Plato's Republic Summary And Analysis

In The Clouds, by Aristophanes, and The Apology by Plato, Socrates is illustrated in distinctive ways. In The Clouds, Aristophanes tries to expose Socrates and his followers, the Sophists. In his play, Aristophanes shows that Socrates is contaminating the young men of Athens, and he uses mockery to magnify a lot of the lessons delivered by Socrates. Plato, who was a devoted advocate of Socrates, portrayed his advisor in a positive way. Even though majority of The Apology is literally a speech narrated by Socrates, we can guess that Plato was intrigued by the story enough to twist it in a way that would highlight Socrates, and the picture was thoroughly diverse from that of Aristophanes.

Socrates defended himself and showed the truth by standing up for what he believed in. By doing this, he was put to death. Socrates effectively used the three acts of the mind to rebut the charges made against him at trial. Socrates used the first act of the mind: understanding. Socrates used simple apprehension by stating facts that explain different

Paley argues that everything has a purpose of being here and without the purpose how else could it exist. With his analogy of the watch he discovered that the watch had to have a designer, and that designer was to be a watchmaker, who designed the watch to have a purpose of telling time. So if the watch had a designer, then the universe had to have a designer as well. It is clear that no human could have created or designed the universe but it is clear that there is an intelligent designer behind its existence. The teleological argument is the most reasonable explanation of God’s existence based on the purpose of the universe that was

To a large extent, I disagree with this statement. Authoritarian and single-party leaders unsuccesfully attempted to use force as a means of rising to power and, once this proved to be unsuccesful, reverted to democratic methods in order establish power. This is evident when looking at how Mussolini established his role as Prime Minister in Italy. Mussolini initially used the “Blackshirts”, members of the paramilitary wing of the Fascist movement, as a means of intimidating people into supporting the Fascist Party. This intimidation and violence, however, was unsuccesful in the initial period of the Fascist movement, as shown by the November 1919 election results, when the Fascists did not win a single seat in the Chamber.

Communism believed in a classless society, while Fascism followed a dictatorship, but maintaining a dictatorship required the suppression of the people. Fascist ideology believed that “war alone brings up to their highest tension all human energies and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to meet it,” which requires constant violence to prove power (Lualdi 236). By 1924, Mussolini was able to gain 65% of the vote for fascism, but in 1933, the Nazi party only gained 44% of the vote, and even with a minority ruling party was able to gain control of the government. Both Mussolini and Hitler came into power through legal means, but Mussolini was named Prime Minister in the hopes of avoiding war but after gaining control. Yet after their legal rise into power, they used coercion and violence to further their fascist rulings.

One of the important definitions given was that given by Thrasymachus: he defines justice as the advantage of the stronger. “Now listen, I say that the just is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger. Well why don’t you praise me? But you won’t be willing”. He said his definition and was sure that it was right.

Socrates uses the allegory of the cave to emphasize the importance of education and pursuit of the Good. The "prisoners" in the cave merely observe shadows and reflections of what actually is, but, with education and the guidance of a philosopher, these prisoners are able to exit the cave, observe reality, and progress towards understanding the Good (520a). With respect to the role of the city and government, Socrates suggests that rulers should be those "in a state of waking," already exposed to reality and committed to returning to the cave to "harmoniz[e] the citizens by persuasion and compulsion" towards the Good (520a-c). In other words, rulers should not be individuals who "fight over shadows," merely interested in the attainment and pursuit of material wealth and resources; instead, Socrates suggests, that rulers should be interested in the pursuit of Truth, and dedicated to gently guiding the ruled towards "fair, just, and good things" (520b-d). Thrasymachus ' vision, however, more closely aligns with the antithesis of Socrates ' position.

Some people argue that Julius Caesar was the greatest military general and politician of all time; however, I disagree. In my opinion, Caesar was a forceful dictator who only cared about his own wealth and power, punished innocent citizens, and was greedy for supporters. Julius Caesar just wanted himself to be satisfied, even if it was at the expense of the Roman republic. He also punished all of the innocent citizens that just wanted to sustain the old laws and traditions of the Roman republic. Another reason he is not an astonishing leader is that he increased the number of senators so that more people would support him.

When it comes to people, Brutus is loving and wants the best for them. It's a decision between morals or friends and makes that decision clear that he rather choose the right morals over having a friend in power. Throughout the novel Julius Caesar's morals is to be seen as ambitious and wanting people to praise him while Brutus's morals being Humble and doing what is ethical. The Characteristics of Julius Caesar and Brutus contradict each other and Brutus does what his morals are to get rid of Julius Caesar or in the play to assassinate him. Another example of of his morally right decisions affecting an outcome is his influence on the conspirators.

The Apology tells the story of the trial Socrates is placed on as a result of the government officials believing that his creation of false idols has resulted in corruption of the youth of Athens. While the religious leaders view his actions as disrespectful, Socrates believes that it is his duty to offer clarification upon the “wisdom” these leaders of the society had to offer. Ironically, the word “apology” serves as an expression of regret in the English language; however, it is derived from the Greek “apologia,” which translates as a defense or justification of belief. Thus, I believe that Plato strategically calls this piece of writing “apology” in order to symbolize the various and opposing perspectives that can be associated with one

The upbringing of the organization has two facets: create a better environment by helping those in need and the other one is to seize opportunities to gain an advantage over others by strategic force. “The idea of the Mafia being a Robin Hood-like organization in defense of the poor had a long life in Italy. But the sheer brutality of the war against the state put the validity of the myth in question. There was so much violence and Mafia brutality. That is when the myth of the good Mafia dies.

In “Re-Composing Space: Composition’s Rhetorical Geography,” Roberta Brinkley and Marissa Smith expose the how valid modern day rhetoric is by analyzing the work of professionals who specialize in the following: history, English, and human behavior. According to the authors, in ancient Greece only educated, white, non-slave, men were the only group whose opinion was considered; anyone’s opinion who did not meet that criteria did not matter. Brinkley and Smith believe that there are a lot of ideas that may have been missed due to this notion and also rings to question the credibility and the morals of the ancient Grecians. In order to convince students of rhetoric who have been taught their entire life the ‘correct’ way to make a valid argument

In Euthyphro, Plato’s method of arguing obliviously proves the point that evidence and a clear thought out explanation is needed when trying to describe and explain the difference between two things—especially when involving right and wrong. Although it helps to prove it and make you truly think about the definitions as well as how to describe it, for the person, in this case Euthyphro, on the other side of the argument it can be very annoying; because you explain one thing and then are questioned and have to explain more or then you being to questioned on your own thinking making you have to restart. It is in a way similar to now how little kids go through a phase were they ask “why” to anything and everything; typically the one being questioned

In Plato’s Allegory of the Cave in the Republic, he alludes to two analogies. An analogy has two fundamental definitions: the distinction between the intelligible and sensible and the proportion of such ideas. The “Allegory of the Cave” helps to show what part of reality we can see and know and the other part of life in which we are trapped and unknowing to the possibilities. It has a lot of hidden symbolism and structure that a first glance may sometimes be hard to see. Socrates uses the Sun and Divided Line analogies to further his emphasis on the intelligible and sensible.