There are many reasons for why one should be moral; that is, why one should act in a morally correct manner when dealing with others. This paper aims to go over two of the main arguments in favor of moral behavior. The first is presented by Socrates in Plato's text Why Should I Be Moral?, which argues that morality and justice are a key part of the soul, one for which man depends on to live a truly happy life. The second is presented by James Rachels in A Critique of Ethical Egoism, in which he argues that we must not treat others differently because there is no non arbitrary difference between others and ourselves.
In Why Should I Be Moral?, Glaucon presents a popular view of morality, centered around the concept that if a person could commit an injustice without any wrong coming their way, then they would commit said injustice. This is exemplified by the Myth of Gyges, which tells the story of a man with a ring that makes him invisible. With the capacity to commit crimes unnoticed, the man commits all sorts of atrocities against others for his own personal gain. Essentially, Glaucon states that the common conception of justice is that to wrong is good (in that it is beneficial), but that to be wronged is worse, and so people avoid wronging others simply to prevent others from bringing them harm.
Socrates, however, partially …show more content…
One's soul is made up of three parts: the rational, the spirited and the appetitive/passionate. Justice is formed when the rational rules, the spirit serves reason, and temptation and appetite exist in moderation, guided by reason. A man is therefore just to himself when he allows his rational part to make decisions and for his spirit to fight for and give courage to such decisions. Injustice, according to Socrates, is a kind of civil war between the three parts of the soul. Justice within a man forms just actions, whereas injustice produces unjust
In Why Should I Be Moral?, Glaucon presents a popular view of morality, centered around the concept that if a person could commit an injustice without any wrong coming their way, then they would commit said injustice. This is exemplified by the Myth of Gyges, which tells the story of a man with a ring that makes him invisible. With the capacity to commit crimes unnoticed, the man commits all sorts of atrocities against others for his own personal gain. Essentially, Glaucon states that the common conception of justice is that to wrong is good (in that it is beneficial), but that to be wronged is worse, and so people avoid wronging others simply to prevent others from bringing them harm.
Socrates, however, partially …show more content…
One's soul is made up of three parts: the rational, the spirited and the appetitive/passionate. Justice is formed when the rational rules, the spirit serves reason, and temptation and appetite exist in moderation, guided by reason. A man is therefore just to himself when he allows his rational part to make decisions and for his spirit to fight for and give courage to such decisions. Injustice, according to Socrates, is a kind of civil war between the three parts of the soul. Justice within a man forms just actions, whereas injustice produces unjust