​

Discussion of the approach of the classical Greek philosophers in issues of law and governance, and that of Thomas Hobbes in the 17th Century. Plus, possible biological roots of the human desire for fair play.

Plato and Aristotle on Tyrany and the Rule of Law (Text)

Plato and Aristotle both developed important ideas about government and politics. Two of the many political subjects that these men wrote about were tyranny and the rule of law. Tyranny occurs when absolute power is granted to a ruler. In a tyrannical government, the ruler becomes corrupt and uses his power to further his own interests instead of working for the common good.

The rule of law is the principle that no one is exempt from the law, even those who are in a position of power. The rule of law can serve as a safeguard against tyranny, because just laws ensure that rulers do not become corrupt.

 

Plato’s Crito: When Should We Break the Law? (Text)

An assembly of more than 500 Athenian citizens convicted Socrates of corrupting the youth and impiety, essentially failing to respect the gods of the city. Socrates denied these charges. Moreover, he insisted that his public philosophizing, far from being subversive, was for the benefit of Athens and in the service of the god Apollo.

The jury wasn’t convinced, and found him guilty. They were further incensed when, during the sentencing stage of the trial, Socrates suggested that his “punishment” should be a lifetime supply of free meals at the prytaneum, or central hearth, an honor typically reserved for Olympic champions and the like. These antics did not play well and Socrates received the death penalty. A religious observance delayed the execution for a few weeks, but it now appears imminent.

Enter Crito, a friend with deep pockets and deeper affection for Socrates ...

“Nasty, Brutish, and Short”: Hobbes on Life in the State of Nature (Text)

To see why we might seek a contract, imagine if there was no contract, no agreement, on what society should be like: no rules, no laws, no authorities. This is called “the state of nature.”

What would life in the state of nature be like? Most think it would be very bad: after all, there would be no officials to punish anyone who did anything bad to us, resulting in no deterrent for bad behavior: it’d be every man, woman and child for him or herself, it seems.

Hobbes has famously described life in the state of nature as “solitary, poor nasty, brutish, and short.” Locke describes it as where everyone can be judge and jury in their own disputes, meaning they can personally decide when they have been wronged and how to punish the offender; clearly, this could get out of hand ...

Galahad v Odysseus (Text)

Honour codes and strategic thinking in sport and beyond.

In the last seconds of extra time in the 2010 soccer World Cup quarter final between Ghana and Uruguay, with the score at 1-1, Ghana were awarded a free kick deep in the Uruguayan half. The ball was crossed into the penalty area and a goalmouth scramble ensued. Twice the ball headed toward the net, and twice it was cleared off the line by Uruguayan striker Luis Suarez: the first time with his knee, the second time with his hands. Following the rule book exactly, the referee awarded Ghana a penalty and showed Suarez the red card ...

The Wall Street Protest (Video)

What happens when you pay two monkeys unequally?

Frans de Waal: "Moral behavior in animals."

​

​

​

​

​