Complete Name Of Student Essays Example

Complete Name of Professor

The argument in the Ring of Gyges renders justice or injustice as a matter of individual notion. In other words, something can only become “justice” or “injustice” based on how people believe it serves their purpose or their sense of desire. If I am the Shepherd in Plato’s story, I would definitely wear the ring once I discovered its power. First, “justice” can be justified by the telos: the purposiveness of your act such that you use the ring for positive ends then it will not be accounted as “injustice”; nevertheless, the only argument on injustice is that something can be considered as “injustice” if pain outweighs the benefit. Therefore, if I use the ring and its powers for the benefit of the good, it cannot be considered an “injustice.” Every virtue is a state of existence that constantly looks for its mean. In other words, everything that we do, either moral or immoral, crops up as a result of our understanding about its supposed value – so in the case of the ring, it would also be an injustice to allow it to exist without a worth or value. In the light of mean seeking, to give value to something means that you are giving justice to its existence, whether you use it for bad purposes or negative purposes: in other words, “justice” or “injustice” also depends on the means of the purpose. Finally, in the light of being/becoming, I would still use the ring because as aforementioned, weather I use it negatively such that I would convince a police officer to kill a thief is essentially beneficial to most people – the meaning and telos is being fulfilled in this regard and still can be considered “justice”.