Should Iraq Become a Democracy? a Platonic Perspective Essay

The concept of Democracy dates back to the Classic Period, otherwise known as the Golden Age of Greece. Prior to becoming a unified nation, Greece was made up of city-states that were constantly warring with one another. None of these city-states possessed full control over its neighbors. It was during this time and because of these circumstances that there was great advancement in Greek thought encompassing philosophy and politics. These advancements are responsible for the strong Greek

Larry Diamond's presentation explores the question of why there are no Arab democracies in the Middle East and North Africa. He shows us the relatively stagnant levels of democratic freedoms that have been the norm in the region for the past several decades. Diamond gives us a multitude of potential explanations for the absence of a sustainable democracy.

By Socrates statement, in order to be happy one must keep their desires balanced so that they don’t desire too much or too little and may therefore keep fair justice within society as no one will strive for more than they can have or desire. The strong would no longer hold all power over the weak of society and all power would be balanced within society as no one will attempt to gain more power than they deserve. However, after this analogy Callicles is still not convinced by Socrates’s argument and argues that the restraint, such as a full jar with no way of releasing water, of ones goals and desires is unappealing and undesired, therefore restraint and balance cannot be considered as happiness (Gorgias, 498). To prove his point to Callicles that not all pleasure is good, Socrattes draws eating and drinking as examples by explaining how one experiences pain when one is hungry or thirsty and that one experiences great pleasure and satisfaction after drinking or eating after a long period of hunger or

The appetite is concerned with the pursuit of bodily pleasure. This aspect of the soul is satisfied only by the creature comforts such as food, sex, and drink (167). These three divisions are found in the individual, but in varying degrees. Some will lean more towards the appetite, while other are spirit-driven, and still others find greater fulfillment through the intellectual pursuits of reason (168). Plato clearly favors the reason in his three part soul, since it is with reason that one can grasp the Forms, which themselves are the ultimate in beauty and truth.

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.

In the era of the contemporary United States, a country that has had the longest standing democracy, we are used to thinking very highly of its system. However, throughout our history, there have been a couple of critics to the system of democracy. It comes as no surprise that democracy does have its issues. One of the first pieces of literature where democracy was mentioned and analyzed at a deeper level was The Republic by Plato. This ancient Greek philosopher did not completely agree with democracy, regardless of the fact that ancient Athens was the first civilization that gave rise to it. In fact, in a numerical list that he composes on which are the best ways of ruling, Plato puts democracy at one of the lowest levels. In order, Plato’s list of types of government from most desirable to least desirable looks like this: 1.) Republic (The ideal city) 2.) Timocracy 3.) Oligarchy 4.) Democracy 5.) Tyranny. Additionally, In The Republic, Plato tells us his beliefs and values on certain aspects of life through the eyes of Socrates. So, even though Plato himself does not appear in The Republic and instead Socrates does, nonetheless, Plato and Socrates shared the same ideology when it came to democracy. As we know, Plato did not agree with democracy. As a result, in this paper, I will explore the greatest intellectual strengths and weaknesses of Plato’s view on democracy.

Plato had some views that seemed realistic to society while others to me seemed to be unjust for the people. According to Plato everyone by nature has their own function and in order to make an ideal state they each need to serve that role and only that. They are not permitted to do more than one thing or venture off of what they are suited best to do. These roles are people that are motivated by three

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

After reading The Republic there are three main points that Plato had touched on. The first of these three points is that Plato is disheartened with democracy. It was due to Socrates’ untimely death during Athens’ democracy that led to his perception of the ideal state as referred to in The Republic. Plato perceived that the material greed was one of the many evils of politics; in Plato’s eyes greed was one of the worst evils of political life. Thus economic power must be separated from political power; he came to this conclusion due to an experience that filled him with a hatred for mob mentality. He concluded that a democracy must be replaced with a government ruled by the wisest and the greatest people fit for the job; the people that would be fit for the job would be called Philosopher-Kings; which I will touch on later. Plato feels that democracy is a form of political organization that is exceptionally inferior as compared to other types of political organizations such as a monarchy and aristocracy. He came to this notion because of the fact that in his eyes the average man and woman would be inclined to make improper decisions for the society based on greed. Plato viewed all forms of government as being corrupt; the key components in an ideal society are morality and justice. The forms of government that Plato thought were corrupt was timocracy, which would ultimately fall and crumble into an oligarchy which then turns into a democracy, then last but not least turns

This is where we get into the meat of the argument. Take note that there might be some consideration as to whether or not, particularly with regard to the Socratic dialogues, the criticism of democracy’s properties originated from Socrates or Plato. But with regards to this essay, such a consideration is irrelevant, as it is not incorrect to say that Plato did indeed have some problems with democracy, especially with regard to the Athenian model.

So, in the Platonic view, what is the worth of the appetite? Plato does not specifically enter the topic in his Republic, but the reader is able to come across a few conclusions from what is said. First, from all the time that Plato spends discussing and teaching about them, it is not likely (though still technically possible) for the passions to be a worthless part of the soul. Secondly, the fact the passions can be moderated by the other two parts of the soul (moderation like one restraining oneself from going to watch the football game in order finish the big project), seems to lead to the passions also being able to moderate the other two parts of the soul. An example of this

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 book, “The Republic” Plato explains the definition of democracy as a single focus on the pursuit of freedom and social liberty at the expense of other societal goods like public order, public safety and stability both politically and economically. He explains that

Greek philosopher, Plato, is considered to be one of the most influential people in Western Philosophy. The fact that he was a student of Socrates and a teacher of Aristotle leaves no questions about his competence. One of his fundamental works is the “Republic”. Even though it was written in 380 BC, Plato’s and Socrates’s thoughts are still relevant in twenty first century. This paper will evaluate the quote from the “Republic” and provide a summary of a quote; provide a context from the text for the quote; and finally, it will include my own thoughts on the quote and the Socrates’s argument as a whole.

Plato and Aristotle believed that democracy is a corrupt form of government because it violates justice of proportionality. The idea of proportional justice attains when we ask who is the most deserving. For example, who should have the best flute, Aristotle answered that the best flute must be not given to the richest man or to the most handsome man, but given to the best flute player. Being in the position of governing is an honor. So who should have the honor? Plato and Aristotle argued that the honor must be given to those who have the knowledge of the Good (agathon). In political

The Republic by Plato was a fascinating piece of literature to read. This book focuses on issues that are still very relevant to this day. That just really shows two things, how smart Plato was and also how humans haven’t changed. Over the years’ humans may have developed and advanced so much, but who we are and how we behave, think and feel hasn’t changed a bit. Prior to reading this, I believed that as time has gone on we have developed as a people, but Plato shows that the problems and issues of Ancient Greece are similar, if not the same as our modern day ones. Plato has made me aware that we have only developed on the surface, our natural desires and instincts however are something that hasn’t changed. In fact, it bares to question if we will ever change.