Philosophy Discussion post – Week 1

Due by 11/20/2014 at 8:30 pm EST.  Post much be 600 words minimum with references cited.

Please read the announcements explaining the discussion requirements and answering the most frequently asked questions.  If you are still unsure about how to proceed with the discussion, please use the “Ask Your Instructor” forum.

Plato (2010). Glaukon’s Challenge (Republic 2). (C. Woods, Trans.).  Available at SSRN:http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1661519

After reading the “Ring of Gyges” story from Plato’s Republic, think about what you would do if, like the shepherd who found the ring, you were able to do whatever you felt like doing without anyone knowing. What is one thing that you are unable to do now, but would do if you had that ring? (Note that it can’t be just anything – make sure that it’s something that the specific power of the ring would make possible; you may need to explain how your aims could be achieved with this ring, but couldn’t otherwise.) The more honest everyone is, the more interesting this discussion will be. No judging, just thinking and discussing!  In the course of the week’s discussion, you will need to:

1.               Reflect on yourself: What is the reason you would do that?  Try to explain as concretely as possible what your reason(s) would be for deciding to do that.  

2.              Reflect on society: Would most people in our society consider what you do to be ethical or unethical (or are there too many different views to really be able to say)? Why do you think this is, exactly?  If you think society would consider it unethical, would they be right to do so? 

3.              Engage with the text: Thinking back to the text, what does Glaukon’s view imply about human nature? In other words, what ultimately matters most to human life, according to him? Do you agree?

4.              Discuss with your peers: Read the posts of your peers, trying to think about them from Gaukon’s perspecive, and suggest how Glaukon might respond to their answers to parts (A) and (B). Use this as a springboard to discuss whether you think Glaukon is right about human nature and why we have the standards of morality and justice that we do (for instance, if a peer suggests how Glaukon would respond to your answers, reply back to that with your own perspective).