Plato Vs Aristotle : Determining Good

1668 Words Nov 23rd, 2015 7 Pages
Plato vs. Aristotle: Determining Good In this paper, I will present both Plato and Aristotle’s arguments for what their personal views are on determining good. Plato believed that knowing good was equal to doing good. He said that if a person knows the right thing that will automatically lead him to do the right thing. Aristotle on the other hand believed that knowing good was not enough to be good. He believed that one had to practice good if one is to be good. Plato was idealistic. He believed that every concept had an ideal of a universal form. Aristotle did not believe in universal form. He believes that every concept or object should be studied individually to be completely understood. When proving concepts, Plato thought that through reason and experiments, a concept can be proven. Aristotle wanted direct observation and experience to prove a concept. In this paper I will argue that Aristotle’s perspective on determining good is better and fits better in peoples actions within today’s society. Plato’s idealistic views on determining a good person represent his views of a utopia. Plato argues that there are three parts of the soul (441a). Plato addresses these three parts as the guardians, auxiliaries and producers. The guardians are the rulers. The auxiliaries are the military and the producers are the farmers, grassmen and craftsmen. The producers produce goods for the city. Within Plato’s ideal city are the four virtues, wisdom, bravery, sobriety and justice.…

More about Plato Vs Aristotle : Determining Good

Open Document