


Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Summary of the political thought of Plato and Aristoteles
Typology: Schemes and Mind Maps
1 / 4
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
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.
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:
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:
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”.