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

'It pays to be moral.' Discuss. (30)

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

'It pays to be moral.' Discuss. (30) Whether or not it pays to be moral is something that has been discussed and debated for a long time - some argue that it pays to be moral as it enables you and others to flourish however others argue that being moral is useless. In Plato's Republic, one character, Thrasymachus, claims that justice (morality) is simply 'the interests of the stronger'. In other words, our morals have been imposed on us by those who have the power throughout history to control our moral beliefs. Because of this it could be said that morals lack legitimacy, as in reality they are simply the values that the strongest (who imposed the morals) desire. As an example, Marx believes that the middle class promote individual freedom (to own property) because they are able to exploit the benefits whereas the poor would prefer less freedom and more support. So, if morality reflects both social and cultural bias, why should we be moral? There are different theories. Egoists believe that we should act morally and it pays to do so because it is in our own self-interest. As part of our self-interest, we may need to make a contract with others; so acting morally is justified by the contract that we have made and agreed to. ...read more.

Middle

condition we was living in that preceded authority and the rights/obligations of the social contract. The social contract is a tacit agreement between individuals and their elected government, made by a process of mutual consent. It is a metaphorical contract made where everyone agrees to abide by rules and accept duties to protect themselves and one another from violence, harm, etc. Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Rawls all have different ideas on what the world was like in the State of Nature and how it is once the social contract has been introduced, however both Locke and Rousseau share quite a similar theory so I will illustrate what they think in detail in order to illustrate why it may pay to be moral. Locke and Rousseau both believe that the State of Nature, the natural condition of mankind, is 'a state of perfect and complete liberty to conduct conduct one's life as one best sees fit, free from the interference of others'. This however does not mean that it is a state of license: one is not free to do anything at all, or even anything that is judged to be in one's self-interest. Although in the State of Nature there is no civil or authority or government to punish people, it is not a state without morality - it is pre-political but not pre-moral. ...read more.

Conclusion

We do also not necessarily have to sign into a social contract in order to be moral, for instance, we obey moral rules when it comes to caring for both young children and animals even though we can not enter into a reciprocal relationship with them as they can not agree to the social contract. It is also worth considering the nature of altruism, if morality is entirely based upon a form of egoism, then this leaves no room for helping others because it is the right thing to do. Egoism claims that it may and may not benefit us to act moral - not because it is best to pursue our self-interests for our own personal gain, however it may benefit us because it will make us feel good. There are both arguments for and against whether it pays to be moral, however being moral seems like the best thing to do - you can still benefit from doing so without the risk of being punished for breaking the laws of the social contract or without the risk of even being killed within the State of Nature due to property, it is in our self-interest to act morally because it is mutually beneficial for everyone. ...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 Philosophy 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 Philosophy essays

  1. An embodied life in heaven is entirely possible. Discuss.

    single element that might count, as a criterion for an individual's identity, such as their memories and characteristics would be evident in the replica and so therefore would be the same person. In this theory, Hick continues to state that God is omnipotent and so can effortlessly create a replica

  2. Synoptic Study, Satre, Engels and Marx

    Sure in a metaphysical sense the man is still absolutely free to make this decision and in this sense Sartre's theory does still stand. Saying this does not really help the situation and I'm sure most people would agree that the man still doesn't have a choice as metaphysical freedom can't really compete with starvation.

  1. John Rawls Bio.

    Rawls has the unique distinction among contemporary political philosophers of being frequently cited by the courts of law in the United States. A Theory of Justice Method: The Original Position and Reflective Equilibrium In his most famous book, A Theory of Justice, Rawls argued for the two principles using the

  2. Compare and Contrast the Philisophical Contributions of Nietzsche and Mill to our understanding of ...

    can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant." -So Mill is referring to not just any harm, but specifically physical harm.

  1. We have consented to be governed so we are obliged to obey the government ...

    This is a plausible argument in my opinion because some people may want to live completely freely. Regardless, the argument still stands because if only some people want to live under government control and others do not then the country would simply not function properly.

  2. I might believe that an action is morally right, but this does not give ...

    In order for psychological egoism to maintain its theory regarding an incident like the soldier, the situation and circumstances would have to be stretched so far as to say in the spur of the moment, the soldier was in fact not thinking about the welfare of others, but instead something

  1. Our freedom to make ethical choices is an illusion Discuss

    Hard determinists would disagree and say would give the example of the Clarrence Darrow case. Darrow a lawyer in 1924 when he defended Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, on charge for murdering a young boy, Bobby Franks.

  2. What are the limitations on our personal liberty? Are all of them justified?

    Although law actually dictates that any actual or grievous bodily harm caused is subject to conviction, as long as it fulfils the highly subjective criteria of being more than 'transient or trifling', Lord Jauncey clearly condemned a minority in a situation in which he would have let off someone partaking

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