Similarities And Differences Between Plato And John Locke

The word Social Contract theory was first used by Thomas Hobbes to define royal authority. However John Locke who wrote the two treaties on government” in the 1680’s reinforce the meaning of a new social contract theory. In his version of social contract, he stated “men surrendered a part of their right to govern them selves in order to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law”(Foner, 149). In his argument, natural right such as life, liberty and proper play a huge role. According to Locke, Government or political system is form by equal individuals (mainly men of a household). Although men surrendered part of their right to govern to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, they do retain the natural right of protecting of liberty, life and property against any local or foreign enemies. According to Locke and the

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are one of the most influential and famous philosophers who both had similar theories but had different conclusions. The two philosophers wrote a discourse “life in the state of nature” and argued about the government. They both had made important and logical contributions to modern philosophy and opened up political thoughts which have impacted our world today. During the seventeenth century the thought of political philosophy became a big topic. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes both started questioning the political philosophy and had had different views and reasoning towards human beings. Both Hobbes and Locke had logical and reasonable theories in which they had opposed to one another. Although each philosopher

Aristotle and St. Augustine have both been influenced by Plato. Their philosophy on morality, politics, and the purpose of life has been platonically influenced. St. Augustine is the true heir of Plato because he has taken Plato’s ideal state, and revealed the implications of the lives that the citizens of the earthly city lead, in the City of God. Plato’s state is an ideal state, that would not function in reality. St. Augustine has taken Plato’s notions, and have furthered the implications of living a life that strives towards a common good. The consequences, whether negative or positive, cannot be seen in the earthly state, but can be seen in the City of God.

Great Philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean –Jacque Rousseau had been deeply concerned about the Social Contract Theories on the people. The main theories include safety, security, equal rights and have an organised society without any foreign interference. The use of non-violence and war against mankind. Society as a whole was the main priority for all these three philosophers. Both John Locke and Jean-Jacque Rousseau had different views when compared to Thomas Hobbes on Society. Each of these men had their own theories on how to protect the rights of human beings. John Locke and Jean-Jacque Rousseau have better ideas than Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes believed that only a true and clean government can rule the people and protect their

Plato encouraged in his writings that the view that sophists were concerned with was “the manipulative aspects of how humans acquire knowledge.” (Lecture) Sophists believed that only provisional or probable knowledge was available to humans but both Plato and Isocrates did not agree with a lot of what the Sophists had to say. They both believed in wisdom and having a connection with rhetoric but vary in defining wisdom in itself. Wisdom for Socrates and Plato is having an understanding of speech, knowledge of truth and being able to question the speaker in order to seek and reveal truth. Isocrates defined wisdom as having a sense of integrity and character along with the ambition and ability to speak well with others.

John Locke and Edmund Burke were two champions for the theory of change in the world of political philosophy during the seventeenth century. Locke is largely known for pushing liberalism in influencing the American and French political revolution period while Burk is known for taking a more placid approach to promoting modern conservatism. Set out in different time period, both thinkers focus on the purpose of the government, its structure and functions, laws of nature and the characteristics of man in and out of nature as a state. It is quite common to misunderstand and misinterpret the aspect of the revolutionary fight as a collective calling for everyone. Not everyone was an intransigent fighter for the revolution, a fact that has often clouded our current notions and ideals in identifying the true assessment of the mind state of the political period in late 18th century. Understanding this, it becomes easier to vision the element of division in terms of personal perspective and mindset, with various powers of thoughts colliding with each other. As such, Locke and Burke represent a political contentious period where these two philosophers who were not necessarily on polar opposites stand strong in championing their beliefs and remain worth contenders.

The political philosopher, John Locke is known best for his ideas that influenced Thomas Jefferson while writing the Declaration of Independence. Locke’s views on government were very respected by our founding fathers, even though they were very different from the government styles of his time.

After carefully studying both writers works, it is very difficult to argue that one type of government is ideal or more preferable than the other, due to the fact that both Aristotle and Locke provide very compelling arguments as to why their style of government is better. Although both styles of government work for the betterment of the citizens of the city-state, the means by which they do so are how Locke and Aristotle differ in their opinions. Aristotle believes that as long as the citizens of the city-state are able to carry out a life of virtue, then the process by which the government achieves its goals is irrelevant. This concept that Aristotle suggests is very compelling to agree with because living a life of virtue is something that the majority of humans want, they want to live their lives happily, and Aristotle’s ideal government would allow humans to do that. The problem with Aristotle’s government is that it has no checks and balances. Aristotle is flawed in that he believes that all humans desire a life where they are able to debate and discuss issues like the meaning of justice, when in reality humans have other ambitions in life. His government system would have free reign to run the city-state however it deemed best, regardless of how the citizens felt, as long as it provided them the security to live

Political and social theories between the two philosophers were very different. Plato had very Totalitarian or even communist views for state government. He in his novel The Republic, he describes in much detail his utopian society. He felt society should be organized into three groups: “rulers, auxiliaries and labourers.”(Gaarder 91) The rulers or guardian class would have reason; education and intelligence this would make them well suited for leadership. Plato called these rulers ‘Philosopher Kings’, they would rule for the good of all in the society. Philosopher

A monarch is in control. You are being what to do by someone you do not even want ruling your country. What could you do? This is how your world works, it’s always worked like this, so why change it? Simply change it because you are unhappy with the way the world is, you deserve to enjoy the country you live in. That there, change the society, is exactly what the Enlightenment thinkers wanted to do. The Enlightenment thinkers are a group of people who found countless flaws in the way people decided to run the countries. Therefore, of all the Enlightenment thinkers, I believe John Locke, David Hume, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau impacted the world the most due to them having a full grasp on the ideologies of humanity.

In order to do this, he goes about Athens questioning those he believes to be wiser than him, including politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Upon this questioning, he discovers that even those perceived as the wisest actually know far less than one would expect. Even the craftsmen, who have much practical wisdom in their respective fields, see their success as merely a tribute to their vast knowledge of many subjects. This, Socrates claims, is not true wisdom. Human wisdom can be described as the acknowledgement and acceptance that one does not know everything, nor is one capable of knowing everything. This, however, does not mean that people should sit idly by, never pursuing wisdom, for it is still vital to the attainment of a good life, which should be the ultimate goal of mankind.

Enlightenment philosophers, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes had different theories about the social contract between government and the governed. John Locke believed in the government while Hobbes believed that the government should have full control. John Locke view on government proved successful than Thomas Hobbes.

Leadership many times can be misinterpreted by many individuals. Leadership is an ability that not everyone is meant to have nor develop. In fact, many can be called, “leaders” but that does not imply that their leadership role plays a positive impact on others. At times, some people seek leadership in a form to only obtain power and abuse it for their own self-interest. While there are others that create great influences to following generations. For instance, there are those like Plato and Thomas Jefferson who have established philosophical thoughts that for past centuries, have revolutionized many people’s ideals. Through their principles many people have identified, what they consider can exemplify, true characteristics that make someone have successful leadership qualities. In their own way, they have influenced others, with the purpose to communicate a foundation of important ideals which have helped guide many. Whether it is one or a group of individuals. Many people should consider in practicing and adapting to those philosophical principles, manifested in Plato’s, “The Allegory of the Cave” and Thomas Jefferson's, “The Declaration of Independence” essay who illustrate certain ideals and aspects of leadership in their own unique way.

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were two main political philosophers during the seventeenth century. Hobbes is largely known for his writing of the “Leviathan”, and Locke for authoring "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding." Included in their essays, both men discuss the purpose and structure of government, natural law, and the characteristics of man in and out of the state of nature. The two men's opinion of man vary widely. Hobbes sees man as being evil, whereas Locke views man in a much more optimistic light. While in the state of nature and under natural law, they both agree that man is equal. However, their ideas of natural law differ

If one compares Locke and Rousseau noticeable similarities and differences can be found. Both men advocate similar ideas with different outcomes regarding the state of nature. Furthermore, Locke and Rousseau both come to distinct actualization and prophecies. Regarding the progression and advancement of mankind. Therefore, by comparing and contrasting these two distinct teachings one can find the true principles behind the state of nature and the natural laws inherent in mankind.