Glaucon_and_Mencius

Glaucon and Mencius When you compare Glaucon’s claims about what any of us would do with Gyges’ Ring with Mencius’ claims about our response to seeing a small child crawling towards a well, you come to find out that they both point to very different ideas about our moral tendencies. In Glaucon’s story, Gyge’s Ring, Gyges finds a bronze horse in the ground after an earthquake. Inside, he then finds a corpse that is wearing a golden ring. Gyges takes this ring and finds out that when the ring is pointed up he is visible and when it is pointed down he is invisible. Gyges decides to use this ring to his advantage. He then seduces the queen and then with her help, kills the king. Gyges is now able to become the king (Plato). To Glaucon, he thinks that morality is a contingent good only under certain circumstances and conventional so long that there is an agreement. The source is based on the self interest to keep your reputation for virtue and honesty. As long as you can keep your good reputation you are still able to do the evil things associated with the ring. Although, looking back at ethical egoism, human beings ought to be motivated by self interest to guide our actions. According to Glaucon, no rational man would follow these rules unless they are done out of self interest for a reward or a fear of punishment. So, no rational man would be moral if he thought he could be immoral without punishment. If a just and an unjust man both had a ring, the unjust man would not hesitate to do harm or evil. The just man would soon act like the unjust man by coming to the same point. If the just man did not use this ring to benefit himself by becoming invisible, he would be looked on as stupid and something is definitely wrong with him. If you saw a baby crawling towards an open well, Mencius thinks that everyone has a heart and it is sensitive to the suffering of others. People would be devastated and concerned if they saw this. This isn’t because this person wants to become friends with these people or because he wants to get a good reputation, but because it is the right thing to do. This then begins with the four sprouts that eventually form into virtues. Without feeling any of these sprouts, Mencius says you are not considered a human being. This person would be unjust, just like the unjust person who does use the ring to their advantage. Both Glaucon and Mencius believe in ethical egoism. With Glaucon, if someone doesn’t use the ring to benefit himself, there is something wrong with you because human beings ought to be motivated by self interest. With Mencius, if you don’t save the child there is something wrong with you because you would be devastated. It should be in everybody’s self interest to save a child from falling into a well. I believe Mencius is closer at being right. Glaucon has a very negative perception of human nature. I don’t like it how he thinks you are nuts if you believe in following the law, even if you know you will not get caught. There are many people who would not intentionally commit a crime. It seems that these just people following Mencius are in the majority and that would make Glaucon in the minority. Since humans are very social, we know that our self interest is best when looking after other people’s self interest because that will make everyone much happier. I know I am much happier when I have made someone else’s day, even if the deed was very small. Works Cited Plato. “The Myth of Gyges.” Conduct and Character. Mark Timmons. 5th ed. Belmont, CA. 2006. 16-18. Print.