Aristotle And Socrates

By viewing the painting The Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David, Socrates’ loyalty to the Athenian government was far more important to him than his own death or friendship. He was more interested in teaching his students about his belief in reason and the law of justice before he died. Still, the students and friends were arguing with him and trying to convince him to renounce his teachings. Socrates was strong in telling his students how it was for the good of society that he drinks the poison hemlock. He was not going to change what he was teaching all along when he truly believed in the democratic Athenian government laws. Socrates’ loyalty to the government was much stronger than the ties of friendship or acquaintances.

By comparing himself to the Greek hero Achilles before the jury in Plato’s Apology, Socrates attempts to portray himself as a hero of equal merit to Achilles and others of similar standing. By selecting the greatest of the Classical Greeks to compare and contrast himself to in his argument, Socrates surreptitiously urges his audience to view him as being of the same caliber as Achilles. This not only authenticates Socrates’ claims, but also exhibits his disconnect from earlier forms of thought. Essentially, Socrates attempts to display himself in the same light as his predecessor Achilles through their shared aspiration to do what they deem to be right in addition to their

He proclaims that “examining both myself and others is really the very best thing that a man can do, and that life without this sort of examination is not worth living” (Plato 66). Socrates believes that the government will be able to change so that people who value goodness and truth would be in power. However, later in the Apology, Socrates contradicts himself when he explains why he has led a mostly private life, saying that “if I had long ago attempted to take part in politics, I should have died long ago” (Plato 58). Socrates believes “a man who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life” (Plato 59). This goes against what he has been saying for the rest of the trial and demonstrates the unrealistic quality of the high standards to which he holds the government and leaders. If Socrates says it is dangerous for proponents of justice to live a public life, it becomes extremely difficult for politicians to be virtuous and morally good, since politicians live essentially their whole lives in the public sphere. It is not realistic for Socrates to believe that the government of Athens could progress so that good people hold the power, when he has shown that in his own experience and observations it is not safe for good people to hold public positions.

Socrates is known for his unique practice of Greek philosophy. In The Republic, Socrates discusses building a just city with Glaucon and Adeimantus. Throughout The Republic, the three men decide what classes of people will live within the city, and how each person will be assigned to a class. There would not be a place for Socrates in the just city. Through examining the definitions of a guardian, auxiliary, and money maker, one can justify that Socrates is too complex of a man to be categorized as belonging to one specific group.

Socrates, a critic of Athenian society, is also known as a critic of democracy. “Athens is a democracy, a city in which the many are the dominant power in politics, and it can therefore be expected to have all the vices of the many” (“Socrates’ criticism of democracy,” Encyclopedia Britannica). Socrates claims that he did not want to take part in government because he feared imprisonment or death, which eventually became his fate. Socrates’ problem with democracy was his concern with the citizens who run the

Socrates, at the other end of the spectrum, saw politics as a wasted venture for him because his life was devoted to a quest for knowledge. He stated his way of life, which conflicts with that of Pericles' model, to differ from that of the democratic system of Athens because he saw the government to be corrupt and the majority to not be just. Socrates did not bother to lead a life of servitude to the ideals of the state because he showed through his actions that an unexamined life without critical thinking was not a life at all. As is made clear by the admittance of Socrates himself, his defense plea is the first time he has appeared in a court of law, even by the age of seventy. Socrates' life was dedicated to the pursuit of further comprehension and debate with the Athenian people on the deeper issues of life, not to a court

Socrates was a unique character in ancient Greece, specifically in the city-state of Athens, which was the seat of democracy at the time. Athens practiced direct democracy where citizens, specifically male, directly participated in and voted on legislation. The implication is that most of the men of Athens served in some political way. A way to distinguish oneself apart from the citizenry was to invoke the power of speech and persuasion to be more respected, powerful, and thus wealthier. Socrates’s philosophy in Plato’s dialogue Gorgias is shown in contrast to rhetoric and its perceived benefits to the individual and the people of the democracy. It offers severe critiques on the practice of rhetoric, specifically for the harm it does instead

Socrates and Niccolo Machiavelli were both incredibly influential in the development of Western philosophical thought, specifically in relation to ethics in politics. Machiavelli’s text The Prince, written during a period of political turmoil in Italy, outlines the necessary steps a prince must take to obtain both power and authority. Plato’s The Last Days of Socrates assesses the moral and ethical guidelines an ideal leader should possess through the beliefs and teachings of Socrates. While both texts had similar objectives, their opinions were quite contradictory. Socrates would have found Machiavelli’s concept of the “Prince”, and the government he creates to be both unethical and fundamentally flawed. Socrates places higher value on the maintenance and creation of justice, while Machiavelli stresses the process of obtaining and preserving power, unethical or not. Due to their differences in their ideas of virtue, knowledge, and justice it can be concluded that Socrates would not be supportive of the government in which The Prince proposes.

While everyone has their own opinion, and is more than entitled to share it, other’s beliefs and thoughts influence most people. Politics and opinions of leaders on the way in which a country must govern are often easy portals to access an impressionable mind. Throughout history, those with opposing viewpoints on democracy have often spoke up and shared their opinions with the world in hopes of being heard. Aristotle, Pericles and Xenophon have each taken a turn in doing so, and made their feelings obvious to the people. All opinions were very different; Aristotle's being more of an open-minded approach towards democracy (not completely dismissing the idea of it), Pericles' being in total agreement with it, and Xenophon being sarcastic and exceptionally opposed.

When I proposed the question, “If the laws of Samford were causing you to go against your own moral standard, would you break them?” I heard a variety of answers from different students. However, one individual talked about how by going to Samford, we acknowledge their laws and therefore are obligated to follow them because we attend this University. He went on to say that we give up certain freedoms when we go into different places because everyone has differing beliefs about how things should work. He continued by saying that if we have a problem with the way Samford is run or what they are making us do then we can leave because it is not our job to tell them how to govern, but to find a place that lines up with how we think a place should

Socrates and Machiavelli are both very influential philosophers and two of the great minds of their time. However, both of these men had their own separate ideas that did not completely agree with one another. Machiavelli was born into a Renaissance time period of fragmented politics, lots of bloodshed, and angry citizens while Socrates grew up in a time of political adjustment and instability in Athens. Machiavelli constructed The Prince as a political pamphlet to his friend Lorenzo de ' Medici on how a prince would successfully rule his land or kingdom most effectively. This guide consisted of ideas that involved cheating and lying to keep people happy and asserting dominance over others. The Greek philosopher Socrates, on the other

Having grown up during times of war and turmoil, both Socrates and Machiavelli use philosophy to evaluate people and politics. After seeing corruption, fragmentation and death, both philosophers developed different views. Machiavelli’s concept of a Prince includes strong stances on morality and religion. Socrates would be likely to agree on the general ideas that Machiavelli believes a Prince should have but he would differ mainly in how they should be executed. I believe that Socrates would agree with Machiavelli that there needs to be a kind of “political renaissance” that changes how people organize and alter political systems as well as gives a new definition of what morality is concerning politics and government. However, in the Last

Aristotle and St. Augustine both wrote philosophical works in order to teach us something that they have learned, in hopes that we will apply it to our own lives. However, Augustine uses a type of autobiographical style in addition to treatise in his works, while Aristotle only uses the treatise style in his works.What were they both thinking when they were writing these famous works? Did they use their respective styles to achieve a goal?

Plato’s Socrates is a character plagued and prized with contradictions. He professed to care for nothing so much as virtue and human excellence but was incriminated by the greatest and most open democracy in ancient history. He was wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. He is at once the most Athenian, citizenly, patriotic, and other-regarding of philosophers—and yet the most critical and self-regarding of Athenians. In exploring that contradiction, between “Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen” and “Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society,” Aristotle’s Politics comes to mind: “the

Separated by more than 8500 kilometers but only 52 years, two seminal thinkers have shaped the moral philosophy of their respective cultures. While Western ethical theory has been deeply influenced by Plato’s Republic, Eastern ethical theory has been deeply influenced by Confucius’s Analects. David Haberman describes the Republic as ‘one of the most influential books of all time’ (86). And Bryan Van Norden compares (with considerable fervor) the Analects to ‘the combined influence of Jesus and Socrates’ (3).