Glucson Critical Thinking Analysis

1. For some doing wrong is a sense of pleasure, rather than doing the right thing. Some people find life better to do others wrong rather than being a victim of someone who has done them wrong. Glucson makes things clear when he states that “those who practice justice do so involuntarily and because they have not the power to be unjust will best appear if we imagine something of this kind”. In other words, to my understanding he is making it clear that those who practice justice have come to an agreement for those who do things justice vs others who do wrong-doings. Glaucon concludes that those that individuals who perform justice (follow the right things) are people are weak. For others who carry out the wrong-doings are considered as individuals are powerful and able to do so. Individuals who do not seek in wrongs otherwise will be considered chumps for not doing so. Although many would disagree that others who do not seek to do wrong would be defined as “chump”. Doing the right thing may seem appropriate; wronging others might pay off for the time being. An unjust person might seek rewards, attention, pleasure, and even be considered powerful.
2. …show more content…
The first confusion is based on the idea that “selfishness is self-interest”. As stated in the article neither one is alike they are different. In the text used as an example, when seeking a doctor when one is ill, are they being selfish? An individual would not be considered selfish but rather one is seeking medical attention for purpose. For example, me going to work full-time and working overtime, would I Be considered “selfish”? The purpose of me working fulltime can be for several reasons’ such as the responsibility to pay expenses, maintain shelter, and buy food and clothing. I am working based on the account that it is for my own purpose and adult