Plato And Aristotle And Plato's Power And Authority

The Age of Enlightenment consisted of a metaphorical molting of ideas, which were advanced by the brandishing’s of social, political, religious, natural and intellectual epitomes; concomitant collisions of man’s perceptions of the natural order of things as he saw fit to define or decipher. The days of Protagoras, Plato and Aristotle had seen immersions deeply imbedded within muthos and logos as argumentative foundations. The Greco-Roman era—which was steeped in the worship of heroes and demi-Gods--soon dissolved into calls for unquestionable compliance and devotion to a singular, omnipotent and omnipresent deity.

Thucydides and Plato have a clear set boundary in their writings as to what type of assertion they are fabricating. Thucydides sets a very narrow view with his piece of The Peloponnesian War that holds more weight in solid evidence of what a “good life” is demonstrated as. Plato, on the other hand, has several writings that go into depth of weighing what someone’s soul ought to have within itself. The statement of Thucydides making empirical claims, with Plato making normative claims, is supported with evidence in their respected works.

The Primary objective of all leaders should be to control citizens. A society that allows authority to be challenged will never succeed.

Thomas Paine essentially wrote Common Sense for the common man. Being a pamphlet, its structure and simplicity made reading easy for those who were literate. Its minimalism enabled citizens in the colonies to unite under one common cause — independence against Britain. He was inspired by both John Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government as well as Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s On the Social Contract. Each of the philosophies discussed the purpose of government as well as which government was the most ideal. For Paine, government, is “a punisher,” in which society is ruled by in order to protect the properties of one’s natural rights (Paine 3). However, he defends a representative democracy as being the ideal. Likewise, John Locke also argues that governments protect the rights of man. Similarly, to

Establishing government is one of the most important inventions develop human beings. As a system to control a state or community, government serves for citizens and put them first. In Homeric Age, the regime of Athens is citizens can go into politics directly, just like governor who wield the supreme power, this kind of regime called Direct Democracy. Be developed in ancient Greece, Direct Democracy helped ancient Greece make tons of achievements in different fields; also laid the fundamental of western political system of modern time. This essay will focus on the reasons of why government is necessary in our society and why Direct Democracy is not fit for modern United States of America, although brought a splendid time for ancient Greece.

Socrates started his life as an average Athen citizen. His parents worked, making an honest living. But as Socrates grew up, he began to realize that his mind questioned things and wondered how come no one else questioned the same things or at least think about the answers to the questions that were not answered. So, as his mind kept wandering, he began to acknowledge the questions that were not answered and sought for those answers. He ended up believing and teaching things to other people, whether it went against the way the Athen government or not, he still continued his work. Making enemies and becoming the topic of conversation, the Athenians began to view Socrates as a threat to their beliefs and way of life and sought to end it. In order to end this, Socrates was accused of blasphemy (Mod1SlideC7). Socrates’s accusers took him to court and after Socrates did not play their game by asking to be sent into exile, and in the end, he was sentenced to death. After reading the textbook and Plato’s writing influenced by Socrates, I realized that in the period of his life Socrates was indeed truly a threat to the Athens society, because he looked for answers that no one else bothered to find which challenged their culture.

Plato believes that people are inherently good and they will do what is morally right and just for society. They will earn their right to power and ensure fairness for all to prevent the tyrants from trying to take control. Plato mentions three main arguments regarding

John Stuart Mill essay on Consideration On representative Government, is an argument for representative government. The ideal form of government in Mill's opinion. One of the more notable ideas Mill is that the business of government representatives is not to make legislation. Instead Mill suggests that representative bodies such as parliaments and senates are best suited to be places of public debate on the various opinions held by the population and to act as watchdogs of the professionals who create and administer laws and policy.

According to Socrates perspective, the democracy of Athens was corrupt and even though they courts were made in such a way that everyone was judged fairly, it wasn’t such because there were no rules or principles set forth. When a person was brought to court in the Athenian court and the person spoke against the jurors or offended them, he or she could be prosecuted based on that. In summary, judgment was passed based on emotion rather than on justice.

In The Republic, Plato writes about his thoughts on good, justice, and how we can achieve it. He starts off by stating that for human happiness and to live the best life philosopher-kings are needed. Not everyone can become a philosopher; certain people simply are non-philosophers also called lovers of sights and sounds. Plato makes the distinction between lovers of wisdom(philosophers) and lovers of sights and sounds clear using beauty as an example. Non-philosophers see ''fine tones and colours and forms and all the artificial products that are made out of them''(476b) but are unable to see or to understand absolute beauty. While lovers of wisdom will search for knowledge in everything and seek to find true beauty.

Everyone has a perspective of their own about the government whether it be good or bad. Ancient Greek philosopher Plato and English philosopher John Locke both discuss the topic of government in their literatures. In the Republic by Plato, Plato introduces this concept of a just city. In this city, he believes that the older and wisest person(s) should rule as they are very knowledgeable. Everyone is born innately different according to Plato. Only those who are born with true philosophical understanding can rule. In the Second Treatise by John Locke, Locke addresses the state of nature, which is essentially equality and freedom. Even though people have liberty, they still need to obey natural laws. On the contrary of Plato’s just city, Locke believes that absolute authority is not a civil government. A civil society is where the majority rules. In the conclusion of this paper, I will have illustrated that Plato’s government view is more valid than of Locke’s.

Plato’s work reads like an offbeat conversation between curious minds. The questions he poses are deeply profound, often leaving his converser lost for rebuttal as the meaning behind his statements can be, at first, difficult to decipher. A comparison can be drawn between the topics Plato discusses and the way in which he discusses them; just as it can be sometimes arduous to understand the connotation behind the assertions Plato makes in order to bolster his arguments for or against a certain issue, it can be just as (or even more so) difficult to understand the issue

In thinking of Socrates we must recognize that what we have is four secondhand sources depicting him. That of Plato, Xenophanes, Aristophanes, and Aristotle. All having radically different accounts on Socrates and his views. Out of all them we consider Plato’s to be the most possible account, even though we face a problem of different versions of Socrates. The existence and continual study of Socrates’ philosophy regardless of differing accounts is astonishing in itself since it survived not through the specific philosopher, but through other people. Which is a testament of the impact that a man, such as Socrates, can make. When we think of Plato, who is regarded as a father of western philosophy, we are quick to think of his major work The Republic, his student Aristotle, and his writing on Socrates. (We think of his writings on Socrates as mere footnotes in philosophical thought without examining them.) “Nothing comes from nothing,” Parmenides proudly claimed, and this philosophical doctrine applies to Plato’s thought.

If Plato had portrayed an Ideal State in hid republic which could be built in heaven only, Aristotle came down to earth while drawing the outline of his ideal state. Like a true scientist he does not attempt any impossible scheme in formulating his theory if Ideal State. His ideal state is attainable on his earth. We must first consider not only what is ideal but also what is the best attainable in actual practice. The only difference between a monarchy and an aristocracy is that in the first case virtue is centered in one person. But since the ideal conditions do not exist for an ideal state, one should think of the best attainable only. For example: extreme wealth makes one arrogant and incapable of buying and extreme poverty makes one slavish and incapable of commanding. According to Aristotle that the state ids the best where the middle class is strong. Aristotle calls such a state by the name of polity. It is the state where the citizens at large administer for the common interest. Though constructing his state ideally Aristotle does not ignore reality and practicability of his state. He believes that for the state as well as for the individuals, the best life lies in the pursuit of virtue rather than of power and wealth.

“Plato’s philosophy is an attempt to justify Socrates’ belief in the objectivity of moral virtues.”