Justice and Beneficence for a Good Life - Essay Example

Are the virtues of justice, prudence, and beneficences sufficient for a good life? Introduction In the book ‘How Adam Smith Can Change Your Life’, Russ Roberts suggests that Adam Smith is an influential philosopher who attempted to explain the meaning of a good life. Adam Smith suggests that good life encompasses morality, decency and virtue. According to Smith, some of the virtues that enhance good life include justice, prudence, and beneficences (Roberts, 2014). However, criticisms about this view have also been provided. First, critics suggest that Smith’s moral perspective does not provide specific guidance on how people should behave in specific circumstances. Secondly, it leads people to become biased to the attitudes and interests of the society rather than helping them to act impartially with all human beings. Lastly, the view of Adam Smith is unclearly justified. This essay will analyse Adam Smith’s views about living a good life and its criticisms. First, the essay examines Adam Smith’s view on the issue and its strengths and weaknesses. The essay will also highlight the criticisms of Smith’s view and their strengths and weaknesses. Lastly, it will provide my position about the issue. In this essay I will conclude that the virtues of justice, prudence, and beneficences are very essential; but they are not sufficient for a good life. Other considerations that need to be observed include rationality, human development and scientific approach of solving problems. These additional factors work with the moral virtues suggested by Adam Smith to enable the society achieve good life while meeting the interests of human beings without bias. Being happy is enhanced by living morally and having enough resources to support individuals and societies to solve their problems and resources. Therefore, human development in terms of social, economic and political advancement supports human life and enables people to live morally and happily. Adam Smith’s View In the book The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Smith attempts to explain the source of morality, and why people exhibit virtues and decency even if they may conflict with their self-interest (Roberts, 2014). In the opening sentence of the book, Smith argues that even though human beings may be selfish, they still care about the happiness of other people (Roberts, 2014). Although one may not benefit from the happiness of others, they are usually pleased to see that they are happy. Smith argues that a human being should be totally virtuous in order for the economic system to function in such a way that it can maximize wealth. As a philosopher, Smith argues that there is more to life than material wealth. Material possessions are not sufficient requirements for moral life; but virtues and self-command are. The world is a system that was designed by God to maximize human happiness (Ozler and Gabrinetti, 2013). Smith also admits that although wealth does not constitute human happiness, it benefits the society. That is why human beings have irregular sentiments that result in disproportionate intentions and outcomes. Smith defines character as an essential trait of human beings that shapes their conduct and brings excellent character of esteem and honor (Smith, 1759). It is an ideal attitude through which people view their lives and the lives of others. Virtue shapes how we carry on our lives and determines our happiness and that of others. Smith considers virtue as an integral tool in the moral structure of human beings because it interacts with all other principles in order to bring happiness. The virtues of justice, prudence and beneficence work together with self-command to enhance a totally virtuous life. Self-command enables human beings to restrain their self-interests and understand the feelings of others. To act with prudence, justice and beneficence enhances great esteem and admiration. Human happiness derives from prudence, which is the concern of others. Justice also restrains people from hurting and beneficence enables human beings to promote happiness (Roberts, 2014). Prudence is dictated by our selfish affections while justice and beneficence are directed by benevolent affections. Human beings who are guided by the three virtues are also influenced by the sentiments of an impartial spectator who judges their conduct. In this case, the impartial spectator reproaches someone for not behaving in a happy way. The virtue of prudence refers to an individual’s act of caring for his health, fortune and rank which are the objects upon which his happiness relies on (Ozler and Gabrinetti, 2014). It gives individuals some sense of security, which makes them happy. One of the virtues described by Adam Smith was the virtue of justice. According to him, justice is necessary for a society to exist. Unlike other virtues, the virtue of justice can be enforced by force and be more precise than other virtues. It is a negative virtue that defines the abstention from wrong doing (Smith, 2006). The virtue of justice also prevents people from hurting others. Justice gives other people a sense of security, which makes others in the society to be happy because of the intention of the individual never to hurt them. Retaliation is an essential part of maintaining justice. Smith says, “The violator of justice should be made himself that evil which has done to another” (Smith, 1759: p.96). Retaliation is a basis of social control which is intended to create remorse and guilt. In turn, remorse and guilt promotes the adherence to justice. The shame that an unjust man feels makes him to understand that he has deviated from the norms of the moral structure of the society, and he becomes compelled to follow those rules. Smith’s perspective on justice is based on superego structure whereby a man considers solitude as a horrifying situation. The fear of being left in solitude prevents a man who has violated the moral structure of the society from fleeing justice by going out of the society (Ozler and Gabrinetti, 2013). The horror of being in solitude brings people back to the society. A man is therefore forced to adhere to the rules and norms of the society in order to avoid being confined to solitude. Justice allows a man to perform generous actions towards others. In return, he is treated with love, esteem, gratitude and approbation. The just man then applauds himself and becomes happy with his actions. Harmony and friendship defines the relationship between a man who observes justice and the society. The virtue of justice reinforces proper behaviour and harmonious coexistence among various people in the society, defined by the moral structure of the society (Smith, 2006). Smith suggests that people should assist each other in the society, and that that assistance will always be reciprocated with love, gratitude, friendship and esteem; all of which make the society to flourish and be happy. Therefore, justice promotes a good and happy life in the society. Beneficence refers to the good will that has no boundary, and covers the entire universe. It protects even the mean and the greatest. The beneficent man directs all activities in the universe and enhances happiness by enabling gratitude of human beings towards others (Smith, 1759). If a man is sufficiently beneficent, people will show gratitude towards him, and he will feel happy for that. He is also determined to maintain the greatest quantity of happiness among all others in the society. Criticism of Smith’s View Those who criticize Smith’s view argue that the moral claims of Smith are not justified. For instance, it is unclear what justifies an impartial spectator’s judgments. According to Smith, an impartial spectator questions people for their wrong actions and corrects them for going against their happiness. Critics argue that the impartial spectator does not have a justified mechanism of determining what virtue is right or wrong. Smith’s moral theory also fails to provide a specific way of reacting or deciding in specific circumstances. Human beings are not capable of determining what the spectator has to say in specific circumstances. Smith only argues that the impartial spectator tells human beings that they have acted improperly in this and that, but does not tell them what they should have actually done in order to promote happiness for themselves and for the society. Lastly, Smith’s moral philosophy seems to include bias towards the society rather than demonstrating universality across the universe. Smith argues that people should act justly in the society and be benevolent; but the society may be biased in its demands and interests (Ozler and Gabrinetti, 2003). The impartial spectator is therefore not free from the biases of the society because it is enmeshed within its biased attitudes and interests. These biases may make people unhappy. My Position In my position, the virtues of prudence, beneficence and justice are very essential but not sufficient to enhance a happy life. In this case, I think that the pursuit of wealth is an essential way of making people to become more benevolent and just in the society. Wealth and material possessions are means by which the society can assist each other in order to become happy. Scientific discoveries and research are also important to make people happy. Smith argues that people should help each other and behave justly in order to be happy and make others happy. However, it is not actually clear how people should behave in specific circumstances. In order to address this weakness, human beings need to have wealth and material possessions that can be used to address specific issues as they arise. For instance, lack of information about a certain issue can be solved by having enough books and the internet to carry out research. Therefore, I believe that using resources in scientific ways helps people to develop a good way of life and become happy. However, the virtues of prudence, beneficence and justice should be included in the society in order to enhance effective distribution of wealth and dissemination of information across the society, making people even happier and enhancing better lives for people. Conclusion Adam Smith suggested that there are three virtues that make life good: prudence, justice and beneficence. Prudence enables people to take care of their health, rank and fortune. Justice involves providing generous actions towards others to make them happy, and beneficence involves goodwill that serves the universe. This essay has argued that Adam Smith’s virtues of prudence, justice and beneficence are very essential but not sufficient to enhance a good life. Accumulation of wealth and pursuit of wealth are also necessary because they provide specific ways of solving specific problems of the society, and provides basis of acting justly in the society. The virtues described by Smith are used to distribute material wealth equally and disseminate information effectively in the society in order to enhance good life. References list Ozler, Sule and Gabrinetti, Paul A. A Known World: An Analysis of Defenses in Adam Smith’s ‘The Theory of Moral Sentiments’. Adam Smith Review, 8, 2013, 1-29. Roberts, Russ, D. How Adam Smith can change your life: An unexpected guide to human nature and happiness. New York: Portfolio/Penguin, 2014. Print. Smith, Craig. Adam Smiths Political Philosophy. London: Routledge, 2006. Print. Smith, Adam. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, D.D. Raphael and A.L. Macfie (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1759. Internet Source. Read More