Introduction
The validity of the law cannot be associated with morality though; there are many instances where moral norms becomes important when formulating laws but still the society can change them if needs be. This concept clearly shows the power of moral decadence and offensive laws existing in legal systems. The dignity in the society continues to depreciate since the law does not take its validity from morality. There are many actions disallowed in the past, but in the current times, they are the most praised acts. The human rights organization plays a major role in disregarding a moral society and promoting evil acts that turn into law. Since time immemorial, the society has been in the frontline opposing abortion labeling it an abomination. Currently, the society engages in actions that support immorality and the world transforming into a Sodom and Gomorrah.
In my opinion, abortion is immoral and should not be legal if not intended to save the life of a mother at risk. The perpetrators are insane to claim that the unborn baby is just a ‘fetus’ with no rights since it is not human. The notion when the law allows evil acts need to be eliminated. When a woman is pregnant, expectations are high that she will give birth to a baby. With this argument, the legislators must understand that the unborn child needs protection from any threats that will deny them a life. As elucidated above, proper mechanisms will protect the rights of the unborn child and prohibit abortion, as the act is immoral.
Part 2
According to his argument, Glaucon’s supports psychological egoism. This is because he believes individuals’ actions are justified if intended to benefit them. He argues that human beings seek their own self-interest, and they are therefore ethical egoists and not psychological egoists.
Glaucon applies the myth, “the Ring of Gyges” to bring the concept that lies within psychological egoism. In the myth, Gyges comes across a magical ring that makes him invisible to other human beings. Using his power, he goes to the extent of seducing the Queen and assassinates the king. Glaucon believes that any human being would have taken the opportunity to murder the king, as the probability of failing never existed. According to him, their own interests motivate selfish individuals.
Psychological egoism does not imply ethical egoism in any way. The aspects of self-interest and selfishness are against ethical egoism promoted by psychological egoism. Rachel contrasts with Glaucon’s argument as she argues, "the unselfish man is precisely the one who does derive satisfaction from helping others, while the selfish man does not.” She highlights three errors associated with Psychological egoism. She starts by saying that egoists are not in a position to differentiate between self-interest and selfishness.
Egoists confuse themselves amid altruism and self-interest. To explain further, altruism does not go hand to hand with happiness, and they will never be compatible. In real-life settings, situations remains unclear, and they will always confuse individuals. Rachel goes ahead to point out that altruism and self-interest can match each other into a single action. This contradicts the perception of the egoists.
Briefly, there lies a significant gap between psychological egoism and ethical egoism and the two remains different. Glaucon has deep beliefs in psychological egoism and explains why individuals are driven by their own self-interest.
