Aristotle and Plato: Death Action and Justice

1284 Words5 Pages
Aristotle and Plato: Death, Action and Justice Ancient philosophers wrestled considerably with the questions of right and wrong, good and evil, just and unjust. The struggle to understand and define these various dynamics was cast into constant debate, especially in the context of the pagan and imperial Athenian state. Here, thinkers such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle would continually advance the discussion on how best to define man, both practically and ethically. In the two prompting statements provided for this discussion, we find that Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics and Plato's The Trial and Death of Socrates are at once contradictory and compatible. First, a discussion on their contradictions is appropriate. Perhaps what is most compelling in the distinction between the two statements in question is their differing perspectives on the level of dynamism which a man must show in the face of decision or crisis. Particularly, we find that Aristotle's comments suggest a man should be judged according to his actions, with the nature, intention and outcome of these actions further define how we might accurately judge the man. For Aristotle, this means that man is proven by the manner in which he behaves and responds to an attendant scenario. Moreover, Aristotle continues on to argue that, in fact, the manner in which one responds to an attendant scenario shares some level of reciprocity with the characteristics of justice, temperance or bravery. On this point,
Open Document