior shaped by natural laws differ significantly. Hobbes discusses moral principles based on human nature and underpins the importance of a governing structure to maintain social order resulting from the inherent chaos of human nature (Pojman and Tramel, 2009). Rand contradicts Hobbes’s view by noting that individuals should pursue to secure their self-interests through engaging in productive, rational interactions while maintaining personal autonomy (Biddle, 2021). Ray advocates for a code of values centered on rational, voluntary, and productive interactions instead of obedience to an external sovereign governing structure. Rand’s philosophy, which is based on objectivism, advocates for individual autonomy, which is contrary to Hobbes’s view of submission to a governing structure (Drelich, 2018). Rand’s rejection of severing authority is based on the view that an individual’s rights of liberty and self-happiness should be realized by voluntary, rational, and mutual interactions rather than coercion or submission to a governing structure.
References
Biddle, C. (2021). Introduction to Ayn Rand’s Objectivism.
Drelich, S. (2018). The Revolutionary Political Philosophy of Ayn Rand. Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej, 17(2), 35-46.
Pojman, L. P., & Tramel, P. (Eds.). (2009). Moral philosophy: A reader. Hackett Publishing.
Tran, T. T. (2023). Thomas Hobbes’ view on the subject of power in” Leviathan.” Journal of Namibian Studies: History Politics Culture, 33, 561-573.
write