Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Plato and Aristoteles, Schemes and Mind Maps of Political Philosophy

Summary of the political thought of Plato and Aristoteles

Typology: Schemes and Mind Maps

2013/2014

Uploaded on 06/23/2014

Aky1991
Aky1991 🇮🇹

5

(3)

6 documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
PLATO
Plato learned a lot about Socrates' method. The main difference from the two of them is that Socrates
didn't write anything, while Plato wrote different dialogues and letter and in most of them Socrates
appears as a character. Everything starts from the definition of philosophy as “knowledge of
ignorance”. The real philosopher is who spends the whole life looking for answers, trying to know
things, even if he already knows that he can't.
The Republic is one of the most interesting works written by Plato. The name “republic” comes from
the latin res – publica which literally means “public affairs”, but the real greek name was
ΠΟΛΙΤΕΙΑ”, which means “things about the city”. In this dialogue Plato writes about a lot of
different subjects, but the most important one is justice. Socrates, the main character, can't find the idea
of justice in people, so he looks for it in the society. The class division that he makes is really
interesting: in the lower part of the society there are the artisans, in the middle part there are the
guardians and in the upper part there are the philosophers. Each class has is own role: artisans have to
work, guardians have to protect the city and philosophers have to govern the city. People understand
which is their class during their education.
Plato's conception of “communism” is also interesting. Of course his communism is a ethic
communism and not a social one (as Marx's conception of communism will be). Plato imagines a
closed society and he assumes that in this society somebody (the philosophers) could arrive to know
the truth and that's why they feel like governing on other people. Also, it's necessary to extinguish
wealth and poverty because who is rich doesn't work and who is poor will always tend to do what it
makes him gain. The reason why we can consider Plato as a precursor of the real communism is his
anti-individualistic vision of society, but the truth is that Plato makes a mistake: he wonders who
should govern and not how we should peacefully replace who governs. Really interesting is also the
role of women in society: they're almost considered as men and, even if they're obviously weaker, they
allowed to fight.
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Plato and Aristoteles and more Schemes and Mind Maps Political Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

PLATO

Plato learned a lot about Socrates' method. The main difference from the two of them is that Socrates didn't write anything, while Plato wrote different dialogues and letter and in most of them Socrates appears as a character. Everything starts from the definition of philosophy as “knowledge of ignorance”. The real philosopher is who spends the whole life looking for answers, trying to know things, even if he already knows that he can't.

The Republic is one of the most interesting works written by Plato. The name “republic” comes from the latin res – publica which literally means “public affairs”, but the real greek name was “ΠΟΛΙΤΕΙΑ”, which means “things about the city”. In this dialogue Plato writes about a lot of different subjects, but the most important one is justice. Socrates, the main character, can't find the idea of justice in people, so he looks for it in the society. The class division that he makes is really interesting: in the lower part of the society there are the artisans, in the middle part there are the guardians and in the upper part there are the philosophers. Each class has is own role: artisans have to work, guardians have to protect the city and philosophers have to govern the city. People understand which is their class during their education.

Plato's conception of “communism” is also interesting. Of course his communism is a ethic communism and not a social one (as Marx's conception of communism will be). Plato imagines a closed society and he assumes that in this society somebody (the philosophers) could arrive to know the truth and that's why they feel like governing on other people. Also, it's necessary to extinguish wealth and poverty because who is rich doesn't work and who is poor will always tend to do what it makes him gain. The reason why we can consider Plato as a precursor of the real communism is his anti-individualistic vision of society, but the truth is that Plato makes a mistake: he wonders who should govern and not how we should peacefully replace who governs. Really interesting is also the role of women in society: they're almost considered as men and, even if they're obviously weaker, they allowed to fight.

ARISTOTLE

One of the most important aspects of Aristotle’s life is the fact that he was Alexander the Great’s tutor. In this way he had the opportunity to study politics and to formulate the thesis that politics is the practical science par excellence. The objects of theoretical science are things not subject to change; its method is analysis of the causes of these things; its purpose is demonstrative knowledge. Practical science, by contrast, is concerned exclusively with the man, or with his capacity as a self-conscious being or a source of action; its purpose is not knowledge, but the betterment of action. Practical or political science has three branches:

  • Ethic, or the science of character
  • Economics, or the science of household management
  • Political science or the science of governing the political community. There are essentially three ways of life available to human beings: the life of pleasure, the political life and the theoretical or philosophical life. Happiness for men can be defined as activity of the soul in accordance with excellent or virtue. (Consequently there’s a conflict between happiness and pleasure.) Aristotle distinguishes between two sorts of virtuous men, the “good man” who acts virtuously for the sake of acquiring the naturally good things of life, and the “noble man” who performs the actions of virtue for their own sake.

For what concerns justice, Aristotle distinguishes between “distributive justice” and “rectificatory justice”. Distributive justice is concerned with distribution of resources that are divided among all who have a share in some public organization. In cases of distributive justice, things must be distributed equally. Things should be distributed so that individuals get their share based on merit. If things are to be divided based on some property, each individual should receive a portion proportional to their possession of that property. The other type of justice is rectificatory justice. This justice governs personal transactions between individuals, whether voluntary or involuntary. In voluntary exchanges, this justice ensures that both parties equally exchange. In involuntary exchanges, some judge restores equality between the parties, returning to each their own. Howerver, Aristotle makes clear that justice can exist only in a community of relatively free and equal men whose relations are regulated by law.

Friendship is another important theme. Aristotle sais that there are three types of friendship:

  • (^) Friendship based on utility, which seem to occur most frequently between the elderly and those in middle life who are pursuing their own advantage
  • Friendship based on pleasure, which is friendship between the young people
  • Friendship based on goodness, which is the perfect one because it occur between those who are good, and similar in their goodness. The political significance of friendship consists in its mitigation of men’s attachment to their private interests in favor of a spontaneous sharing with other of external goods.

The comparison between Aristotle and Plato is interesting for what concerns their ideas of the city. Aristotle’s city is not just a mere appearance, but is the order in which all human communities reach completion. Men show themselves as social animals. Even if this conception is more modern than Plato’s one because now there is the idea of a new common citizenship and not just a society divided in classes, it’s clear that there is a continuity with Plato’s tradition. We see this because both authors assign primacy to philosophers (even if Aristotle never sais it clearly, it’s however easy to understand). There is no big difference between Plato’s “good man” and Aristotle’s “good citizen”: both of them have the privilege to use their wisdom to do what’s best for the

At the beginning of book IV Aristotle makes a detailed analysis of the varieties of regimes. He makes this division based on who (and how many people) exercise power: there is the government by one person (monarchy), government of a few people (aristocracy) and everybody’s government (democracy). Beside these three possibilities there are three degenerations: tyranny comes from monarchy, oligarchy comes from aristocracy and demagogy comes from democracy. Aristotle’s analysis of regimes encompasses not only a variety of imperfect regimes, but also the best regime for men. He sais that the best regime is the one founded on the middle class and he also states that democracies are safer and more durable than oligarchies. He understands that few people are easier to corrupt and also that the best city is not the largest one, because big cities are more difficult to control. Moreover, it’s not desirable for the best city to be itself a port, but it should be near to the sea. Aristotle concludes that the optimum size of the city can be defined as the greatest possible number with a view to self-sufficiency. For what concerns defense, Aristotle suggests four strategies: superior training of troops, fortifications, offensive naval power and alliances. He formally concludes that the best way of life for the city and the individual is the practical or active life. The best regime depends on the presence of a variety of virtues: courage and endurance are needed in support of the activities of politics and war; moderation and justice are required in occupation and leisure, but these virtues are evidently not sufficient and that’s why Aristotle adds that the best regime will also require, with a view to leisure alone, “philosophy”.