Plato Society Or Totalitarian

Plato?s view of Justice can be seen in his model of The Tripartite Soul. In this model Plato outlines 3 sectors of his ideal society. This theoretical society is composed of Guardians, Auxiliaries, and Producers. The Guardians were the upper class citizens who had the authority to pass judgment. Guardians were rational and wise, and could participate and become involved in politics. The Auxiliaries were positioned as courageous citizens who helped preserve the spirit and emotion of a society by ?protecting and serving? much like a modern day public works department or police and fire squad. In the lowest tier of Plato?s ideal society were the Producers, whose job it was to create. The Producers were to use temperance in their lives, for they were classified as appetitive souls who could easily succumb to bodily desires. The Producers were to practice asceticism, which is the eradication of bodily desires.

The Republic, a philosophical analysis of the nature of justice, is renowned for Plato’s detailed and meticulous presentation of his ideal city, the Kallipolis. In order to identify justice on an individual level, Plato first observes justice on a macroscopic scale by hypothetically transforming “a city with a fever ” (372e) into the Kallipolis. For Plato, the Kallipolis is a luxurious city with an elevated presence of justice mainly because the city’s rulers, or the guardians, are defined by their superior virtue. The members of this elite group are the perfect arbiters of justice in a city filled with virtue-deficient craftsmen. Despite the virtuous characters of the guardians, Plato nonetheless foresees the fall of his Kallipolis, not due to the lack of virtue from the craftsmen, but rather from the unintentional faults of the guardians. Despite having the most virtuous people in power, the guardians are still expected to fail. As a result, the reader can raise the question: are the guardians indeed the group that possess Platonic virtue when they fail to exercise true justice? While Plato may not consider the craftsmen as the epitome of justice in the Kallipolis, they, unlike the guardians, maintain justice until the guardians’ acts of injustice negatively affects the whole city.

Plato, according to his writings and others record of him, was an avid critique of democracy and his critiques if reflected upon rationally are very thought provoking. In the words of historian John Wild “The most serious charge against Plato from a modern point of view is that he is an enemy of democracy.”(Thorson 1963, p.105). In his

More than two-thousand years have elapsed since Plato wrote what many consider his most famous work, Republic. To this day, students and scholars alike grapple with the challenging philosophical issues presented therein. The thematic crux of the work lies in the nature of justice. In defining this slippery concept, Socrates details the structure and workings of what he considers a truly just city, the kallipolis. There are those who would say that this kallipolis may be equated to a utopia, an ideal society; however, I intend to illustrate a much divergent point of view. The justice of this city, made analogous to the justice of the individual, is specifically what precludes the kallipolis from being an ideal society. For this

Plato’s Republic proposes a number of intriguing theories, ranging from his contemporary view of ethics to political idealism. It is because of Plato’s emerging interpretations that philosophers still refer to Plato’s definitions of moral philosophy as a standard. Plato’s possibly most argued concept could be said to be the analogy between city and soul in Book IV, partially due to his expansive analysis of justice and the role justice plays in an “ideal city,” which has some key flaws. Despite these flawed assumptions that my essay will point out, Plato’s exposition on ethics is still relevant for scholars and academics to study, due to his interpretive view on morality and justice.

In The Republic of Plato, Plato, in addition to sharing his views on justice, shares his views on democracy using a fictionalized Socrates to outline the most pressing issues. Plato’s views on democracy are negative; he believes democracy to be bred from a response to inequality of wealth and to heighten all of humanities worst traits. Plato believes democracy leads to unequipped leaders who hold offices and power without the necessary traits and preparation.

Plato defines justice as being a certain kind of person. Likewise, he must look for something in a just society in order to explain the just person. A just society has three divisions of labor based off of what people are good at. The first division is labeled as the rulers. The rulers can be male or female and they figure out what citizens should do.

In the Republic, Plato places Socrates as the main ‘character’ to express his philosophical views on the world. Plato lived in Athens and as such his criticism of democracy can mainly be applied to Athenian democracy and is fundamentally different from the democratic systems we have nowadays. In order to understand Plato’s position on democracy, the essay will use the Republic as main source to point the wrongs of democracy according to Plato. This essay will detail in four parts the elements that support Plato’s points against democracy. These points will be given in context to Plato’s time and will be both based on the historical context of his life. The first part will explore Plato’s sense of justice and what justice should be. Using his perspective on virtue and justice, this part will explain how Plato perceived a just world and as such this part will demonstrate how democracy is not compatible with his views on justice. The second part will explain how Plato defends the idea that philosophers should rule as an alternative, not only to democracy, but most ruling systems. This part aims to provide information on what Plato thought was wrong with democracy by

In his philosophical text, The Republic, Plato argues that justice can only be realized by the moderation of the soul, which he claims reflects as the moderation of the city. He engages in a debate, via the persona of Socrates, with Ademantus and Gaucon on the benefit, or lack thereof, for the man who leads a just life. I shall argue that this analogy reflecting the governing of forces in the soul and in city serves as a sufficient device in proving that justice is beneficial to those who believe in, and practice it. I shall further argue that Plato establishes that the metaphorical bridge between the city and soul analogy and reality is the leader, and that in the city governed by justice the philosopher is king.

Much of Book IV of The Republic is concerned with establishing a definition of justice that can be carried forward into Plato’s discussion of Kallipolis. After many circular arguments involving Socrates debunking his peers’ different interpretations of justice, Socrates finally outlines his own definition of justice on both a political and individual level. Socrates views justice both on a structural level, as something that permeates the design of a perfect city, as well as something that is intrinsically a part of the human soul. Furthermore, Socrates makes the claim that the similarity is far deeper, and that the qualities of a just soul can be mirrored in the qualities of a just city.

Jennifer Dunn PHIL 100: Individual and Community Final Paper Plato’s Republic is a dialogue … Some people believe that its main purpose is to allow Socrates to propose plans for his ideal state, a utopia of sorts. But actually, Plato uses Socrates’ proposal of this ideal society as a framework for promoting his own philosophical ideas. These ideas range from the concept of the soul to the importance of education, but one crucial, overarching theme is the definition of justice and why it is important. The beginning of the book is structured as a traditional Socratic dialogue but then moves into a series of lectures, though Socrates does pause occasionally to respond to questions and comments. In this paper, I will analyze the definitions of justice that Socrates and others put forth as well as the

Nature assigns craftsmanship to each person, and only when people practice their best craft and fulfill the roles assigned to them, can the city as a whole have the greatest shared happiness (Bk4 421c). Plato argues that “justice is doing one’s own work and not meddling with what is not one’s own” (Bk4 433b). “Doing one’s own work” does not only include practicing the pursuit that each person is naturally best suited, but also recognize the social class and ruling hierarchy. The ruled needs to share the belief about who should rule and have a rational account of the constitution. Plato disregards the significance of kindred, and believes that a citizen must perform the role that naturally suits him regardless of the roles that his family members practice (Bk4 423d). He encourages the rationality of people, and actions driven by human self-interests and emotions are discouraged by both for a city to work

Plato’s interpretation of justice as seen in ‘The Republic’ is a vastly different one when compared to what we and even the philosophers of his own time are accustomed to. Plato would say justice is the act of carrying out one’s duties as he is fitted with. Moreover, if one’s duties require one to lie or commit something else that is not traditionally viewed along with justice; that too is considered just by Plato’s accounts in ‘The Republic.’ I believe Plato’s account of justice, and his likely defense against objections are both clear and logical, thus I will endeavor to argue his views as best as I can.

In book VI of The Republic, Plato uses Socrates as his mouthpiece to reveal the ideal city. Plato points out that the idea city is based on the foundations of three basic forms. Consequently, these three forms are manifested in the individuals that make up the city. The functioning of the city will thus depend on the analogy of the structures within the city and within the souls of the people. The main purpose of this paper is to analyze the argument by Socrates with respect to the three forms in the city and in the soul. Additionally, the paper seeks to analyze the rationale behind Socrates’ comparison and subsequent establishment of analogy between the forms in the city and the forms in the city in the context of justice. The paper also

Plato was never satisfied with accepting other’s ideas or views of things in this world. Instead he would question everything to discover for himself what things in the world meant. Plato as seen in some of his writing such as “The Republic” uses numerous amounts of theoretical questions to try and get a deeper understanding of themes such as justice. Plato refuses to accept that justice is naturally good and injustice is bad as he writes “see, that to do