Perspectives of Justice - Essay Paper

2021-07-28 04:04:24
5 pages
1256 words
Wesleyan University
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Socrates was one of the most famous classical Athenian philosophers accredited as one of the founders of Western Philosophy. He was a man many people considered as being strict especially regarding justice and morality. Socrates was an independent thinker who had his definition and beliefs regarding justice that many of the people in his country did not accept. In his life, Socrates is depicted as a man who respected the sanctity of the law but was also a free thinker who had his own unwavering beliefs regarding justice and its execution.

From the passage about Socrates and fellow philosophers, the idea of justice is debated. There is a belief that justice will never prevail in the world until rulers decide to apply some philosophy in their thinking. It is also considered that leaders themselves have to believe and adhere to the concept of good deeds and human perfection guided by justice. Socrates argues that the republic is built upon more than just the structure of the best possible state to be the reference point for all states regarding standards of conduct. He argues that the standards set for the administration of justice ought to be for the good of the public. This means that justice is something intended for everyone and should be implemented equally across the Republic and to everyone regardless of who they are.

From the extract, there is an assumption that a just state is almost impossible to achieve, but it is possible for the individuals within it to be just themselves and lead by example. It is considered that there is a truth beyond the changing world and that all men should strive to discover the truth. The idea can be perceived as an urge by Socrates for all people not to conform to societal beliefs but instead, try to find their path in life despite how different or unfavorable it might be. He believes that if all people were to be just and honorable, then they would indeed understand the true meaning of justice. Socrates himself was a symbol of morality and justice through his life that was guided by strong moral beliefs that he adhered to at all times and situations.

In the life of Socrates, there were many drawbacks to realizing justice in its entirety in the Republic. This is mainly perceived in consideration of how Socrates himself was oppressed and ultimately killed for his beliefs regarding the law and justice. From the passage, the rich people are discussed as having many consolations that give them an edge in life compared to the rest of society that has to face more hardships and injustices because of the different standards set in society. Those who try to fight the injustice in the Republic are met with many objections and are rejected by society. The Republic at the time had been conditioned to think that the law is to be followed strictly without wavering or thinking twice about the flaws that often limit its just administration.

According to Socrates thinking and moral beliefs, every situation presents a special case that requires special consideration when applying the law. This he says is how the Republic and its people can achieve true justice. However good and correct his thinking was, Socrates views and opinions about justice and the society faced many objections not only from the state but also from his peers. He was depicted as a lost individual who did not know what he was saying. He was even considered an enemy of the state since most of his beliefs were contrary or did not align with the law of the Republic.

From the passage, there is an element of old age and money discussed through various conversations. Cephalus ponders upon how people acquire most of their possessions and whether they get them by themselves or inherit them. This is a question that tries to find out what wealth is acquired justly in society. It can be viewed as a question that aims to find out how justice is regarded in society about gaining wealth and contentment with the amount one receives. The reasoning behind the matter is that those who acquire wealth through inheritance or who do not work for it themselves are thought to be too fond of money. It is considered that those who gain wealth themselves tend to have a different reasoning that has double standards regarding their love for money; they tend to value it more and take it seriously.

The idea of old age is discussed in the passage with the description of how when a man realizes that they are getting old, they begin to have fears and worry regarding issues that he did not take seriously before. It is assumed that it is at this age that most people start to realize that they will have to pay for the wrong they might have done in their lives. There is also an association of a good life in old age good deeds that is acquired when a man lives their life in justice and piety. From the passage, there is an assumption that the possession of wealth is of most value not to all men but to those who are good and live a just life.

From the passage, Cephalus asks whether it is without a doubt that telling the truth and paying back any debts one owes can be considered just actions or can there be some injustice in them too. The definition of justice is described as not only about truth-telling and returning what was once received but rather involves even deeds that are considered just. From another perspective of the passage, there is a definition of justice as giving to each what is befitting of their actions and how they have lived, which is referred to as the due.' From this perspective, justice varies from one individual to another depending on what they have done and how they have lived their lives.

From the passage, there is a view of how justice is not considered valuable if it is only applicable to things that are not useful. There is also a debate about whether justice is to be regarded in situations where friends benefit and enemies are harmed. By this description, friends can be considered to be the good and just people while enemies are the bad and unjust ones. However, there is some debate to the point since people who are considered good are capable of injustice and those who are bad are also capable of just actions. From the idea of what is due, enemies and those who are bad are harmed while the good and friends get rewarded. Based on the passage, this is the main definition of justice. However, there is still some contradiction to this idea since according to Socrates beliefs, it is it never just to harm anyone no matter the case.

From the essay, based on the passage of Socrates and fellow Philosophers thoughts regarding justice, it is evident that there are many perceptions to the idea. Different beliefs are perpetuated by various thinkers who base their opinions on different concepts. Most of these concepts relate to society and fundamental human beliefs. Socrates, unlike most philosophers, had his way of thinking that differed from the rest of society and which guided his everyday life. These ideas were what made him one of the most respected philosophers since his credibility was based on his thoughts and not what the rest of the world believed.

Have the same topic and dont`t know what to write?
We can write a custom paper on any topic you need.

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the website, please click below to request its removal: