Good day fellow Vizzed members.

So one of my favorite books is Plato's The Republic and I've read the book many times over.

Anyways there is a certain chapter in The Republic that is always a serious debate topic so I might as well introduce the topic to Vizzed and see what people think.

In Plato's The Republic, after countering arguments made by Sophists as how do we define Justice; Socrates defined his version of justice (or attempted to ) as someone who does his job or duty that society has chosen him to do. Socrates then says that there are 3 classes in a society; the Leaders, the Soldiers, and the Craftsmen and each has a duty in this society: the Leaders make Laws, the Soldiers defend the city, and the Craftsman do what is needed for them to survive. Socrates also says that in order for these "classes" to do their duty they must have certain "characteristics" (I say this loosely as Socrates uses the word Soul instead); a Leader must be intelligent and wise; the Soldiers must have Courage, and the Craftsman must have desire (or another way of looking at it is self-interest).

To make a long story short, Socrates says that these 3 classes must do their jobs that is "natural" or what society has deemed them to most able to perform. Socrates says that someone who tries to do a job that is not what they are best suited for (like a Leader becoming a Soldier or a Craftsman becoming a Leader) then they wouldn't being doing Justice to a city and can expect to live an unhappy life as he will never accomplish or perform his job like someone who is "natural" at his job.

That last part is what becomes the subject of much debates as to are we all destined to take jobs that are "natural" or easiest for us to perform given our certain set of skills. Here is another way of looking at this question.

I'm sure people here have all heard about the Peyton Manning-Tim Tebow controversy so hopefully this will be easy to explain. As some people know Peyton Manning is the "natural" embodiment of a QB (height, throwing strength, throwing accuracy); while Tebow is not. Even thou Tebow has won a playoff game, has enjoyed some success in the NFL, and practices and trains harder then Manning (debatable, but lets say he does). Yet despite this Tebow is no longer an NFL QB due to the fact that he got replaced by someone who is "natural" at the QB position, despite all of his training and effort to improve himself.

So now this question goes to the Vizzed community.

Are the jobs we take determined if we are "naturally" built for handling this job?

Can someone who is not "naturally" built to do a job be able to achieve a level of success of someone who is "natural" at handling the job?

Hopefully you read all of that before writing your answer.

I agree with Plato on this one. Everyone is naturally talented at something. So people who are naturally good at leading should lead. But where my opinion differs is that people who have trained and prepared to do a job should be put into those positions also.