Plato 's dialogue Meno touches on many important questions of virtue and the ability to teach someone to be good. Arguably one of the most interesting of these questions concerns the nature of learning itself, as Socrates and Meno discuss the relationship between knowledge and true opinion. Socrates concludes by not only defining knowledge and true opinion as separate entities, but also by placing knowledge as the higher of the two in value. He makes this value judgment by pointing to knowledge 's status as opinion that is substantiated with reasoning and truths, arguing this makes knowledge concrete and unwavering. However, due to the notion of change as the central tenant in the search of scientific knowledge, I am inclined to disagree with this static description.
As Plato pointed out in The Republic, the government should be ruled by the most wise, intelligent, non-corrupt and individual in the city who does not want to rule, thus being the philosopher. The "philosopher king" idea on paper works well because it portraits the philosopher as a robotic figure who has no heart and does whatever that's good for the city. In real life, humans no matter how unbendable they are, they will still be changed by the original sins like lust and greed. Even Plato admitted with the allegory of the Ring of Gyges, which no matter how legitimate an individual is, as soon as he get his hands onto power he start to sin. In The Republic, the Ring of Gyges is described as a ring that gives invisibility power then the man goes out and does whatever he wants and is unnoticed. In reality, even when a philosopher is given a king's power, his sins would make him unfit for Plato' model.
Plato's Republic is a blueprint for his ideal society. In his republic education is something only attainable to the philosopher-kings. It is beneficial for the philosopher-kings to be very well educated so they will make good decisions while they are ruling the republic. The reason that no one else should receive such an elaborate education (in Plato's opinion) is because the rest of the people in the city only need to do what they are specialized in. This seems to be divergent from what Socrates previously said, ."..the power to learn is present in everyone's
On the contrary, Plato's idea of the ruler is almost exactly the opposite that of Machiavelli's. Plato's reason for his ideal ruler and state was to explain the meaning of justice. One must examine what it means for a state to be just and what it means for a person to be just to truly understand the meaning of justice. According to Socrates, ??if we first tried to observe justice in some larger thing that possessed it, this would make it easier to observe in a single individual. We agreed that this larger thing is a city?(Plato 96).? Plato?s ideal ruler must have a good mind, always be truthful, have knowledge and discipline, and not be afraid of death. The ruler is a philosopher that satisfies the four virtues of wisdom, courage, moderation/self-control, and justice.
The first characteristic of a great leader is being loved by their people. By way of example Jane Simmons wrote “ an aggressive military leader, he was feared but also admired by people in other land.” Sulieman scared the people that he needed to scare but he was admired by the people he helped. Also in Amit carters queen Elizabeth I summary it says “she was thought of as a good and wise ruler who was truly thought of as a good ruler
Over the length of this course, we have discussed several aspects of politics. We have studied citizenship and obligations to society as a citizen, justice and what it means to us as individuals, and how to go about enacting change within a community and around the world. Some of the
Character and Determination. A leader is made by their character and willpower, meaning that the two go together hand-in-hand in a virtuous
The study of philosophy and the pursuit of its insights have been a goal of humans for ages and will likely continue to be for the foreseeable future. Why is it that so many people in history would choose to continue to dedicate time and resources to the understanding of
In the allegory written by Plato titled “Allegory of the Cave”, Plato discusses the concept of seeking knowledge and gaining wisdom. He uses a story of prisoners trapped into a cave to represent the confines of reality that humans are put into, and a lone prisoner exiting the cave to represent a philosopher seeking a greater understanding. Plato’s writing tells of the flaw that all humans share, which is the fact that we believe our perceptions to be the absolute, incontestable truth. It is this flaw that can easily affect our spiritual, educational, and political knowledge, hindering us from having a full grasp on actual reality beyond what we visually see. His rhetorical devices, tone, symbolism, and imagery all lend themselves to giving
Plato once said, “Human behavior flows from three main sources: desire, emotion, and knowledge.” Some believe that the desire for knowledge and the emotions that arise from it can be dangerous. This assumption is incorrect because possessing vast amounts of knowledge causes many positive impacts everywhere. Knowledge is not dangerous because it causes advancements in the lives of others which leads to a more harmonious society.
Through history, everyone is trying to rise to the top. However, the ones at the top are not always the most suitable. This becomes evident in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, where Oedipus becomes the ruler of Thebes after defeating the Sphinx. Throughout the story, Oedipus fails to meet the characteristics of a good leader, including: humbleness, selflessness and patience.
In addition, people of unexamined life don’t like change, and they never try to change themselves to become a better person. They don’t know why they need to change, and why they should pursue a better life. Plato used Socrates word, “It is clear then that those who do not know things to be bad do not desire what is bad, but they desire those things that they e believe to be good but that are in fact bad(10)”. The unexamined people keep repeating what they are doing every day, just like a “walking dead”. And they believe being lazy, sleep all day long, keep watching the TV show to get the entertainment is good for them. Consequently, they do not desire to do the good thing, and they are being no change, of not improving themselves. However, they should feel ashamed of doing that because they are human beings. Plato said, “It is a human being’s goal to grow into the exact likeness of a God(52)”. The examined life people always want to change, they know they are human, sometimes they make mistake. They may have a lot of weakness, that why they need to improve themselves to be a better person. Everyone is not perfect, that why we must change. And how much we should change? Plato showed us a goal, to become perfect, liked a God. Although it is impossible to become a God, it is a goal for us to pursue, try our best to change. As examined life
Concerning Plato’s Philosopher King and Machiavelli's Prince) It is highly debated what type of ideal king is the better type of ideal king. Both philosophers, Plato and Machiavelli, have their own separate version of what the best and most ideal king would look like. Plato’s version of the ideal king can be found along with a description in Plato’s Republic Book 6. He describes a king raised in philosophy, and a regimented education plan. Machiavelli’s king can be found with a description in Machiavelli’s The Prince. This king is best summarized as a “might is right” type of fellow. The Philosopher King is a better king because he has been educated by the people, for the people.
In order to understand why Machiavelli’s Prince may be more appealing than Plato’s Philosopher king, we must 1st come to understand what the King and the Prince look like as described by our writers. When it comes to the Philosopher King we are talking about someone who is truly virtuous on the basis of morality and justice. In Plato’s head a just person can create a just society.
A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and