Aristotle’s Critique of Plato
Aristotle took a distinct path verging from the foundation of Plato’s philosophy. In order to control society Plato used the noble lie, so people under the state wouldn’t question their place in life. Aristotle, on the other hand, used the idea of “civic virtue of friendship” to create a sense of community. “For Aristotle, friendship is a virtue “most necessary for our life.” Without friendship, life would be missing a major dimension and in consequence our live would lack real significance.” (50) As this quote entails, friendship is important to Aristotle and is a major foundation for his philosophy. Plato’s noble lie was a way to patch the giant hole in his theory of an ideal
…show more content…
The polis’ well being is more important than the individual. Not to say that Aristotle cared for individual rights, but he viewed the polis as a means to the “good life.” The polis is justified then by the peoples desire to achieve happiness.
Aristotle and Plato have differing opinion on who should lead the polis. Plato felt “philosopher kings” should rule because they would be trained and have the most knowledge and wisdom to know justice from injustice, and Plato strictly disagrees with democracy saying that it only leads to tyranny. Aristotle was in favor of a Polity which has the middle class rule since the middle class have the least desire to be rich or to have control; however, a Polity is unpractical because the middle class is usually not strong enough to counter the ambitions of the rich or the power crave of the poor, thus leaving either the rich or the poor in charge. Needing a practical solution to which group shall rule Aristotle choose democracy. “Whereas tyranny is the most perverse of the unjust regimes and whereas oligarchy is nest to tyranny among the worst regimes, democracy is the “most moderate” among the worst regimes and thus the “least bad” among those considering to be the unjust regimes.”(51) Aristotle’s democracy
He pointed out the flaws of the four main political systems, and sought a new way of government. He came up with a subsidiary of a democracy, called, as his book was, a republic. This new form of government would have leaders be elected by the people they governed, and lead to the new political concept of popular sovereignty. This meant that in a democracy or republic, if citizens felt that who they elected wasn’t doing a good job, they wouldn’t have to re-elect them. On the other hand, Aristotle denounced Plato's idea of an “ideal state,” in his book titled The Politics. Instead of trying to theorize an ideal state, Aristotle took a more practical approach in trying to make a Constitution that could be easily implemented. He divided some of the types of governments in Greece into either “True,” or “Defective.” After researching he figured that the easiest to implement and least problematic was a system called a polity. hybrid between an oligarchy and a democracy that would uprise with a strong, educated middle class. It is also referred to as a “Middle Class Polity.” In ancient Rome, they implemented a republic, and the Romans
Plato's final argument in Phaedo for the immortality of the soul is one of the most interesting topics of all time. It goes hand to hand with the application of the theory of forms to the question of the soul's immortality, as Plato constantly reminds us, the theory of forms is the most certain of all his theories. The Phaedo is Plato’s attempt to convince us of the immortality of the soul by using several main arguments. These include the argument of forms and the law of opposites. In the final passage of the Phaedo, Plato provides his final proof, although it may be his last attempt to give his reasoning, it is not very convincing. Plato has some good points and reasoning to believe in the immortality of the soul, but his arguments often
Aristotle argues that in order for a polis to emerge, a union between man and women must convene. Later a household must be introduced which unites with other households to form a village, villages come together to form city-states. This theory is Aristotle’s natural view that an individual can not be self sufficient Plato argues that, in order to achieve absolute justice, a city-state is needed.
ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the viability of certain aspects (the sex lottery) of Plato's Republic, book V. It is college level 'A' paper.
Excellence is a function which renders excellent the thing of which it is a function is Plato’s definition of virtue. What does this definition really mean though? Plato and Aristotle both had their own unique arguments devoted to the topic at hand, and their own ways of describing what virtue really is. Defining virtue may seem to be an easy taste, but to truly understand the arguments behind the definition can prove to be very challenging.
Democracy is a form of government where people choose leaders through elections and social construct that are based on the equality of everyone within the state. It is a form of government were majority and public opinions combine to choose leaders with respect to the social structure of a particular society, taking into consideration the social laws, rules, traditions, norms, values, and culture. Plato and Aristotle tow of the most influential figures in Greek philosophy. Both Plato and Aristotle were big critics of democracy as a poor form of government. Aristotle’s views about democracy hold that democratic office will cause corruption in the people, if the people choose to redistribute the wealth of the
We are social creatures. We surround ourselves with other human beings, our friends. It is in our nature. We are constantly trying to broaden the circumference of our circle of friends. Aristotle understood the importance of friendship, books VIII and IX of the Nicomachean Ethics deal solely with this topic. A modern day definition of a friend can be defined as “one joined to another in intimacy and mutual benevolence independently of sexual or family love”. (Oxford English Dictionary). Aristotle’s view on friendship is much broader than this. His arguments are certainly not flawless. In this essay I will outline what Aristotle said about friendship in the Nichomachaen Ethics and highlight possible
Aristotle says that justice is thought of as equality among all, there is a disregard to merit (p.172). In a society, there is usually more poor people and because there is this demand of equality then the majority rule (p.174). Mob rule is then authoritative. All governments have their forms, which are good and are bad. Democracy to Aristotle is not the best regime because it is ruled by the poor or the ones that need from the government. Government is not chosen by those who pursue virtue, but instead pursue wealth. The democratic principle is that of freedom, wealth, and birth. Not virtue. He believes the best regime would not be exactly a democracy but a polity that would be a combination of freedom, wealth, birth and virtue. The best regime has ideal conditions in which it becomes a predictable regime and consists of values, choices, the inanimate, elements of the class of workers, and the education of rulers. Democracy has a big defect in that it does not have intelligence or wisdom. It is the rule of many. It is based on the idea of happiness by following pleasures (p.48). Democracy comes into play when the majority revolt against the oligarchy because of the ideas of freedom. The problem with it is that people are pursuing their pleasures, not thinking of the state as a whole. There is unity based on pleasure. Before long, everyone is pursuing their own pleasures and there is an undermining of authority
In ancient Greece two great written philosophers lived. First there was Plato and then Aristotle. Aristotle was a pupil of Plato. Despite being taught by Plato they had different theories and views. Their ethics were very typical and traditional of ancient Greece but Aristotle detailed virtue ethics and the path to happiness. Plato’s political theories for a utopian society varied from Aristotle’s view of ‘best state for each society’. Their metaphysical theories are complete opposites and very contradicting. Even though Plato and Aristotle came from the same era and were closely linked they had very different philosophies.
Aristotle and Plato are two of the most influential philosophers in history. Plato was Socrates’ greatest student and in turn taught Aristotle. In time, Aristotle became Plato’s greatest student. Together Aristotle and Plato, along with Socrates, laid the groundwork for what we now know as Western philosophy and science.
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.
In Aristotle's Politics, he focuses much on the regimes of an oligarchy and of a democracy. Democracies exists when the free and poor, being a majority, have authority to rule, and have an equal share in the city. Oligarchies exists when the few wealthy and better born have authority and grant benefits in proportion to a person's wealth (1280a:10-30;1290a:5-10).
Philosophy is a Greek word meaning "love of wisdom." Throughout Plato's Republic, wisdom plays an important role. According to Plato, education is wisdom. In the passage, 518d, Plato discusses the true meaning of education vicariously through Socrates. Some literary mechanisms can be found in the passage and I will show how they fit in the text and how they contribute to the main themes of Plato's Republic.
“the having and doing of one’s own and what belongs to one would be agreed to
In order to compare these great philosophers, it is important that we first of all view their history from an individual perspective.