This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by November 3, 2017 at 12:19 pm.
October 28, 2017 at 12:20 pm #1310
Most people have heard the phrase; “God is good”, “Good job”, and things of that sort. Being good seems to be something that is appreciated by cultures all around the world. So what does it mean to be good? What are its benefits? Is it necessary for a civilization to be filled with good people? There are many definitions of good in the world, and there are many ideas about how one should be good, but what is, if anything, ultimately true about being good.
One thing someone can say for certain is that “good” seems to be the way we interact with and treat other people. Primarily, the idea that permeates most cultures is the idea that what you do unto others will be done unto you, therefore treat people around you good. You can see, in history, the idea of “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. These ideas clearly show a human yearning for justice. Justice, was described by Plato, is a “human virtue” that people universally want. So that begs the question, what is justice?
Justice is similar to the idea of good, in the sense that you can see examples of it from cultures all around the world. It is also difficult to find an exact and true definition of justice. However, the general idea is that justice is how we treat are friends and our enemies. This definition comes from Plato’s Republic. Even though this definition is challenged by Socrates, he, later on in the text, seems to agree with this definition. Plato did not only say that, he also described that justice can be defined as following the laws set by a kings who yearns for justice.
So, after thinking for a while, it seems that justice is not without its blurred lines, however it does have a universal theme to it. That theme seems to illustrate the idea that justice is when we act the way we should. That definition is still disappointingly relative. Unless you take into account the idea of human nature, and what it is.
November 3, 2017 at 12:19 pm #1321
your argument equates being good to the social contract. as seen in the republic the ring of gyges (probably spelling it wrong) would make a man under the social contract immune to others and therefore it would be better for him if he was not good. thereby, goodness by this model is COMPLETELY relative. your reference to human nature to attempt to fix this would not be accepted as a fix in the public square because human nature to the public can mean any number of things. (and it is not clear how this is to fix it anyway)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.