Republic of Plato Essay

The Republic of Plato is a fiction about a conversation. This conversation bridges a huge amount of topics, most regarding concepts of justice or goodness. The points of the book seemingly is to sort out what makes a good man and what makes a good city. God men and good cities, Socrates and friends conclude, must fit a myriad of criteria. During the course of this fiction the idea of fiction itself comes up, specifically idea’s about using imitation as an art and how it makes a man and city just

ancient Gods to more in depth works such as Ethics or The Bible. All of these works show serious teachings about multiple things such as justice, Gods, and philosophy. In my paper, I am going to discuss the concepts of Aristotle 's Ethics and Plato 's The Republic in order to hopefully achieve whether or not the ideas that have stuck out to me, are true or not. In the book Ethics, by Aristotle, plenty of concepts have stuck out to me, and made me think quite a bit. One of the ideas that stick out to

should be to set an example, and standard for others. The well known, Machiavelli, Plato, and Marcus Aurelius have varying opinions of what a leader should be. Only one view of a leader that I can agree with correlates with the voice of Aurelius most. Despite this, I must admit that Machiavelli's and Plato’s writings of the Prince and Republic offers a few point that can be validated. The writings of Plato’s Republic, Machiavelli’s Prince, and Aurelius’s Meditations all contain a visions of a leader

Final Exam The Republic is Plato’s best known work and gives and account of Socrates as he tackles several of some of the most intellectually important topics that humanity has known. This book has not only survived the test of time, but it is one of the world’s most influential books that has ever been written. The book starts by giving an argument that deals with the nature of justice that sets the foundation for the rest of the topics and the assumptions about what an ideal relationship with

felt the need of some sort of social organisation that would satisfy interest of every person of the society. Justice can be interpreted on basis of ethnicity, law, equity and rationality. Different theories of justice were proposed by Plato in Plato’s Republic , Utilitarian theorist

POL200Y1 – C. Orwin Maria Ouchnikova | 1001396170 Are Philosophers Good Citizens in Plato’s Republic? It seems that Plato says that the good man is a just man. Philosopher by nature is endowed with the ability to understand what justice is and how to achieve it. However, only because philosopher has the knowledge of the true sense, does that make them just and moreover a good citizen? To figure this out we need to look carefully at the definition of each of the terms. First of all, while the definition

In the end of Plato’s Republic Book I, Socrates and Thrasymachus who had just finished a set of vigorous arguments on what the definition for justice is and whether the just or the unjust life is the best life to live, come to a conclusion. Regarding the true definition of justice, at the end of Book I, Socrates mentions that their discussion have not led them to the true definition of justice (Republic 354b). On the other hand, their discussion on which life is more profitable does come to a conclusion

In Book XI of The Republic, Socrates introduces three metaphors to help us understand his Theory of the Forms, which says that the only way to acquire true knowledge of the Good, we must turn away from the world of the sensible, and turn to the world of the Forms and intellect. These analogies follow Socrates’ argument earlier in Book XI which is that the only way to correctly rule a city is to master the Forms and understand that ultimate form of the Good which only a true philosopher can achieve

The introduction deals mainly with a twofold question: first what is justice? Second, why should we be just? He answers the first one as follow: justice is indeed both wisdom and virtue. He said that it is injustice that produces factions, hatreds, and quarrels among themselves, and justice that produce unanimity and friendship. He also said that justice is virtue of the soul. He justifies by saying that the just soul and the just man will have a good life, and the unjust man a bad one. He continues

Throughout Book 1 of Plato’s Republic, there are a variety of positions taken defending or objecting which is stronger, freer, and better: justice or injustice. Socrates believes that justice is a necessary and important good. Thrasymachus, on the other hand, does not believe this. Toward the end of 344c, he claims: So you see, Socrates, injustice, if it is on a large enough scale, is stronger, freer, and more masterful than justice. And, as I said from the beginning, justice is what is advantageous