The nature of Justice

1828 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Thomas Hobbes and the Leviathan

What purpose does justice serve within society? Throughout history, Political philosophers have debated and presented arguments on the justice. Many have presented new views on the concept, and the purpose it serves in Society. For John Locke in his Second Treatise of Government, justice was needed for individuals to escape the state of nature and preserve their property. For Glaucon in The Republic by Plato, justice was used by the weak to escape the suffering that they found in injustice. The arguments presented show the different viewpoints on justice, and it's relevance to civil society. The question then arises as to where these viewpoints have similarities, where they differ, and if the viewpoint of others differs from the viewpoints of Glaucon and Locke. When analyzing the concept of justice, it can be said that the arguments presented by Locke and Glaucon believe that justice leads to a social contract between individuals, but differ on their views of the purpose of justice within a civil society.
The arguments presented by Locke and Glaucon have several areas where they agree on the effects that justice has on civil society. Both view humans as being very weak, and unable to survive in the state of nature; therefore, we seek social contracts in majorities for our protection under justice. As explained by Thomas Hobbes in his work Levithan, the state of nature is one in which individuals are living within a constant state of war, which is "poor, nasty, brutish, and short" . In chapter 8 of his work, Locke describes how although men are "free, equal, and independent" in the state of nature, they come together for a greater sense of security and peace against those who may look to commit injustices upon them . For Glau...

... middle of paper ...

...peace and wellbeing of all citizens. For the arguments presented by Glaucon, justice is simply put into place to prevent the sufferings of injustice, ensuring that those who commit injustice against us receive some sort of punishment because they have committed injustice. For Socrates argument, justice is a good virtue that is intrinsic, while those who live justly live happy lives, contrary to the miserable life of the unjust person. It is apparent that people will have varied opinions on the nature of justice, and whether it is a good or evil within society. Regardless of the different viewpoints, many of them agree upon one thing; justice is an integral part of civil society, helping to codify a law system of what is right and wrong, which actions are accepted and which are punishable, and what will lead to the protection of citizens and peace within a society.

Show More
Related

  • Justice and Moderation of the Soul in The Republic, by Plato

    3023 Words  | 7 Pages

    The three men discuss justice as if it's a good thing. Glaucon wants Socrates to prove that it is, and argues if it is just to do wrong in order to have justice, or on the other hand, is it unjust to never do wrong and therefore have no justice. For example; a man who lies, cheats and steals yet is a respected member of the community would be living a just life, in comparison to a man who never lied, cheated, nor stole anything but lives in poverty and is living an unjust life. Glaucon assumes the life of a just man is better than the life of an unjust man.

    Read More

  • The Logical Response To The Fool, By Thomas Hobbes

    1004 Words  | 3 Pages

    Glaucon presents an argument against justice in order to pressure Socrates to give a more convincing argument for living a just life. He was unsatisfied with Plato’s counterargument against Thrasymachus. Glaucon wants to believe that justice is good and that living a just life will result in a good life, unlike the Fool in the Leviathan. However, Glaucon strengthening the argument that the unjust life is better. Glaucon starts his argument with the three ways in which something can be good: good in itself, good in itself and good for its consequences, and bad or indifferent in itself but good for its consequences. After presenting these three types of good things, Glaucon asks Socrates to place justice into one of the three categories. Socrates’s responds by saying the he would define justice as the kind of good that we like both for its own sake and for its consequences. Glaucon then requests that Socrates present a convincing argument that justice is good for its own sake, regardless of its consequences. He essentially wants to hear a compelling argument that shows justice as a kind of good that is good for its own sake. Glaucon eventually developed a case that supports the unjust life. He argues that anyone, just or unjust, would commit acts of injustice if they could get away with it and not suffer any consequences. To support his claim, he

    Read More

  • Comparing Justice In Wasp's Nest And The Uderly Perfect Murder

    622 Words  | 2 Pages

    “We live in a world in which justice is skewed.” Justice is when someone gets what they deserved due to an action that they executed. Due to justice not being fair, it is skewed in one way or another when solving a mystery, weather a murder or any other case that may require the detective/officer or the criminal to do something that my be illegal. It may be for the good or bad but, it does not change the fact that an action is illegal. Very rarely cases are solved without twisting or bending a law one way or another. All three of the stories, “Full Circle”, “Wasp’s Nest”, and “The Uderly Perfect Murder” are examples of real cases being solved by skewing the law for the good and/or bad outcome of the case. Justice is always served and given to one person and not the other. In the three stories justice is given to two or more people.

    Read More

  • Glaucon And David Hume Analysis

    955 Words  | 2 Pages

    It is important to acknowledge that Justice protects our possession and our rights as humans. Without justice, it would be more likely for destruction to occur than that of benevolence in a society. Glaucon and Hume philosophy of justice aligns with each other, in the sense that justice is a contract created to prevent people from killing each other. I agree that the sole purpose of justice is its utility to the public. Although, I cannot help thinking what would happen if I possessed the power to be unjust without ever suffering consequences.

    Read More

  • John Locke's Second Treatise, Of Civil Government

    731 Words  | 2 Pages

    1. First of all, John Locke reminds the reader from where the right of political power comes from. He expands the idea by saying, “we must consider what estate all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit.” Locke believes in equality among all people. Since every creature on earth was created by God, no one has advantages over another. He makes a strong suggestion by saying, “that creatures of the same species and rank, should also be equal one amongst another, without subordination or subjection, unless the lord and master of them all should, by any manifest declaration of his will, set one above another, and confer on him, by an evident and clear appointment, an undoubted right to dominion and sovereignty.” For people to confirm the state of Nature, a law is set that obliges people to follow and consult it. The Law of Nature brings many things that need to be followed by each person. Locke describes the law’s consequences if not obeyed by saying, “the execution of the law of Nature is in that state put into every man’s hands, whereby every one has a right to punish the transgressors of that law to such a degree as may hinder its violation.” Every law is fair and equal to every person. As you have equal rights, you may also be punished equally if you don’t obey it.

    Read More

  • Glaucon's Challenge and Plato's Theory of Justice in Plato's Republic

    1807 Words  | 4 Pages

    Plato’s Republic focuses on one particular question: is it better to be just or unjust? Thrasymachus introduces this question in book I by suggesting that justice is established as an advantage to the stronger, who may act unjustly, so that the weak will “act justly” by serving in their interests. Therefore, he claims that justice is “stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice” (Plato, Republic 344c). Plato begins to argue that injustice is never more profitable to a person than justice and Thrasymachus withdraws from the argument, granting Plato’s response. Glaucon, however, is not satisfied and proposes a challenge to Plato to prove that justice is intrinsically valuable and that living a just life is always superior. This paper will explain Glaucon’s challenge to Plato regarding the value of justice, followed by Plato’s response in which he argues that his theory of justice, explained by three parts of the soul, proves the intrinsic value of justice and that a just life is preeminent. Finally, it will be shown that Plato’s response succeeds in answering Glaucon’s challenge.

    Read More

  • Justice In Plato's The Republic

    1072 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • John Locke and Thomas Hobbes

    1073 Words  | 3 Pages

    Locke states that the correct form of civil government should be committed to the common good of the people, and defend its citizens’ rights to life, health, liberty, and personal possessions. He expects that a civil government’s legislative branch will create laws which benefit the wellbeing of its citizens, and that the executive branch will enforce laws under a social contract with the citizenry. “The first and fundamental positive law of all common-wealths is the establishing of the legislative power; as the first and fundamental natural law, which is to govern even the legislative itself, is the preservation of the society and (as far as will consist with the public good) of every person in it.”1 Locke believes that humans inherently possess complete and i...

    Read More

  • Common Sense Justice

    1440 Words  | 3 Pages

    Commonsense justice and jury instructions are placed together to exemplify the informative and the response between the two; like the “analytic and beneficial”. Conjoining these two objectives, gives them “instructive potential for the law;” with the verdicts of not guilty, or hung juries, and jury nullification. These two objectives are “more likely the failure of jury instructions,” [slightly] than the “failings of jurors.”” (Norman J. Finkel, 2000).

    Read More

  • Locke and Rousseau

    1787 Words  | 4 Pages

    Locke and Rousseau present themselves as two very distinct thinkers. They both use similar terms, but conceptualize them differently to fulfill very different purposes. As such, one ought not be surprised that the two theorists do not understand liberty in the same way. Locke discusses liberty on an individual scale, with personal freedom being guaranteed by laws and institutions created in civil society. By comparison, Rousseau’s conception portrays liberty as an affair of the entire political community, and is best captured by the notion of self-rule. The distinctions, but also the similarities between Locke and Rousseau’s conceptions can be clarified by examining the role of liberty in each theorist’s proposed state of nature and civil society, the concepts with which each theorist associates liberty, and the means of ensuring and safeguarding liberty that each theorist devises.

    Read More

  • Justice in Plato's Republic

    971 Words  | 2 Pages

    Justice. What is justice? In this world where many people look out only for themselves, justice can be considered the happiness of oneself. But because selfish men do not always decide our standards in society, to find a definition, society should look at the opinions of many. Just as in the modern society to which we live, where everyone feels justice has a different meaning, the society of Plato also struggled with the same problem. In this paper, I will look into the Republic, one of the books of Plato that resides heavily on defining an answer to the meaning of Justice, and try to find an absolute definition. I will also give my opinion on what I personally think justice is.

    Read More

  • Justice And The Justice System

    1040 Words  | 3 Pages

    The ideal society we would all be considered equal, but reality often defies this idealism. When we think of police officers, we think of people working hard to keep us all safe, but this may not always be the case in today 's society. This is demonstrated in an opinion piece published in the Miami Herald, entitled “Need a ‘big, bad dude’? White criminals need not apply” by Leonard Pitts Jr. The article opens by discussing the shooting of African-American man Terence Crutcher, where the police officer who shot him stated it was due to him not obeying her orders and reaching inside his SUV for a weapon. However, the video of the shooting shows that this did not happen. The article also goes on to discuss other African-Americans shot in recent

    Read More

  • The Notions of Justice in The Republic and Antigone

    1696 Words  | 4 Pages

    Within two classical works of philosophical literature, notions of justice are presented plainly. Plato’s The Republic and Sophocles’ Antigone both address elements of death, tyranny and immorality, morality, and societal roles. These topics are important elements when addressing justice, whether in the societal representation or personal representation.

    Read More

  • What is Justice?

    710 Words  | 2 Pages

    Of course I looked “justice” up in the dictionary before I started to write this paper and I didn’t find anything of interest except of course a common word in every definition, that being “fair”. This implies that justice would have something to do with being fair. I thought that if one of the things the law and legal system are about is maintaining and promoting justice and a sense of “fairness”, they might not be doing such a spiffy job. An eye for an eye is fair? No, that would be too easy, too black and white. I could cite several examples where I thought a judge’s or jury’s ruling was not fair, but I won’t because frankly, we’ve all seen those.

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Justice In Plato's Republic

    1440 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Plato’s Republic, the main argument is dedicated to answering Glaucon and Adeimantus, who question the reason for just behavior. They argue it is against one’s self-interest to be just, but Plato believes the behavior is in fact in one’s self-interest because justice is inherently good. Plato tries to prove this through his depiction of an ideal city, which he builds from the ground up, and ultimately concludes that justice requires the philosopher to perform the task of ruling. Since the overall argument is that justice pays, it follows that it would be in the philosopher’s self-interest to rule – however, Plato also states that whenever people with political power believe they benefit from ruling, a good government is impossible. Thus, those who rule regard the task of ruling as not in their self-interest, but something intrinsically evil. This is where Plato’s argument that justice is in one’s self-interest is disturbed. This paper will discuss the idea that justice is not in one’s self-interest, and thus does not pay.

    Read More

More about The nature of Justice

Open Document