Appraisal for Democracy by Plato, Aristotle and Thucydides

The concept of Democracy dates back to the Classic Period, otherwise known as the Golden Age of Greece. Prior to becoming a unified nation, Greece was made up of city-states that were constantly warring with one another. None of these city-states possessed full control over its neighbors. It was during this time and because of these circumstances that there was great advancement in Greek thought encompassing philosophy and politics. These advancements are responsible for the strong Greek

Plato’s impression of democracy which was intellectualized around 384 B.C.E is rather different from the present day understanding of democracy and the power of wealth. As an aristocrat himself, according to Plato “When the poor win, the result is a democracy.” (Plato, p.58). In other words, Plato believed that only kings were authorized to rule its society, whereas regular everyday people were perceived as ferocious and unable to govern. Plato’s awareness of democracy was established when he realized ordinary people were not born to lead, that only the elite people had the utmost respect, and right to rule over the lower class. Furthermore, the concept of power and wealth continues to be a crucial stand point in society’s then, and now since the exercise of democracy is known to be a political affair.

The Greek society was a direct democracy with people voting on the issues themselves instead of representatives voting on their behalf. Any male citizen over the age of eighteen was allowed to vote. Like the Romans, the Greek government was divided into separate parts. The Greek government consisted of an assembly, council, and courts, with each requiring a different number of voters present. The people all gather and vote on issues by hand, and this is the simplest form of majority rules. The role of the people is extremely important in how the society and state is governed and run. This early form a democracy was detailed by Pericles funeral oration during the Peloponnesian War. Pericles was an eminent Athenian politician who states in regards to the government of Athens, “Its administration favors the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy (Pericles, “Funeral Oration”, pp. 2)”. Here, Pericles states that the people have all the power and their opinion is highly valued. Likewise, the Romans valued the people’s opinions so highly that they entrusted with them rewards and punishments, vital aspects that held the society together. Pericles also states, “…nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, here is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition (Pericles, “Funeral Oration”, pp. 2)”. Here is the essence of democracy, every man no

The United States is known for its many liberties to all, liberties that lead to all sorts of bad according to Socrates and Aristotle. Plato-Socrates in The Republic and Aristotle in Politics criticize democracy, a form of government that tries to equalize all. Centuries have passed and many of the democratic elements described in their works apply to current democratic regimes in particular the United States.

In The Republic of Plato, Plato, in addition to sharing his views on justice, shares his views on democracy using a fictionalized Socrates to outline the most pressing issues. Plato’s views on democracy are negative; he believes democracy to be bred from a response to inequality of wealth and to heighten all of humanities worst traits. Plato believes democracy leads to unequipped leaders who hold offices and power without the necessary traits and preparation.

Abstract In this paper, we are going to discuss the Greece Polis, talking about democracy and Dictatorship, we will compare Sparta and Athens comparing and answer the following questions: How did people in Athens and Sparta obtain the right to participate in public life and make decisions affecting the community? Who held public office?

Socrates’, Plato’s, and Aristotle’s main criticisms of democracy were based on both theory and precedents. Whereas Plato and Aristotle believed that democracy could lead to mob rule in part due to group-think based on a population’s impulses, Socrates advocated that governance should not be solicited based on the citizenry’s desires at any given time. Aristotle advocated that democracy was indeed the best form of government, or better said he believed democracy to be lesser of the forms of government. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle all believed that only the wisest should govern because those governed might squander resources and wealth, make decisions based on emotion, and revolt due to a perceived or real notion of inequality.

The forum style debate is a frequent motif in Thucydides’s retelling of history. Although he notes that his accounts may not be precisely accurate, his depictions of public discussion yield particular insight into the functioning of ancient democracy. The Debate at Syracuse is a unique example of these forum debates because its content is both particular to the potential Athenian invasion of Syracuse and concerned with the more abstract ideological debate over the merits of democracy. However, in this debate, the democratic leader Athenagoras, in his disagreement with Hermocrates, espouses a philosophy dissonant with our contemporary understanding of democracy, indicating that the Greek democratic ideals are fundamentally distinct from modern interpretations.

Beginning in Athens circa 800-700 B.C.E, the population expanded at an unusual pace alongside rapidly improving economic conditions. It was this, “early development of a large middle class,” that allowed them to begin exploring the then novel concept of a democratic system (Hunt, 68). As early as the seventh century B.C.E, the Archaic Athenian government had begun to represent a democracy in its fledgling stages as a direct result of the success of the entrepreneurial middle class; with, “all freeborn adult Athenian male citizens,” reserving the right to vote on public matters by means of assembly. One such example of this newfound solidarity occurred around 632 B.C.E, with the common masses’ triumphant rally in opposition to an attempt to install an elite Athenian tyrant. After the likes of the harsh legislator Draco in 621 B.C.E, the reforms of Solon by 594 B.C.E, the tyrant rule of Peisistratus in 546 B.C.E, and alight upon the reforms of Cleisthenes in 508 B.C.E, for it was here that true democracy began to take root and would remain and grow as a result of all that had come and been done before.

In the fifth-century BC, Athens emerged as one of the most advanced state or polis in all of Greece. This formation of Athenian ‘democracy’ holds the main principle that citizens should enjoy political equality in order to be free to rule and be ruled in turn. The word ‘democracy’ originates from the Greek words demos (meaning people) and kratos (meaning power) therefore demokratia means “the power of the people.” The famous funeral speech of Pericles states that “Our constitution is called democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people.” However, only citizens (free adult men of Athenian descent) could participate in political matters. Women and slaves held no political rights, although they were

Democracy was instated in ancient Greece by the tyrant Cleisthenes. Cleisthenes was strongly against factionalism and took steps to prevent factions from occurring in the democracy. There were three natural factions in Greece; urban, rural, and coastal. To offset this, Cleisthenes divided Greece into 170 demes and 10 tribes. The tribes consisted of scattered demes so they would be prevented from allying together to create a faction. The goal of this new form of government was to maximize individual liberties. Greece’s democracy was significant because no other ancient society put so much power on the hands of the people and because officials served the state and the constitution, not a person (125).

As Americans, we sometimes have a hard time picturing what life was like before the United States was ever founded. While we have so many ways of looking back on history, getting facts, and information it is much more different than having had to experience it all on our own, first hand. However, what we do know is that much of our own practices and traditions come from the cultures that we wanted to break away from.

‘The Republic’ is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 380 BC, concerning about the order of justice, the order and character of just men and just city/states. The Republic is considered as the best known work of Plato and is considered one of the world’s most influential works of politics, history and philosophy. In this Socratic dialogue, Socrates discusses about the notions of justice and whether the just man is very happy when compared with his unjust, Athenian and foreign counterparts. Socrates considers the various facets of the existing regimes and proposes a series of hypothetical cities that are entirely different from his considerations. Such heated discussions result in the culmination of discussing kallipolis, a hypothetical city-state that was ruled by a philosopher king. In this paper, we are going to consider Socrates arguments about democracy by examining whether the concept of democracy always remains inconsistent with philosophical goals.

After democracy was introduced in Athens around the 5th century B.C.E., the majority of the Greek intellectual community condemned it as a form of communal tyranny. Socrates was put to trial and executed after a vote by the Athenian citizens because, despite strong evidence negating their arguments, the common people blamed him for corrupting the city’s youth. Aristotle would later argue in his writings that the most effective democracy should include equal power between the rich minority and the poor majority, so the poor could not take advantage of the rich. In other words, Aristotle felt that the poor should have a disproportionately small voice in democracy, perhaps believing that they were fundamentally less capable than the educated bourgeois of making the right decision. After two and a half thousand millennia have past, we’d all like to believe we’ve perfected this tried and failed egalitarian system. After all, the entirety of the first world operates under political structures that can largely be described as democratic, and there is something intuitively, morally correct about every person having an equal say, right?

Democracy is often referred to as the rule of the many, but Aristotle called this definition incomplete. In his book “Politics”, he explained that in a city if the majorities are aristocrats and if they have political authority, then it is an aristocracy not a democracy. He therefore defined democracy as when “free people have authority and Oligarchy as when the wealthy have it” (1290b). Plato viewed Democracy as a flawed system with too much inefficiency that would make any implementation of a true democracy not worth it. While Aristotle viewed democracy as a system that could work if it is limited to certain restrictions and if it is the regime that best fits the culture of the people to be governed. In this essay it will be argued that Plato’s view on democracy as a flawed system is more prevalent or more compelling if the current political arena around the world is observed.