Cicero 's Influence On The Modern Political And Legal World

Both Marcus Aurelius and Cicero try to create a guide, based on their stoic views, on how a person is supposed to live a purposeful life. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor and Cicero was a politician, so both serve somebody or something. In Cicero’s “On Friendship” he bases his guides on what he has learned from important people in his life. In Marcus Aurelius’ “Meditations” he bases his guide off of what he has learned as an emperor with stoic views. Some of what he Aurelius has learned is different from Cicero’s view of stoicism; an example of this is in section seven of Meditations. Section seven of Meditations is about what Aurelius learned from his tutor. He states, “Endure hardship, and have few needs; to do things for myself and not

In his ground-breaking text The Politics, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle was a staunch advocate of a mixed constitution. A mixed constitution is a form of government in which there is an amalgamation of characteristics that comprise differing types of constitutions. There are a plethora of reasons that are argued to have contributed to his adoption of this stance. However, this essay will hone in on three that are posited to be crucial: firstly, the well-known philosophical principle that two extremes cancel out the worst excesses in each other, from which stability will result; secondly, […] ; and thirdly, […] Prior to a discussion that will ensue on why and the grounds on which Aristotle advocates a mixed constitution, this

By looking at the readings of Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Locke, there are a few distinctions between how the modern thinkers viewed politics versus the way the ancient thinkers believed politics should be. There are many topics both modern and ancient thinkers discuss in their writings, such as the purpose of politics, the science of politics, human nature, as well as the ideal regime. By doing so, these thinkers’ views on political topics such as these illuminate how they thought politics should work and who should be able to participate in the activity of politics.

Swiss-French writer Benjamin Constant and ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle offer conflicting viewpoints concerning the merits and possibilities of ancient Greek democracy. Aristotle’s political theory attempts to justify his city-state’s political structure by providing a model of the common good, or Chief Aim, his end goal for Athenian democracy. He believed Athenians could reach the Chief Aim as a society by individually learning to be virtuous and then instilling laws and morals based on these ideals. In his lecture, The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with that of the Moderns, Constant highlights that the individual liberties protected in a modern representative democracy are much more important than the political liberties that one was given in antiquity. Constant illustrates that while some ideas of ancient Greek democracy are precious, Aristotle’s political theory is not an obtainable reality and it was beneficial that modern democracies transitioned to a system that protects individual liberty.

| What form of political state is best?Can a government restrict the liberty of its citizens?

One of these papers, "Letters to Brutus," analyzes the different opinions behind the Constitution and where representation lies in a society. The article delves into the terror that can arise in the presence of an absolute power under a constitution that exists without proper representation. The letters also observe arguments which include the difficulty a single government has while attempting to maintain control over a nation that is large and extremely diversified. How could a centralized government represent the interest of all of the individuals with such an inefficient system? The Brutus papers examine how confidence

Cicero's basic viewpoint held that Rome was held together as a Republic because of the rule of the Senate, not the rule of one King or one Man. Cicero opposed the idea of Julius Caesar taking on more and more power and authority, because he saw this as diminishing the authority of the Senate. The Senate, Cicero thought, was the representative of the "people of Rome," and the discourse and disagreement during debate allowed for more egalitarian rule than that on a central figure. The rule of Rome, than, was based on "a man who is held worthy of defending"¦. Cannot be deemed unworthy of the constitution itself." This, and the idea of being born a common person, allowed Cicero to believe that it was the oratory and intellectual skills of the individual

To claim that Socrates would or would not be supportive of any political system might then seem irresponsible, a presumptuous analysis not fitting for an academic recognizing the false equivalence between Socrates’ philosophy and Machiavelli’s political ethics. The strategy to conduct any sort of liable and valid analysis is not to wholly ignore the “political” part of the system but to evaluate the ethics behind the systems. The goal of this essay will be to compare and evaluate the Machiavellian ideological government, through the lens of Socratic

Both Greek Democracy and the Roman Republic contributed greatly to the development of the modern world, bringing into it the notions of democracy and republic. The evolution of these concepts took them to a level much higher than one present in Ancient Greece and Rome respectively. However, modern society continues to draw on somewhat idealized accounts of the ancient world for inspiration in improving today’s governing procedures.

Cicero’s essay, titled On Duties, presents a practical approach concerning the moral obligations of a political man in the form of correspondence with his young son. Essential to the text, the incentive for Cicero to undertake On Duties emerges from his depleted hope to restore the Republic within his lifetime. Cicero therefore places such aspirations in the hands of his posterity. The foremost purpose of On Duties considers three obstacles, divided into separate Books, when deciding a course of action. Book I prefatorily states, “in the first place, men may be uncertain whether the thing that falls under consideration is an honorable or a dishonorable thing to do” (5). Cicero addresses the ambiguities present under this consideration and

In chapter four, Beard shines a light on the Republic. She explains how the Republic established basic principles in Republican politics as well as developing structures for a way of doing things. Which lead to a new understanding of what it meant to be a Roman citizen. Beard uses the Latin phrase, “Civis Romanus Sum” (‘I am a Roman Citizen’). She gives us a better understanding by connecting John F. Kennedy’s use of the phrase to her argument on the new form of Rome. Beards writing style in this chapter relies on making connections between Ancient Rome and modern culture. This writing style is one of

Cicero’s definition of duty is a term in which in this course, is far reached than what we would have ever thought duty would stand for. Defining duty can be said to be a commitment or obligation to someone or something that causes them to pursue a certain action. Duty is split into two parts which consist of dealing with what is the “supreme” good and second, practicing rules which are strictly regulated in all means of daily life. Another classification of duties are duties which are middle or complete. Complete duty is link to being what is “right”. Middle duty is the reasoning behind why has it been done. When Cicero writes about individual activism we consider the duties that are honorable and dishonorable. What is honorable or

As one of the most significant works in philosophy, The Republic has been one of the most historically and intellectually influential basis of many political theories and philosophical approaches since its first appearance. It is also crucial to mention that the book contains both Plato’s and Socrates’ arguments of life and the view of the Athenian Democracy in the ancient Greek world. Therefore, it can be confusing and complicated to decide to which philosopher the arguments belong. The main focus of the book is to find the definition and the whereabouts of order, justice and to establish a just state, as well as to prove that a just man is happier than the unjust man by providing examples. The true importance of The Republic lies in the fact that everything has meaning in it, not only the arguments, but also the people who act as metaphors for the different kind of roles, which they fulfill in the Athenian society, furthermore the way they speak symbolizes those roles and every one of them embodies a part of the soul and the city-state. Even though it is not obvious, Plato / Socrates criticizes the Athenian society and tries to establish a new, ideal one with the different people he meets and talks to in the book.

What one can take away from both the implicit and explicit criticisms given by Xenophon and Aristotle is that political life is incredibly messy and problematic and, moreover, the best regime, the telos of political life, may not be unattainable. Both works indicate that virtue must be a main component of the regime, yet it appears human beings have difficulty remaining virtuous in the face of 1) material wealth and 2) the allure of

Political theory is the study of concepts that allows for the analytical study of relationships between political institutions. Over the centuries, political theorists have established renditions of what political theory is. This essay will focus on Plato, Nietzsche, and Aristotle, and their works, which respectively define the concepts of the common good and the significance of philosophers to the welfare of the state, self-deceiving intellect and the power of authority over our intellectual lives, and the concepts of interdependency and the importance of virtue and happiness for a successful political framework.