Plato And Aristotle 's Views On Life And Political Regime

They are educated through their strict curriculum, and due to the virtues that they learn, they are able to rule in a just manner (Plato 515a). The purpose of life for Plato is to create a just state. Through a broad education, and a democratic government, justice can be pursued. Justice is defined as the harmony that results when everyone is actively engaged in fulfilling his role and does not meddle with that of others (Plato 434e). When each person follows their role in life, stability can be achieved in the state.

According to Socrates one of the most important things that identify with human being is their desire. Socrates argues that desire that can change people minds quickly and very abnormally. The three-part division of the soul is crucial to Plato’s overall project of offering the same sort of explication of justice whether applied to societies or individuals.

Plato’s moral theory consisted of the concept of the soul and the concept of virtue as function. To Plato, the soul has three parts; reason, spirit, and appetite. The reason we do things is to reach a goal or value, our spirit drives us to accomplish our goal, and our desire for things is our appetite. The three virtues that must be fulfilled to reach the fourth, general virtue are temperance, courage, and wisdom,

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 and Plato were both great thinkers but their views on realty were different. Plato viewed realty as taking place in the mind but Aristotle viewed realty is tangible. Even though Aristotle termed reality as concrete, he stated that reality does not make sense or exist until the mind process it. Therefore truth is dependent upon a person’s mind and external factors.

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.

Plato and Aristotle are philosophers that both have an idea of an ideal state but they have their differences. While there are benefits to each of their views on politics and society, there are also many negative things about their views. Some of their negative views were realistic at one point in time but few are the same in today 's society. Although I don 't fully agree with either philosopher, I would have to side with Aristotle overall.

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.

Socrates had different views from the Athenians. He believed that democracy wouldn 't work in their society, nor in any society. He doesn 't believe that the people are capable of governing themselves. Socrates and Plato believed that the common man was too stupid, to say the least, to govern him/herself and to have a say in society. Socrates was in pursuit or truth his entire life. In his eyes, how could he let someone have the capabilities to make their own decisions with the potential for an error to occur. He was for a philosopher-kings because they could at least imagine what absolute truth looked like and hopefully bring it to the people. It 's not that Socrates thought everyone was idiotic, he just didn 't want anything to stop him on his pursuit of finding truth. He already was upset enough that the world was constanly changing. He didn 't want another human error to change his perception and rationality to one thing that he almost found the truth in.

In the fifth-century BC, Athens emerged as one of the most advanced state or polis in all of Greece. This formation of Athenian ‘democracy’ holds the main principle that citizens should enjoy political equality in order to be free to rule and be ruled in turn. The word ‘democracy’ originates from the Greek words demos (meaning people) and kratos (meaning power) therefore demokratia means “the power of the people.” The famous funeral speech of Pericles states that “Our constitution is called democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people.” However, only citizens (free adult men of Athenian descent) could participate in political matters. Women and slaves held no political rights, although they were

The scales on which both philosophers regard the human soul on are consequently determinate to the whole political structure and system more so in Plato’s utopia. To be able to recognize the difference of perspectives, looking at what qualifies one to become a ruler is essential. Plato claims that the pre-determined level of a soul is the definite feature of the ruler. The king must be of a golden soul who also happens to be a philosopher. Aristotle takes the latter part of this interpretation and applies it to the rational part of the human soul and defines it as being the determinate factor unique characteristic that qualifies to be the leader. The soul classification of Plato creates an obvious hierarchical system that it’s seen as a huge

relate to the human soul. The first part is reason, which is the capacity to

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.

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

“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors” – Plato. Plato states that refusing to utilize the right to vote is equivalent to giving away one’s future and leaving it in hands of inappropriate people. In order to stride for progress one must wisely choose the people who are going to be in power to handle the nation properly. The human race has proven that an authority figure has to constantly be present in order for humans to work to the best of their abilities, or at least to work normally and not have anarchy; such authorities are represented by the government who makes and forces laws. Plato expresses the idea of democracy and encourages people to be involved in politics. Ignoring politics is misusing rights as a citizen thus not making any progress to the nation. For example, if citizens think they 're paying too many taxes, they can vote for a person who promises to lower taxes. If citizens want more services, they can vote for someone who will promise to spend funds to gain more services. Every vote counts; an election might be decided by a single vote and history would be changed because a person got, or lost, that one vote. Refusing to be involved in politics is refusing to live a better life. Therefore, disregarding politics is giving away power to the government. Once that occurs people jeopardize such rights as privacy.