"In justice every virtue is summed up" (Aristotle 114). Upon the founding of a community, leaders often want to reach an ideal just society. In order to reach this state of justice, they set forth principles to guide and shape the newly-founded civilization. Unfortunately, the correct values are frequently either misused or not put into practice. This can lead to a decline in a community, where the people never reach a point of true justice. Therefore, a just society must have its basis in solid beliefs. This foundation is achieved through the principles set forth by Aristotle and the teachings of virtue in the New Testament. Laws should regulate people's actions. Each individual should receive equal distributions of items, and in order for the civilization to remain just, each person should lead a virtuous life.
Laws hold a society together as a means of protecting the people and creating order. Aristotle states, "For the just exists only among men whose mutual relationship is regulated by law, and law exists where injustice may occur. For legal judgment decides and distinguishes between what is just and what is unjust" (Aristotle 129). He explains that humans are fallible creatures, and at times they need a form of regulation when they veer off the path of justice. Thus, in order to hold society together a set of laws should be enacted, along with a council to preside over the laws created. Even Jesus knows the importance of a set of laws when he answers his disciples, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your mind. [...] You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (The Holy Bible 24). The greatest commandments given in the New Testament cover two main areas of being faithful...
... middle of paper ...
...mans are still fallible creatures, who are not likely to act virtuously. While most societies have laws to govern the people, members are only punished when they act unjustly on a greater level towards others, such as killing another person or stealing. Members often seek equality with ideas such socialism, like China and Russia. Nevertheless, over time, they evolve into communism, and they often fall into ruin, because the system becomes corrupted by members with higher social status. The failings with the just society today lie in the individual who does not live a virtuous life. Either they do not care to have justice within themselves or they do not recognize the impact their unjust actions have on the people around them. While members in a civilization live without virtue, it would be difficult for an ideal just society to exist.
Works Cited
Aristotle
Jesus
The formula of humanity and universal laws help people decide how a certain act would affect the world and if it would be a moral thing to do. This allows for a more standardization of figuring out if something is moral or not. Aristotle’s view of virtue is like The Bible. The things that he finds are virtuous can be seen in different ways. For example, people use The Bible to say certain things like men shouldn’t marry other men or that capital punishment is bad, but other people can use the same text to argue that men should get married and that capital punishment is fine. Same can be said for Aristotle because he gives a list of virtues in chapter 7, but these virtues can be seen in different ways. An example of this could be friendliness which is a virtue. People can be too friendly or not friendly enough but it’s personal preference and changes for everyone. Furthermore, some virtues aren’t on the list, and as societies grow more virtuous characteristics arise as
Nearly two millennia later, Salic law seeks to introduce a similar law code to that of Hammurabi. Religious influence binds these two legislations showing, once again, the importance of religious law. During the medieval times education and literacy took a sharp decline, leaving religious officials such as priests and monks in a state of power. Priests sought to influence kings in order to spread their faith and ensure that all people held a similar foundation in beliefs. Salic law sought to incorporate the rules of the ten commandments of Christianity and Judaism, as the foundation for this law code. This law code parallels Christian beliefs through its moral guidelines of not to kill, steal, fornicate, and be dishonest. However, unlike other law codes, Salic law does not hold any physical punishments for crimes such as murder, rather majority of the crimes ask for some sort of fine to be paid; “If any one shall have killed a free Frank, or a barbarian living under the Salic law, and it have been proved on him, he shall be sentenced to 8000 denars.” The purpose of this seems to be influenced by priests consulting with Clovis during the making of this law. Fines help build both the government and church, allowing for an increase of conversions and land to be obtained. Religious officials see Clovis as an opportunity to ensure the survival of their faith through Salic law hoping to bring unity within the nation and church. This cooperation with the church gave the monarchs the ability to keep power, making their reign a god given right. While this helps maintain power for the ruler, citizens are ostracized for disagreements with the ruler. The use of religion establishes the law’s authority, ensuring none question the decreeing of the king, unless that person wishes to be subject of
The well-known philosopher Aristotle once said,“At his best man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst.” In other words, Aristotle is saying because of justice and the law mankind are partrian (a person of noble or high rank). However, if justice did not exist humanity would become barbaric. In fact, Glaucon and David Humes were both philosophers who shared a similar perspective
In the Republic Plato endeavours to answer complex questions about justice by introducing a unique account of what justice actually is, and how morally sensitive people are educated and informed about the real nature of justice and morality [3]. Our understanding of justice is more profound if we insist that what really matters is not merely the observance of external demands — normative and conventional moral rules — but the character of the truly just person [4]. Justice and goodness, based upon judgement as the virtue of a decent life, are seen as congruent in the context of a well ordered society.
When we consider the questions of how we ought to live our lives, we often seek for some schematic that we can employ to help us categorize actions or qualities as good, bad, or indifferent. Such a means of organization would indeed make it easier to determine what the right thing to do is. Aristotle once attempted to formulate a similar plan. His ethics used a scheme by which characteristics could be measured and the right amount attained. Such an account is known as the doctrine of the mean. Aristotle’s doctrine is meant to illuminate the nature of eudaimonia, which can be briefly defined as succeeding or flourishing, the key to which is arête.
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that was first developed by Aristotle. It suggests that humans are able to train their characters to acquire and exhibit particular virtues. As the individual has trained themselves to develop these virtues, in any given situation they are able to know the right thing to do. If everybody in society is able to do the same and develop these virtues, then a perfect community has been reached. In this essay, I shall argue that Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unsuccessful moral theory. Firstly, I shall analyse Aristotelian virtue ethics. I shall then consider various objections to Aristotle’s theory and evaluate his position by examining possible responses to these criticisms. I shall then conclude, showing why Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unpractical and thus an unsuccessful moral theory in reality.
Also, that justice is a certain type of specialization, meaning that performing a particular task that is a person’s own, not of someone else’s. Plato (2007), Polemarchus argues with Socrates in book I that, “Justice was to do good to a friend and harm to an enemy” (335b p.13). Plato (2007) he then responds, “It is not the function of the just man to harm either his friends or anyone else, but of his opposite the unjust man” (335d p.14). His views of justice are related to contemporary culture, because when someone does something that they are supposed to do, they receive credit or a reward for it, but if the opposite of that is performed, by not doing the particular task that is asked, they are then rewarded but with punishments. Also, that justice is doing the right thing in a society. Justice of contemporary culture does not diverge from the views offered in The Republic and Socrates views are adequate, because if a task is not performed the way it needs to be, and is supposed to be a person should not be rewarded for it. Additionally, that an individual should be just not
Philosophers from the ancient times to philosophers of today and the modern society all have voiced their opinions on how a government should be set up and ruled in order to have a just society. Some philosophers say that the government is corrupt and unjust while others argue that the government controls fairly and appropriately. The two main positions that philosophers believe are resources in society should be distributed to obtain common good and live life as long as you do not infringe on others. The laws and rules the United States government currently has in place today often originate from these philosophers ideas and work to maintain a just society. The definition of a just society can be described as a society with equality and solidarity where everyone is treated the way they deserve to be treated. The government today has control over the people to avoid chaos but tries their best to best serve its people. People in society deserve to be treated fairly based off their natural rights of being human. The Declaration of Independence states that the consent of the govern is applied to serve its citizens with the best laws and regulations to keep the people in a state of contempt and delectation. Governments are supposed to protect and give the people of a nation the rights and justice they deserve with the consent of the governed. If humans are treated fairly and justly then the people will respect the government and not cause chaos. Just societies start from a stable form of government and work their down to the people of society through the laws and regulations set in place by government trying to treat them as fairly and justly as possible.
laws is to keep the bad things out from the old society out such as
Much like the laws in the Old Testament, the law is God solving a problem before it occurs (Maxwell, 2010). As Reggie Joiner reminds us: “Relationship comes before rules” (Maxwell, 2010, 176). If a relationship forms, rules are easier to embrace. Rules are a tool to keep the ship and everyone on it going in the same direction. Shared systems of values strengthen partnerships minimizing the possibility of comprise. Values determine our actions. Our conscience can be a fickle thing if not tended to. A good study of 1 Timothy 1:5 will sharpen the cause for keeping the conscience in order and know that a good conscience is the product of a pure heart. Finally, we trust fully in God’s promises to comfort us, but need to share that same comfort through an empowerment to do so from God himself. Kept promises are the glue that holds all the guidelines together and shuttles them into the heart and soul of mankind by building
The morals of society concept is exemplified by the Judeo-Christian religions. These religions base their moral principles on their respective religious texts that they believe to contain God’s will.
Traditionally justice was regarded as one of the cardinal virtues; to avoid injustices and to deal equitable with both equals and inferiors was seen as what was expected of the good man, but it was not clear how the benefits of justice were to be reaped. Socrates wants to persuade from his audience to adopt a way of estimating the benefits of this virtue. From his perspective, it is the quality of the mind, the psyche organization which enables a person to act virtuously. It is this opposition between the two types of assessment of virtue that is the major theme explored in Socrates’ examination of the various positions towards justice. Thus the role of Book I is to turn the minds from the customary evaluation of justice towards this new vision. Through the discourse between Cephalus, Polemarchus and Thrasymachus, Socaretes’ thoughts and actions towards justice are exemplified. Though their views are different and even opposed, the way all three discourse about justice and power reveal that they assume the relation between the two to be separate. They find it impossible to understand the idea that being just is an exercise of power and that true human power must include the ability to act justly. And that is exactly what Socrates seeks to refute.
Luther states “the law is spiritual. If the law were for the body, it could be satisfied with works. Because it is spiritual, however, no one can satisfy it- unless all that you do is done from the bottom of the heart” (Luther 77). What Luther really means by this is that law can only be fulfilled where there is a spiritual heart and where that spirit is absent from the heart then there is sin and dissatisfaction with the law. A law is achieved by doing works which God decides if we are performing these tasks with the will of God from the heart. However, one will be punished by God for performing deeds when there is no heart because God is not satisfied by individuals who only do good works when others are watching or to get something in return. (Luther 76). Laws are meant to keep the sinful attributes of individuals under control through the fear of punishment. The law shows anyone that compares their life to Christ’s life who was without sin that he or she is sinful. God gave us law not because he is harsh but to help society maintain order and is also a guide so that we can know what good works will please God. The book of laws are found in the Old Testament which teaches what individuals can and cannot do. The Old Testament is comprised of the demanding of good, stories of how laws can be maintained or broken, and promising the forgiveness of sin (Luther 98). The apostles use the
For many years, dating back to the first birth of man there has been the ultimate question of what makes a man just. This question has been pondered by numerous great philosophers. The question is varied to answer because of a multitude of opinions due to the nature of human diversity. Whether or not there is an objective answer to the question still remains a mystery. Plato and Epicurus have both given their detailed opinions of what makes one just. Plato believes that justness is something that comes from a more internal location dealing with the soul this disagrees with the idea that Epicurus holds which is justness is more of a physical or external matter. In this paper I will prove that Plato's ideas on this subject are the more appropriate and more truthful.
According to Aristotle, "The rule of law is better than that of any individual”, suggesting every member of society, even a ruler, must abide by and follow the law. The rule of law is linked to the principle of justice, meaning that everyone within a society (including both private citizens and government officials) are subject to the law, and that those laws are administered fairly and justly. The intention of the rule of law is to protect against arbitrary governance. It is the basic underpinning of a free society.