In what way would society function if all lived virtuously?

[Hatikvah]

I think it is obvious: society, although it claims to be “responsible” and “good” at its core, is collectively fallen and broken to some degree; look at all of the wars there have been. Yes, that’s extremely general, “wars,” but then look at the war crimes, genocides, etc.

Then we have even crimes and evil committed outside of war than can never be justified: murders, arson, considerable theft, and the like that affect us all in some way, even if it is only to show one another what we are capable of.

Christianity has the idea of original/ancestral sin, and St. Augustine elaborated. This is not what I’m necessarily getting at, but that’s a good thing to consider when thinking about mankind and its oft-known vices.

For my post here anyhow, we can simply use a rudimentary definition and scope for the concept of society: a group of people involved in persistent social interaction. It does not have to be a particular society like the Western world, the literal worldwide Muslim community of the Ummah or even the Christian idea of the Church Militant in the communion of saints. It is just society, no adjectives.

The most important part of this thread would start: what is virtue? Plato wrote an entire Socratic dialogue called Meno on the issue. This .edu article (PDF) summarizes Meno and Plato’s objections and discourse. Socrates never does find the overarching essence of virtue, he only finds instances of virtue. There have been many definitions, from something undefined (Plato), to a point between a deficiency and an excess of a human trait (Aristotle) to mere honor and bravery as prudence (Seneca, other Romans).

So something that is not contradictory or all too objectionable may be the Greek concept of philia. Aristotle defined this as a sort of friendship among people (though distinct from agape, etc). There’s an examination of Aristotle’s ideas on love and friendship here (PDF).

Can all humans even do their absolute best to act virtuously, as with the universally-applicable Golden Rule? Of course, being human, we all make mistakes: but correction is the key. Small children even know, if taught properly, to respect each other. Grown adults, however, go to war and do untenable evil with entire groups being polluted by such conduct.

If all humans were somehow able to act virtuously, would we even need common justice and law? Justice is also an abstract concept, but codified law is not always common sense.

 

[fhansen]

True justice, according to our faith, is based on love. If we could continuously love as we should, then no formal or publicly revealed law would be necessary; we’d be living by the law God inscribed in all men’s hearts. The issue in any case is that man’s first problem is alienation from God, ‘apart from Whom he can do nothing’, including retaining moral integrity And without that relationship man can never find any permanent depth of peace or happiness or satisfaction to begin with; he’ll always be restless, unsettled, to one degree or another, existing in a disordered and unjust state as it were until he finally and fully knows and is known 1 Cor 13:12

 

[Strydersroom]

There is one way this could work, or at least work better, and it has to do with space exploration and uniting humanity as all human beings.

**Jean-Luc Picard tried to explain to Ralph Offenhouse from the 20th century that there would be no need for his law firm any longer: “A lot has changed in three hundred years. People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of ‘things’. We have eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions.” (TNG: “The Neutral Zone”)

When Lily Sloane asked how much the USS Enterprise-E cost to build, Picard told her “The economics of the future is somewhat different. You see, money doesn’t exist in the 24th century… The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of Humanity.” (Star Trek: First Contact)**