Just Society In Plato's Republic

While some, like Plato in his The Republic, thought it weak to give government into the hands of the common people, Pericles countered this argument with a compelling argument of greatness. By putting government into the hands of the people, the people are united and more devoted to their country. Democracy bonds the people together in a way that no other government can understand. Pericles confidently states, “Athenians advance unsupported into the territory of a neighbor, and fighting upon a foreign soil usually vanquish with ease men who are defending their homes.”

He justifies the need for democracy, aristocracy and monarchy depending on location. The three philosophers use their judgment and prior knowledge on each other’s work to validate an ideal society, especially for the uprising continent of America. Governments are an established institution in every society. Though there are multiple types of governments, their purpose is fundamental to determining the influence on a civilization.

Barber uses logic in arguing for mass public education, quoting two of the most influential founders of our democracy, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Barber knows that in a democracy, the people decide what is best for the nation, and if the nation is uneducated they will make the wrong decisions. Jefferson and Adams warn about those “tyrannies” of an uneducated society, which is why Barbers claims are truthful that education allows people to “think critically and act with deliberation”(6). To answer the question of how a society achieves equality and opportunity for its citizens, one should totally disregard William A. Henry’s callous remarks and illegitimate claims in his essay, “In Defense of Elitism.” His reasoning for selective educational opportunities tries to divide our country, which will discriminate individuals, amplify class

In an article, Joseph Ellis expresses: “Stemming from his deep optimism in human reason, Jefferson believed that the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, expressed from elections, provided the most appropriate guidance for directing the republic’s course” (20b). In other words, Jefferson asserts it is the best for the government to have limited power and to leave more resources to the people because the power of democracy comes from the people. When the people have resources and rights, they will tell the government what is right, so it is absolutely unnecessary to deprive the people of centralizing powers. Not only Jefferson implements democracy but he acts as a democrat not a tyrant. In discussing the way Jefferson acts, Jeremy D. Bailey makes following statement: “Jefferson changed the office by stopping presidential levees and birthday celebration, holding dinners in his republican attire, and delivering his addresses to Congress in writing rather than in person” (2).

Joseph Daunis Three Classes and the Soul In Book IV of Plato’s The Republic, Socrates draws a comparison between the classes evident in their fictional city to the human soul. Socrates clearly defines the three forms he finds in the city as being the appetites of mankind, or in other words, all human desires, such as pleasure, comforts, and physical satisfaction. The second form discussed by Socrates is the spirit or the component of the soul which deals with anger and perceptions of injustice. The third and final form is the mind or reason, which analyzes and rationally weighs options and solutions to problems. Socrates compares these three forms of the soul to the three classes in the city: producers, auxiliaries, and guardians.

The Prime Directive In the novel Anthem by Ayn Rand the society that she portrays lives under one injunction, or prime directive, for everyone to be equal. There are numerous rules and controls instituted to help keep the citizens’ in order and while some of them seem to be beneficial, others are constricting the basic rights that every person should have. The one thing that all of the rules do share in common is the restriction of a person's freedom, individuality, and life in general. Ayn Rand knew that by writing this novel, it would spark many conflicting views about equality and liberty in today's world.

In our modern day society, we live in a world in which equity is very important for us to achieve as citizens. Equity can be understood as recognizing that society needs differences in order to be successful. As we are humans, each one of us will be different from everyone else, and it is this difference that adds creativity and color to the world. However, in Kurt Vonnegut 's story "Harrison Bergeron", they live in a future world in which everyone is equal. A society in which the government enforced equality so much that they go to extreme measures to force everyone to be as equal as they possibly can be.

There's certain benefits to thinking this way though. It's very important to keep one's own happiness and well being at the forefront of their mind. People should not be expected to constantly cater to others. Selflessness is completely overrated. Equality is not wrong to want something for himself, especially after servicing others his whole life.

This logically leads to debates of human countryside, the success of knowledge, the distinction between presence and realism, the components of an real education, and the basics of principles. The republic is a Socratic discussion, inscribed by Plato around 380 BC. It is a 4 volume book. Plato 's advanced philosophical opinions appears in The Republic.

After these contracts are established, however, then society becomes possible, and people can be expected to keep their promises, cooperate with one another, and so on. I believe that thanks to the social contract we created justice and established what is moral and immoral for the whole society and not only on what we think could be moral or immoral. This topic may be controversial for some people because they will probably think that even though the social contract was created to be equal for all people there are some things until today that does not apply for all. But for me that is not a strong reason to do not believe in the Social contract I strongly believe in this theory because this is what makes a civil society with justice and morality. A philosopher Stuart Rachels suggests that, “ morality is the set of rules governing behavior that rational people accept, on the condition that others accept them too”.

Hobbes believed that natural state of humans was violent and therefore needed order and control to ensure a just and equal society (Robinson 2016, 4). However Hobbes believed that a sovereign could maintain power without deceit and manipulation. Hobbes believed in the social contract which is when people could have a moral understanding about right and wrong to avoid the chaotic violent human nature. Hobbes believed in the idea of utilitarianism which would “maximize the most good and minimize the pain” (Robinson 201, 4). This would ensure that the sovereign was doing things for the right reasons and not to better himself but to better society as a

The ability the book have given me to understand the fundamental relationship between good and evil in a society that I take part of will help me become a more well-rounded and excellent contributor

A nation lets one feel a strong sense of belonging in which they can truly express their existence. The pride that citizens have for their country is what gives them the strength to pursue their or their leaders’ desires. Another effect of nationalism is where society is brainwashed into doing what is wrong, such as a massacre to an innocent nation group. Due to this effect the society members cannot be blamed for an act considering they are only obeying their leader. They also cannot be blamed because they have a loyalty towards to their country and a duty in which they have to save their country from any sort of threats.

Additionally, I do not want to place any unfair pressure on you to live up to a certain expectation. My expectation of you is to live a moral life full of virtue rather than someone deciding for you who you are supposed to be. It is a challenge I pass onto you to live each day understanding that the world is as you see it, not how anyone else tells you to (Lewis, 1944). You are capable of being a great leader by living a virtuous, wholesome life as you see it from your perspective. It may be challenging to wrap your head around the things discussed throughout this letter, but I share it because I know you are capable to harnessing the vision that Aristotle has shared, an idea removed at the time of the Enlightenment.

Without order or stability, people would kill each other. Another key factor in which Plato and Machiavelli seem to agree on is that by keeping the mass happy the government is safe. Essentially, if people have nothing to truly complain about, then the ruler will not be overthrown by the popular mass. Lastly, although these great philosophers wanted stability and freedom, they both acknowledge the reality that it is impossible to have both in