Ethic / Moral Problems

Phil1120 TR

I wanted to delve into social contract because it seemed like a very justifiable theory. Its
also very contemporary and modern you could say, especially in recent times, with cases such
as the (clich) Ferguson events. We give up what little rights we had, for safety, opportunity
and community, yet, it is almost robbed when such privileges are abused. What then becomes
of moral? If its leaders do not follow, or are immune to, the same rules as its people? If man
does not follow the same rules as its fellow man? Some say theyre abusing the power, others
say conspiracy; either way, its arguably something that should be resolved.
Socrates was probably the one who first brought about the subject, in the dialogue
Crito. In which, Socrates is talking to a man imprisoned, in the sense of the Law of Athens.
(Crito) In this dialogue Socrates explains to this man that he has quite an amount of
responsibility to follow these laws because of what they have enabled him to be. They made it
possible for his mother and father to marry, and therefore to have legitimate children, including
himself. Having been born, the city of Athens, through its laws, then required that his father
care for and educate him. (Friend, C.) This way, Socrates life, and every other life in Athens, are
each dependent on these laws for them to be a flourished community. But, these laws are not
forced; once an individual has reached maturity, he then can decide if this is the lifestyle for
him, and he abides by these rules if he chooses to stay, les he suffers the consequences, in
which he is obligated to accept his fate.
Plato also returns to this theory in the Republic, except in a different light. In Book 2,
Socrates argues with an individual named Glaucon, who is arguing that justice is something that

Ethic / Moral Problems

Phil1120 TR
man conforms to because he fears the consequence, and is also something that we allow each
other to suffer in order to avoid something worse that might happen if it were not followed. He
also believes that justice stems from our vulnerability, since everyone is capable of committing
injustice. He gives us a thought experiment of the Legend of the ring of Gyges. (Republic) In
this example, he explains that a man is given a ring that enables him to turn invisible. Once he
has learned of the power, he realizes that he is free and can do so as he pleases without the
fear of consequence. Saying he can indulge in all his materialistic, power-hungry, and erotically
lustful urges. (Republic) He concludes that no one is just for the desire of justice, and that they
prefer unjust over just actions. Yet, Socrates believes that while man does fear the
consequence of injustice, he believes that justice is to be desired more than feared, and desired
that of the highest class.
More modern theories of this came about the end of the 16th century, most popularly
with a book titled Leviathan, where Englishman Thomas Hobbes expanded on the thought.
(Kelly, M.) He theorized that a community would come together and create/find a sovereign, in
which they gave their liberty unto, in exchange for the protection of its people. More
philosophers from this era came to delve further into this idea, like the minds of Locke and
Rousseau. While Locke went the more political route, Frenchman Jean Jacques Rousseau, took
this more ethically minded. He theorized man as being passive (unwarlike, as the English civil
war had passed almost 100 years) and somewhat nave, without a sense of morality. But, when
achieved this sense of security, he theorized people then felt a moral and civil obligation; and,
in order to preserve what morality has been established, the sovereign must then rely on its

Ethic / Moral Problems

Phil1120 TR
peoples consent, known as the volont gnrale (general will). [Social contract (political
philosophy)]
The beauty of these theories, especially the latter, are that they are as timeless as moral
and philosophy itself, and we can apply them to current social travesties. Lets take the case of
a man named Eric Garner; a middle-aged man living in NYC, whom, like the rest of us, is stricken
with the wallet decaying disease of being an American citizen. In Manhattan, he tries to solve
this dilemma by selling untaxed cigarettes outside a market for some extra cash. But, being
the greedy piglet the government is, any sort of contraband that is sold without their consent is
treated like cancer. In a video, Eric seems to be a sane man, trying to ration things out with the
police, he shows no signs of hostility and even raises his hands in submission when the cops
react. (Eversley, M., & Bacon, J.) But, like a pack of wolves surrounding their meal, they hear
nothing but the thirst for imposing this power theyve been granted on the poor victim. Eric
Garner died hours later in the hospital, from injuries to his chest and collapsed wind-pipe.
Now, we as citizens give up some precious liberties just to be bullied by these Law
Enforcers? One almost shouts for a world in Socrates view. In this way, we should be sane
enough to uphold the rules independently. But, even the very people that have given up their
freedoms for the greater good, are appointed by the sovereign to uphold the rules and given
special liberties to do so, it almost takes Glaucons view as the truth, the ring of Gyges can be
applied to this very situation! People who are given a little of the governments power, feel as
though the rules dont apply to them since they uphold the rules! They own it, and bend it to
their will, however desired. This deteriorates morality because it shows that people love this

Ethic / Moral Problems

Phil1120 TR
feeling called power, and in having it, impose their will as Nietzsche would say, to anyone,
regardless of consequence, because they are enforcing the consequence! The rules do not
apply to them so they think! They almost abandon their responsibility because of reasons
unknown, whether it be a sort of psychological instinct, or that people are inherently ethical
egoists, is still let on the table to discuss.
My opinion on this is, from what Ive learned, is that people are no different than
animals. We all have the ability to be moral and just, but there is this thing about us that urges
us to be violent. We sort of feed of tragedy, its like a fuel for our living. Most people give in to
this urge, and Im sure one is most definitely a liar if he or she has not ever given in to it.
Violence, I believe, is our nature. Concluding; its all fun and games until somebody gets hurt.
Then its hilarious.

Ethic / Moral Problems

Phil1120 TR

Citations

Friend, C. (n.d.). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved November 30, 2014, from
http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/
Crito. (n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2014, from
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/crito/characters.html
Republic. (n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2014, from
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/republic/section2.rhtml
Kelly, M. (n.d.). Social Contract. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from
http://americanhistory.about.com/od/usconstitution/g/social_contract.htm
Social contract (political philosophy). (2014, November 26). Retrieved December 3, 2014, from
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/550994/social-contract
Eversley, M., & Bacon, J. (2014, December 3). Lawyer: Cop in chokehold case won't be charged.
Retrieved December 3, 2014, from
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/03/chokehold-grand-jury/19804577/