Rockridge High School
Taylor Ridge, Illinois
Teacher: Barbara Downey

The Ideal Society
By Nick Bisby
12^th grade

Socrates was tried before five hundred and one jurors. Of those, two hundred twenty agreed with him, and two hundred eighty one disagreed. This situation applies to life the same way that it applied to the courts of Athens: some people will agree with a theory and others will disagree. Philosophers throughout the ages have argued over various philosophies and which of these theories were better. One argument that has never been resolved since the beginning of all philosophies is the concept of the ideal society and how it would be established. Many philosophers today have ideas that are very similar to the ideas of ancient philosophers, and somewhere in between lies my opinion that includes some inspiration from other philosophers.

Socrates calls for a change in government, opposite of what a modern thinker, Peter Gabel, desires. In Socrates’ opinion, a ruler should be a philosopher. By his theory a philosopher would be someone who can tell the difference between facts and appearances. By accepting facts over appearances, a ruler can tell between good and evil. While Gabel wanted a system based on fewer facts and more opinions and emotions, Socrates wanted a system based entirely on the knowledge of facts. This is more similar to the legal system that Scruton described wherein laws do not change for any one particular individual. Changing laws for circumstances could cause people to want situations to be changed to benefit themselves. This constant unfair changing could cause a chaos where no situation is fixed and people are always complaining.

Plato seems to agree with Ayn Rand on one major aspect: classes are inevitable. While Plato’s classes consist of leaders and servers, Rand’s classes consist of similar levels: successful people and failures. However, Plato’s leaders are dedicated to help people. His leaders are never corrupt. Rand’s leaders are decisively against helping others undeservedly; unearned aid ruins society. This is because in Plato’s world, wealth inspires greed, so all people with wealth should tithe their entire success. Clearly in Rand’s world this is not so or is irrelevant. The wealth is the inspiration for greatness. Without motivation people will accept the average or worse; therefore idealism or something similar can never be achieved. For Plato being average is perfectly fine as long as everyone is content.

Aristotle agreed with Rand that there was no “ideal” society but rather an “improved” society. He also agreed that happy individuals cause a happy nation. However, contrary to both Rand and Scruton, he thought that personal joy should be sacrificed for nothing, including power or county. Scruton very clearly states that he believes that everything should be sacrificed for the well being of the country. As long as the society as a whole is happy and functioning, Scruton believes that individuals are unimportant and should not be a source of concern. A happy state, Aristotle argues, cannot exist without happy components.

Truly an ideal society cannot be achieved due to society’s inability to mandate productivity and aspirations for success. If everyone were to suddenly agree to the rules of the society, it might possibly work, but to expect that to happen would be a fallacy. However, if everyone were to follow the rules, the ideal society may not greatly vary from our society today. The main change would have to come from the attitudes of the citizens who believe that our society is not ideal. These people consist mainly of poor people who think they have been cheated by society. The cheated people form the unhappy faction of society. This is similar to the way that Aristotle believed that an ideal society needs happy components. If everyone were more cheerful and willing to put forth more effort into constructive plans, the country would be more productive and happier as a whole. While society is very trying, it is not completely smothering unless there is no will to succeed. As Rand believed that without a proper reward there is no striving for success, it is true that many unhappy people believe that all of the rewards have already been handed out to the rich. This causes a horrid cycle that prevents some, the unhappy, from ever trying. If these people would realize that they could still achieve these goals and then attempted to do so, the United States would blossom with flourishing individuals even more so than there already is. Our success would encourage other authoritarian cultures to adopt a less restrictive system in order to provide the possible rewards, as our system is one of the few that allows the opportunities that people so often decline.

Many philosophers have argued over what composes the ideal society. Some of them looked at the faults of society then pondered a perfection that cannot be. However I, like Aristotle, look at the strengths of our society as a firm base upon which to build. It is obvious that our system works as many people have gone from rags to riches. Why do not more people have these thrilling tales to tell? Clearly it is simply because they believe they cannot.

Questions

Q1- Number the “fault lines” mentioned in paragraph one, #1 to #7 according to your personal priorities.
A - I would rate the fault lines, from highest priority to least as: abortion, role of government, taxes, welfare reform, health care, gun control, and environmentalism.

Q2- In paragraph three, what is meant by “defeat of community”?
A - People are growing apart and there are fewer communities and more individuals. Without people living together, they are not really a society. If the communities are defeated, there can be no ideal society.

Q3- Do you sense “the pain of isolation” in the adults in your community?  Explain.
A - I see the isolation, but I fail to see the pain. It is obvious that isolation is growing throughout adults. More and more adults are getting divorced and not thinking twice of the isolation they are causing. I would have to say that this failure to think twice shows that there is no pain from the loneliness.

Q4- Discuss your feelings about the SAT in light of paragraph six.
A - I feel that Gabel does a good job of pointing out that the tests do not portray individual personality. However, there is a point when some guideline on a person’s intelligence needs to be given. It would be absurd to let certain people be doctors. Maybe they truly want to do that, but it would dangerous to let them.

Q5- In considering a future career, what are your “prime motivations”?

A - My prime motivations in a career involve the amount of free time I would be given. I also would place high importance on salary. Money is important, so I would be able to afford things to do in my spare time.

Q6- What do you think about a less “objectified” legal system?

A - I think objectified is the way to go. The motivations behind a murder are insignificant: a dangerous person is dangerous. Whether he killed a person due to racial indifferences or because of insanity, he still holds a high capacity to do it again and should be locked up. Rules are rules and should not be broken for any reason. Exceptions should not be made.

Q7- Would you describe yourself as an idealist? Why or why not?

A - I believe that I am an idealist because I feel my life is rather ideal. I expect the best to happen everyday. However, I am realistic enough to recognize that there are people who have different points of views, and that circumstances will arise.

Q8- Share an anecdote about a local idealist over age 40.

A - My little league football coach was always positive about everything. He even gave up smoking to set a good example for kids. He wanted a reason to quit and found the best possible reason, and then he followed through.

Q9- How does Scruton describe the differences in political culture of Islam and the west?

A - Scruton believes that in the West, people’s dedications should be towards each other. If everyone works together, then everything will work. In the Islamic world, all people’s dedications are towards their god. If their god is pleased and the holy law is obeyed, the society will be granted happiness.

Q10- What does Scruton suggest are the prerequisites in Western societies for citizenship?

A - The prerequisites in Western societies are a sense of patriotic public spirit and a commitment to the preservation of the social contract.

Q11- What is the danger to the Western social contract that Scruton identifies in the last paragraph?  Do you think the Western social contract involves “patriotic self-sacrifice”?  Should it do so, in your opinion?  Why or why not?

A - Erosion of national unity endangers the social contract. I think the Western social contract does currently involve patriotic self-sacrifice. With all that has occurred in the past few years, patriotism has risen drastically. People who are too afraid to stand up for their country are frowned upon. It probably should not be this severe; people should be entitled to their own beliefs. However, if patriotism is the one thing that keeps people united, then it is absolutely necessary.

Q12- Comment on the quote taken from Ayn Rand’s book, Atlas Shrugged.  Do you agree with it?  Why or why not?  Have you read Atlas Shrugged?

A - I feel that Ayn Rand is trying to point out that people who take from society by any means without having earned their share are harmful to society. For example, people on welfare, though honest people, are still a drag on society much the same way that a thief is a drag on society: they take yet contribute little or nothing. I have not read the book, but I tend to agree with Rand due to the fact that I will be expected to work for my success: everyone else should also.
 

BACK