Though partially unrealistic, but functional, Plato’s and Aristotle’s models of their ideas of society, they both aim at happiness, justice, self-governance, and a virtuous life for each individual as a part of the community.
Aristotle and Plato, theorize that virtue must be gained though practice and a form of self-control, and how to achieve happiness.
In Aristotle’s, Ethics, Books 1., he studies ethics and asserts that there is an ultimate good which is both complete and self-sufficient. Aristotle believes that this ultimate good is happiness; it means living well. In Book 1, Chapter VII, Aristotle talks about the good being happiness, he proclaims that in accordance of virtue, human good turns out to be activity of the soul. Aristotle’s theory of good seems to be similar to Plato’s theory. In Aristotle theory, virtue is the potential
…show more content…
Both Machiavelli and Plato would find it necessary to have their ruler have total power. For Plato the logical because no one else is fit into this rule except those who do; therefore, they should have the power. For Machiavelli it is because the ruler—via himself— acts in the interest of the people. Furthermore, Machiavelli and Plato agree that virtue is needed to create a good civilization. Without virtue, each and every civilization would fall if its rulers are unjust and do not conform to the rules of the land.
Machiavelli 's believes that the citizens should usually be left alone, facilitating the ruler 's constant support from the people. Plato’s belief is that a government must directly interfere with people to make their lives more virtuous. Machiavelli 's ruler is concerned with only maintaining his power. Plato 's ruler is virtuous and cares for his people, not his own
In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that the human good is the soul’s activity that expresses virtue. Aristotle concludes this from an invalid argument. On the one hand I do agree that the activity expressing virtue is a requirement for the human good. But on the other hand, I insist that the human good is a state and not an action. By modifying this argument, I believe we can reach a new conclusion that will help us better understand what Aristotle meant by these concepts.
Machiavelli’s book also suggests that a ruler should be feared by everyone that dares to face him. At this time, one ruler appeared to be more daunting than a chain of command. Another major idea spread during this time period was the idea of a social contract, from “Leviathan” by Thomas Hobbes. He explains that if two people desire the same thing which they cannot both enjoy, they will end up destroying each other. Two people should be able to lay down their right to all things and be contempt with having as much as another person has, instead of trying to fight with them in order to gain more.
Then for Machiavelli he talks about how a prince should show no fear instead for him to show that he is the one with power. That a prince's people should fear him. Both authors go on to talk on how their people react based on the prince and princesse act. The authors then go on to explain how they should view and run their people. Both authors also reflect the fact that the way their people are going to act towards them is mainly based off of how they treat them.
Machiavelli argues the perfect prince will be both feared and loved by his people, and if unable to be both he will make himself feared and not hated. Machiavelli believes it is much safer to be feared than to be loved because people are less likely to offend and stand up against strong characters, also people are less concerned in offending a prince who has made himself loved. Accordingly, Machiavelli believes generosity is harmful to your reputation and the choice between being generous or stingy, merciful or cruel, honest or deceitful, should only be important if it aids the prince in political power. All in all, Machiavelli believes the ruler must be a great deceiver and do what is essential to uphold power over the
In Book I of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle brings up the idea that in order to discover the human good we must first develop a certain understanding and identify the function of a human being. Aristotle’s function argument is brought up through his belief that the human function is rational activity, meaning that our good as human beings is rational activity performed fine because this is what leads to living well. The good Aristotle tries to get across can be seen in many different forms depending on how it is viewed, because of the idea that the main function of anything is to reach a final end, the final end is considered the good. “The end of medicine is health, that of shipbuilding, a ship, that of military science, victory…” (Nicomachean,
Plato's Republic is centered on one simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? This is something that Socrates addresses both in terms of political communities and the individual person. Plato argues that being just is advantageous to the individual independent of any societal benefits that the individual may incur in virtue of being just. I feel as if Plato’s argument is problematic. There are not enough compelling reasons to make this argument.
Their Voice The Enlightenment changed and challenged the way that people thought or acted during the Age of Absolutism. During the Age of Absolutism, the only things kings cared about was power and wealth. They had complete disregard for their subjects. In all six DBQ excerpts, the reader sees people either challenging the king or the King getting upset that people are starting to stand up for themselves instead of just taking his word as the gospel truth.
The Ancient-modern debate involves two main tenets and philosophers Boethius and Niccolo Machiavelli and both have extremely different and even contradictory views of politics and whether morality comes into play and how. Boethius covers the classical side of the debate where he gets some of his ideas from other philosophers in the classical rea like Plato and Socrates. Niccolo Machiavelli covers the modern aspect of the debate. Both speak on similar themes like the conception of happiness, the role of “Lady Fortuna” or Fortune and politics. The ancient or classical view of in the Ancient modern debate of human nature is that humans are naturally good and naturally political.
Machiavelli believed that men will follow a ruler as long as the ruler serves their interests, and a quick to turn against the ruler unless they fear great punishment. Machiavelli would say that it is best to be feared rather than loved as long as the fear does not cause hate, which he believed to be perfectly possible.
Introduction The question of what politics is has been a hotly debated topic around the world for more than two thousand years, from Ancient Greece to the 21st Century. Indeed, many philosophers including Aristotle, Dahl, Leach and Machiavelli, discussed their definitions of ‘politics’, with widely differing conclusions. However, despite the extensive debate, there is still no universally accepted definition of what politics is, let alone what it should be. Despite more contemporary efforts to define what politics is, these definitions can be called into question and requires much more diverse perspectives to define.
First, prior to understanding the role of human nature, it is necessary to contrast Machiavelli’s two humours against Aristotle’s few and many/poor. At the heart of this tension is the notion of justice – Aristotle’s deference to justice leads to his treatment of the few/many as political, whereas Machiavelli’s neglect of Aristotelean justice leads to his treatment of the two humours as apolitical. We begin with the former. Aristotle yields six possible regimes a polis can be, both consisting of two groups – the many/poor and the few/rich: Kingship/Tyranny, Aristocracy/Oligarchy, and Constitutional Government/Democracy. The former in each pair is considered to be a right regime and the latter a perversion of it.
In his more specific discourse on the nature of happiness, Aristotle comes to the conclusion that happiness lies in the contemplative life because “contemplation is the highest form of activity” (Aristotle 268). Aristotle views the activities of the mind to be the most sophisticated element of human life, and thus he believes the greatest good must come from the greatest aspect of life. In this view of happiness, Aristotle assumes that “happiness is an activity in accordance with virtue,” and that in order to live the contemplative life, one must also live a morally virtuous life (Aristotle 270). This connection between morality and contemplation coincides with Aristotle’s view of the superiority of contemplation over all other human activities.
In the field of political theory, history, and literature, there have been many ideas passed. When we consider the Middle Ages, The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli and Utopia by Sir. Thomas More appears to be the most influential works on how leaders should govern. By analyzing the messages passed by both Machiavelli and More, we will determine their requirements for establishing a successful system of government, and assisting those in authority to become better leaders. Nicolo Machiavelli is seen as a major political thinker, who had unique ideas concerning governance and leadership.
I. Machiavelli In his famous work the Prince Niccolo Machiavelli exposes what it takes to be a good prince and how only this good price and keep control over his state. There are many different qualities that make a man a good ruler but there are some that are more essential than others. In this work Machiavelli stresses the importance of being a warrior prince, a wise prince, and knowing how to navigate the duality of virtù and vices. Without these attributes there was no way that a prince could hold together their state and their people.
So a good life can be understood in at least six ways. Having a good education can be considered as a factor to live a good life. Both Plato and Aristotle agree that a good education is a way to acquire virtue. Even though, they have a different view on how a person should be