• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

With reference to Aristotle, Is it preferable for a society to suffer acts of injustice or to commit them?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

With reference to Aristotle, Is it preferable for a society to suffer acts of injustice or to commit them? Aristotle once argued that it is always preferable to suffer an act of injustice rather than to commit one. This is an interesting argument to think about when considering the occurrences on September 11 in the United States. Aristotle was making his argument in terms of the individual, but who is to say that the same thought could not apply to a society as well? When considering whether or not it is preferable for a society to suffer acts of injustice or to commit them it is important to think about the ramifications that the act (whether it is being inflicted or the society is inflicting it on some outside entity) will have on the culture and subcultures that comprise a society. In regards to the September 11 tragedy and the effects that it has had on American society (and its various cultures and subcultures), it would seem that it is preferable to suffer acts of injustice rather than to commit them. Since the terrorist attacks on the United States, we have seen a great pulling together of the American people. ...read more.

Middle

All in all Americans will not forget the tragedy committed against them on that day, but instead of cowering in fear (as the terrorists would have us do) have risen together in a response that involves every citizen standing firm and feeling proud to be an American. In contrast to the unity displayed by all the different groups of people that make up American society, what would happen if the United States carried out an act of injustice of the magnitude of that which was committed against us? Some groups would no doubt rally behind the actions made by the government, but many other groups would oppose the actions. The resulting political and socio-economic aftershocks triggered by such an event would be extremely detrimental to the United States as a whole. Based on these facts it would seem that it is certainly true that while the gratuitous violence carried out on the United States is indeed a gross act of injustice, that in the outcome it would be preferable to suffer such an act than to commit it. This notion is further aided by the wrath the alleged perpetrators are feeling at the hands of the American government. ...read more.

Conclusion

So long as Americans adhere to the values that make this country great and continue to exhibit virtuous behavior, those who carried out horrible acts on us will only grow more and more frustrated that they cannot disrupt our way of life. It is also important that the leaders of our society be prudent in the decisions they make when dealing with those who have wronged them. Should the American government begin slaughtering innocent people in lands whose governments sponsor terrorism they would be as unjust as those who slaughtered our innocents because of their problems with our government. If that were to happen it is inevitable that justice would be served to us, just as we are serving justice to those who wrong the innocent now. The suffering that Americans have had to go through is only temporary, and we rest assured that justice will be served to those who would commit such acts. The argument presented by Aristotle is indeed true in the context of a society. The case the United States in relation to the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11 is a good example of this idea in real life. Throughout the aftermath of the incident the United States has proven that it is indeed preferable to suffer injustice rather than to commit it. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Truman - Guilty or Innocent

    But the American advantage was short-lived. In July 1953, the Russians detonated their own H-bomb. As tension escalated between the USA and the USSR, war seemed a real possibility. At the height of the crisis, the western powers met in Washington and signed an agreement to work together in order to defend themselves from attack from the USSR.

  2. While surfing the channels on TV you might hear a lot of news about ...

    the business is not about citizens but about governments and the only way to affect power is to use innocent people (as I said blackmailing). And citizens only want to live freely, they know that alone they are not strong enough to fight against terrorists.

  1. MEDIA, CULTURE AND SOCIETY

    However, it is struggling to keep an objective view with the failed attempts at finding the super=-power weapons. As it clearly shows that America has made a huge error in its primary reason for attacking the country. Since this fact was made clear, the coverage of the situation has lowered.

  2. September 11th

    Tony Blair is under extreme pressure from America to back her on a war. Britain is also under extreme threat from Iraqi backed weapons and terrorists. As I explained earlier on in the essay, these terrorists do pose a serious threat to security.

  1. History of the United States

    At the same time the elimination of French rule in North America lifted the burden of fear of that power from the colonists, inducing them to be more independent-minded. The war effort itself had contributed to a new sense of pride and confidence in their own military prowess.

  2. Press Treatment of the September 11th

    If the precocious Blair was really hostile to terrorism, he would do everything in his power to pursue policies that lifted the threat of violent death from people in his own country and third world countries alike, instead of escalating terrorism, as he and Bush are doing.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work