Mimesis: Plato and Aristotle

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.

Aristotle created three devices to help writers persuade audiences to agree with their topic. Neil Postman’s, Amusing Ourselves to Death, directs the use of television being a negative impact on our culture. He expresses these impacts with Aristotle’s devices: logos, pathos, and ethos. Logos or the appeal to logic meant to convince the audience by using logic or reason.

The Gorgias is a dialogue that starts off with a question of what rhetoric is, and from discussing what rhetoric is, develops into a inquiry of what justice and virtue is. While the readers should never leave the theme of rhetoric behind, this paper will focus solely on the topics of virtue and justice. By the second to last section of the Gorgias, we find that Socrates’ interlocutors are worn out by his refutations. Yet, Socrates cannot leave now, for his argument has not been complete. He has already been accused at least once of being womanly by being late to a fight; the philosopher cannot now accused of abandoning the virtue he champions and which we all might metaphorically agree he poses,

The main idea which sets apart the thoughts of Plato and Aristotle is that of the forms, which must be explained to understand Plato’s divinity. The

In the Republic, Plato proposes the complete censorship of imitative poetry from his ideal city, arguing that it corrupts individuals’ souls and therefore has a negative effect on society, resulting in injustice within the city. Although seemingly trivial at first, when considered within its proper context, the censorship of imitative poetry from the city would result in severe consequences. Throughout this essay I will discuss the political and psychological implications of its censorship, and will also refute Plato’s argument, showing how it lacks soundness: notably, through a criticism of his epistemology. Regarding the political implications of the censorship of poetry, I will draw from the ideas of Karl Popper, who argued Plato to be one of the most influential philosophers on the emergence of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century, laying the foundations for their very existence (K. Popper, 1945). I will also show how poets themselves have an important political role within cities, in that they enable the general population to hold the state accountable for their actions. To discuss the psychological implications of poetry’s censorship, I will compare the contrasting views of Plato and Aristotle regarding its effect on the soul, whereby Aristotle claims that poetry actually has beneficial, cathartic effects. Following these criticisms, it will become apparent that Plato’s proposed ban of imitative poetry is indefensible.

During this period, writers and poets were actively engaged in the creation of a new form of artistic expression. The objective of this type of expression was to celebrate intuition, rather than reason. It is believed that the greatest

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.

Ignorance: the condition of being uninformed or uneducated; this basic definition is crucial to understanding one of the most controversial figures in ancient Athenian society: the philosopher Socrates. The man’s entire life was devoted to proving the fact that no one actually knew what they thought they did; that everyone lived in ignorance. This viewpoint earned Socrates many enemies, so many that even a renowned playwright, Aristophanes, decided to exploit the situation. He wrote his critiquing play of Socrates called The Clouds; a scathing criticism that the philosopher would partially attribute to his future indictment on charges of impiety and corrupting the

This portrayal of emotions, of the inferior part of the soul, in Plato’s beliefs, “awakens and nourishes and strengthens the feelings and impairs the reason.” (41) Plato considers this indulgence irrational and useless. The superior and rational person (the ideal statesman) would pride himself on the opposite qualities and in times of sorrow or passion would suppress urges to openly sorrow or indulge in pleasures. Summing up Plato’s philosophy, the imitative artist is a long way from the truth and can write or paint any and all things because he does not know about the subjects he creates; he denies the rational principle of the soul and overly indulges in emotion resulting in the neglect of justice and virtue, (45) and has not found a proper purpose in the ideal state.

The sources I will utilize in this investigation will range from primary sources such as Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and Euclid’s six books entitled Euclid’s elements to secondary sources from scholars and experts who have studied Greek Mythology/philosophy. I will also supplement my research with preliminary research from the internet, which will answer questions that my print sources cease to answer. While some of my research manifests from the ideals of Greek philosophy, other aspects of my

In order to compare these great philosophers, it is important that we first of all view their history from an individual perspective.

Comparing the political theories of any two great philosophers is a complex task. Plato and Aristotle are two such philosophers who had ideas of how to improve existing societies during their individual lifetimes. While both Plato and Aristotle were great thinkers, perhaps it is necessary first to examine the ideas of each before showing how one has laid the groundwork and developed certain themes for the other.

For over two thousand years, various philosophers have questioned the influence of art in our society. They have used abstract reasoning, human emotions, and logic to go beyond this world in the search for answers about arts' existence. For philosophers, art was not viewed for its own beauty, but rather for the question of how art and artists can help make our society more stable for the next generation. Plato, a Greek philosopher who lived during 420-348 B.C. in Athens, and Aristotle, Plato’s student who argued against his beliefs, have no exceptions to the steps they had to take in order to understand the purpose of art and artists. Though these two philosophers made marvelous discoveries about the existence of art, artists, and

In Barthes’ “Rhetoric of The Image” he writes about image semiotics and the approach to images, the way they are presented and perceived. He begins with giving us the origins of the word “Image”, and it is of Greek origin meaning “Imitation”. And so he continues to propose two main important questions: “can analogical representation (the "copy") produce true systems of signs and not merely simple agglutinations of symbols? (Barthes 32)” And also: “Is it possible to conceive of an analogical "code"(as opposed to a digital one)? (Barthes 32)”

Socrates was an influential Greek philosopher; however, he never wrote any book and his ideologies are mostly presented by Plato, who was his student. Plato explains Socrates’ attitude towards poetry in his books, the Republic and the Symposium. Afterward, he offers his perceptions and solutions to the matter. Plato’s Republic explains Socrates’ mindset towards poetry censorship. Socrates argued that poetry lacked wisdom because there was no censorship of works of poetry. As a result, poets can write about anything they wish to inscribe, which enhances imitation. On this note, Socrates argued that poetry exposed citizens to different forms of imitation, which would corrupt their minds because they had no restrictions.