A-level Philosophy
Pre-course activity
Summer 2014
Introduction
Before the first lesson of the term (on 3rd September 2014) you will
need to complete the following task. It requires no previous
knowledge of Philosophy – it requires you research a classic
thought experiment, and present your findings in an essay.
The purpose of the task is to give your teachers a feel for how you
organize your thoughts, and arguments, in an essay. So please do
put time, care and effort into expressing yourself clearly, and in
depth.
The task
Given a written answer to the following questions:
What is the story of the Ring of Gyges meant to
show?
Do you find the argument convincing? Explain
your answer.
Your answer should be in continuous prose (i.e. using full
sentences, paragraphs and punctuation). It should be at least 300
words long. Try and write it all in your own words – if you do need
to include a direct quotation from a book/the internet, please make
it clear [write in brackets – “this is a quotation from The Republic
by Plato” for example].
Resources
Links to a few internet sites which explain the myth of Gyges are
given below, and on the EGA Wikispaces page. The original
description of the thought experiment (as it was given by Plato) is
given on the next page.
Feel free to use any internet resources – but you are strongly
recommended to start with the ones given. A lot has been written
about this bit of text, and most of it is aimed at university students
and academics.
The story of the Ring of Gyges, as described by Glaucon in “The
Republic” by Plato. Glaucon is arguing with Socrates about the nature
of morality.
Gyges was a shepherd in the service of the king of Lydia;
there was a great storm, and an earthquake made an opening in
the earth at the place where he was feeding his flock. Amazed
at the sight, he descended into the opening, where, among
other marvels, he beheld a hollow horse made of brass, with
doors. He stooped and, looking in, saw a dead body of stature,
who appeared to be more than a mere human, wearing nothing but
a gold ring; this he took from the finger of the dead man and
climbed back out.
Now the shepherds met together, according to custom, that they
might send their monthly report about the flocks to the king;
into their assembly he came, with the ring on his finger. As
he was sitting among them he chanced to turn the collet of the
ring inside his hand, and instantly he became invisible to the
rest of the company - they began to speak of him as if he were
no longer present. He was astonished at this, and again
touching the ring he turned the collet outwards and
reappeared; he made several trials of the ring, and always
with the same result-when he turned the collet inwards he
became invisible, when outwards he reappeared. Whereupon he
contrived to be chosen as one of the messengers who were sent
to the court of the king; as soon as he arrived he seduced the
queen, and with her help conspired against the king and slew
him. He then took control of the kingdom.
Suppose now that there were two such magic rings, and a
virtuous person put on one of them and an unvirtuous person
the other; no man can be imagined to be of such an iron nature
that he would remain virtuous. No man would keep his hands off
what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked
out of the market, or go into houses and sleep with any one at
his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would,
and in all respects be like a God among men. Then the actions
of the virtuous would be the same as the actions of the
unvirtuous; they would both come at last to the same point.
And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a man is
virtuous, not willingly or because he thinks that virtue is
any good to him individually, but of necessity - wherever any
one thinks that he can safely be unvirtuous, there he will be
unvirtuous. This is because all men believe in their hearts
that injustice is far more profitable to the individual than
justice, and anyone who argues as I have been, will say that
they are right.
If you could imagine any one obtaining this power of becoming
invisible, and never doing any wrong or touching what was
another's, he would be thought by the lookers-on to be a most
wretched idiot, although they would praise him publicly, and
keep up appearances with one another from a fear that they too
might suffer injustice.
Hints about writing it
 There are two questions to answer – make you sure you
answer them both.
 Make a written plan of what you are going to say before you
start. For example ….
Intro to Plato – who he was
Context to the story in the The Republic
What the myth says
What it is meant to show
A few examples of what it means
Why I disagree with it – counter-arguments
Conclusion
 Make it clear when you are describing the facts – who Plato
was, who is describing the myth in the Republic, what
Glaucon says - and when you are describing what you think
of it. It is best to put any of your thoughts (about whether the
claim Glaucon makes is convincing) in a separate paragraph.
 Imagine you are explaining the story, and what is trying to
show to a group of interested, intelligent adults, who know
nothing about Plato. This should give you an idea of how
much depth to go into.
 Double-check that what you have written makes sense. It is
easy to miss out words, and get tangled up in long
sentences. Make it concise and clear.