Essay on What if…
The power has enormous impact on individuals but individuals always have a choice how to use their power, either for good or for bad, either for their selfish interests or for the public good. In this respect, it is possible to refer to the case of Gyges described by Plato, when the person got the power of the ring and could use the ring to remain uncaught whatever he did. In fact, actions of Gyges are negative and imply the evil nature of humans, but Plato could view the attitude of people to the power of ring and the power at large one-sidedly, at least in this story. Obviously, Gyges as well as any other person could act otherwise and commit good acts using the power of the ring. Therefore, people are not always guided by their interests and wishes solely but they may be guided by superior concerns, such as the concern of the public good and some ethical norms and principles.
In fact, Plato stands on the ground that people, when they get the power are eager to use it to the full extent, while being aware of their ability to avoid punishment and to stay uncaught, regardless of whatever they do, makes people even bolder and persistent in their intentions to do whatever they like to meet their interests solely. At this point, Plato definitely has a reason because people often face difficulties with controlling their interests and the threat of punishment for their wrongdoing is a strong motivator that keeps people from committing evil acts. In such a way, people face a problem of limiting their interests in face of the threat of being caught and punished for wrongdoing. In such a way, the threat of punishment is a restrictive measure that forces people to act within the framework of existing social norms.
In such a situation, Plato’s reasoning seems to be logical because Gyges can do what he likes and other people are likely to follow their interests and wishes, if they had the power of the ring that would help them to avoid punishment and to stay uncaught. However, Plato’s reasoning may be challenged because people are not necessarily slaves of their wishes and interests as the philosopher attempts to persuade the audience. What is meant here is the fact that people may do good things as well as they do wrong or bad acts. In such a situation, the power of the ring gives people a chance to commit bad acts as much as it gives them a chance to commit goods acts. In such a way, people are not necessarily bad as was the case of Gyges. Instead, they can do good things, even if they have to sacrifice their personal interests or wishes.
If people can have good intentions, then they can commit good acts, even if they are aware of the fact that they will never be caught, whatever they do. Hence, people can do good things using their power. For instance, Gyges could use his power for good and, if he had strong ethical norms and principles, he would try to use his power for the good of his community. Obviously, people, who have the power of doing whatever they want without the risk of being caught always have an option to focus on the public good instead of their personal interests and wishes.
At the same time, many people are driven by their selfish interests and they might have used the power of ring for their personal benefits. In such a situation, if one admits that people are likely to do whatever they want being aware of avoiding any punishment or restrictions, then being good is not actually good for people in their regular life. In fact, being good means that not only an individual perceives him- or herself as being good but also his or her social environment perceives the individual as being good. Consequently, an individual should be good in relation to other people. Otherwise, they would not consider the individual as being good.
However, to gain the public approval and to become a good person, an individual has to do something good for others, which, though, often means that the individual should restrict his or her personal interests and refuse from doing whatever he or she wants. For instance, an individual can have an option, either to take a vacation and make an interesting and pleasant trip or, alternative, the individual can refuse from vacation and stay working extra hours. In the first case, the individual pursues his/her personal interests and take a vacation but other people, his/her colleagues, stay working. Naturally, they will not perceive a person, who leaves them in the time of hard work as good. In contrast, if the person refuses from the vacation and keeps working, he/she is doing well in regard to his/her colleagues and they perceive the person as being good. However, in such a situation, the person will definitely suffer the wide gap between his/her personal interests and interests of the community and the intention of being good. Normally, an individual would prefer taking a vacation and this choice would meet interests of the person. However, to be good, the individual has to stay at work that is definitely not good for him/her. Hence, being good in everyday lives is not always good for individuals and their personal interests.
Nevertheless, people still keep doing good things because they cannot act otherwise. In fact, the society, where people are driven by their personal interests solely, is doomed to failure and decay. If each individual pursues his/her interests solely, they will not be able to cooperate with other people effectively. Individual interests differ and, if some individuals manage to meet their interests, then others will not. In such a situation, conflicts in the society become inevitable and individuals, who fail to meet their interests, are likely to use all possible means to meet their interests at cost of others. Hence, social conflicts will emerge.
Thus, the pursue of individual interests solely is impossible because people live in the community and they should respect interests of the community. Otherwise, they will become outcasts and live outside the community but, being excluded from the community, individuals can hardly survive as they are deprived of means for living brought by community activities. At any rate, an individual cannot create as much goods and conveniences as the community can. Therefore, standards of living of community members and outcasts are different and outcasts are in a disadvantageous position. This is why people agree to do good things to stay in the community and to meet interests of the community to gain benefits from membership in the community.
