Aristoteles y Plato are two of the greatest philosophers in history. Plato was a teacher of Aristotle, so it is common that we find some similarities between them. Aristoteles does not agree with the political and social philosophy of Plato; but both have something in common, in his two books, Plato with “The Republic” and Aristoteles with “Politics”, both try to decipher what is "the ideal state". For Aristotle, man is a political animal that lives in a polis, or state. For man to develop and be happy, he has to live within a society that is governed by laws and regulations; for Aristotle this is a political life, and for him, Plato's theory regarding complete unity violates the nature of this political life.
These ideas of Machiavelli are shown in his text ‘The Prince’. His view on politics strongly influenced the ideas of English political philosopher Thomas Hobbes (Sullivan, 2004). In Hobbes’ book ‘Leviathan’ he further claims that politics is based upon self-interest; that is inevitable to avoid conflicts. Both Machiavelli and Hobbes thought that politics is about power and self-interest. These two prominent philosophers well explain what politics is and they may define the most appropriate definition of politics in the 21st century.
This is such a giant question in philosophy with a million answers and subcategories used to try and answer it. This book is the foundation of the entire topic, with many propositions used to answer it. Do men act justly because fear of higher power, or just because it is the ‘right’ thing for men to do? Justice is considered the most fundamental ethical and political ideas. Platos political view of democratic government
Philosophy focused on the individual’s relationship to the Polis. Plato was a philosopher during this period and his work Republic was one of the earliest organized treatment of political philosophy. In the Hellenistic period philosophers focused on reason rather than always looking for the truth. The philosophers accepted their inability to know the truth so they focused and relied on their faith. Aristotle was known as the first teacher, in the west he was the philosopher.
The republic is one of the great valuable work mainly referring to the justice, the rule or order and the character of the righteous and just city-state and the just man written by Plato, who is a philosopher in Classical Greece. It adopts a writing technique of Socratic dialogue, a kind of literary or artistic prose developed in Greece, around 380 B.C. and its contribution proved is one of the most influential works of philosophy and political theory. The republic concerns for the true and genuine principle and justification in the surrounding community especially for the affairs and changes in human life involving the economics, ethics and moral philosophy, political sociology. Plato stands a point of view that there is no blindness for human to clearly and persistently accept the criterion and norm of the moral or behavioral according to our own reason and mind.
To what extent could Plato’s Republic be or not be justifiably characterized as a closed and authoritarian society without freedom? To begin with, the absolute theoretical basis required for complete understanding of the question and the further speculation on it consists of two important books: “The Republic” by Plato, where the philosopher introduces his conception of an “ideal state” and “The Open Society and its Enemies” by Karl Popper, the summarizing and systematizing overview of the original text. Let us start by considering Plato`s theory of ideal state. The main goal of Plato`s ideal state is an achievement of common good and happiness through the implementation of Idea of justice. By Plato, justice can only exist if every person
It is a well-known fact that Plato’s Republic is one of the most influential works in philosophy and political theory. Despite its importance and the fact that Plato offers a state in which there are justice, good and wisdom, his state was criticized as “anti-democratic, anti-humanitarian, anti-individualistic, and totalitarian” (1). In this essay I will try to answer questions whether Republic could be characterized as an authoritarian society without freedom and which Plato’s arguments evokes criticism by exploring Plato’s concepts of state, justice, philosophy and politics. To begin with, the state, according to Plato, arises from the natural need of people to unite in order to facilitate the conditions of their existence. In developing the concept of an ideal state, Plato proceeds from the correspondence between the cosmos, the state and a separate human soul listing the four qualities necessary in the State: wisdom, courage, temperance and justice.
Political Philosophy is a wide branch of philosophy that focuses statements and arguments involving political opinion. It is all about state, politics itself, liberty, justice and the idea of authority. It tackles the meaning of government itself, why it is needed, what makes a government legitimate, the freedom of its underman, duties of both government and citizens and other political stuff. This type of philosophy is being practiced since it was discovered and has two reasons. First is the method and approach the philosopher and second is the philosopher's agenda that made him came up with the methods he used.
The term “Nicomachean” was used because it is believed that this text was either dedicated to or edited by son of Aristotle named Nicomachus. Aristotle tends to analyze current stature and future prospective, and according to that has given us certain practical philosophical ethics to make our life much surrounded by peace. Nicomachean Ethics and other work Politics are quite in relation as both deliver the message of creating good living. Ethics is more individualistic leveled while Politics aims at good living of whole
Idealism is directly traced to Plato, with concepts of the idealistic perspective influencing education today. Plato is a good reason and the most influential philosopher in Western civilization. He makes people think and for Plato, He wants people to disagree with him. He wants you to argue with him. He wants you to identify the fallacies in his arguments and some are deliberately fallacious.