Introduction Throughout this paper I plan to compare and contrast the ideas and philosophies of two of the greatest political thinkers of all time. Thucydides and Aristotle have separate opinions of the idea of democracy, originally created by Plato. However, these two have a positive assessment of this idea of majority rule of the people. My paper will provide each of their points of view. At the end I will determine, in my opinion, which of these two philosophers give a better case in favor of a democratic form of government, and give the reasons as to how I came to that conclusion.
Aristotle
Aristotle considers every form of government, and blatantly everything, in terms of telos. Telos defines a purpose, for existing, and how it exists.
…show more content…
For Aristotle, a virtuous government is one that’s rules is done aristocratically; meaning that merit plays the basis of governance. In a democracy, however, as Aristotle describes it, ruling should be done on the basis of numerical equality. This means that everybody partakes in the ruling of the city-state. Aristotle makes the conclusion that no one has additional rights than another, after he points out if everyone is equal in ruling then either none should rule another or where there must be common rule. This leads to a non-virtuous form of government, because if the choices are made by people who do not agree with, or believe the telos of the city-state, then the telos of the city-state will never be reached, therefore making the government non-virtuous. Aristotle adds that whenever large amounts of people get together to make decisions, it is foreseeable that personal bias will appear, and virtuous decisions cannot be made for the city-state. This cognitive analysis leads Aristotle to believe that a democracy’s notion of equality is a portion of the issue with a democracy being non-virtuous. Aristotle believes that, the poor are worried about obtaining more wealth, which means that they are placing their personal good above the common good whilst engaged in governance. For an individual to rule in a virtuous way, they must put the common good for the …show more content…
But the good men did not remain good: they began to make money out of that which was the common property of all. And to some such development we may plausibly ascribe the origin of oligarchies, since men made wealth a thing of honour. The next change was to tyrannies, and from tyrannies to democracy. For the struggle to get rich at all costs tended to reduce numbers, and so increased the power of the multitude, who rose up and formed democracies. And now that there has been a further increase in the size of states, one might say that it is hard to avoid having a democratic constitution”
(Aristotle, Politics)
According to Aristotle, a democracy is a failure. It is a majority rule where the majority is poor and non-virtuous. This means that whomever is in office, and all have equal access to office because of democracy’s concept of equality, may not act in the best interests of the city-state. When the city-state fails to reach its telos, providing the good life for its citizens, then the government of the city-state is non-virtuous, as are the people in the government. Since the city-state fails to achieve its telos under a democracy, Aristotle believes democracy to be a failure.
... against him. With regard to the second objection, Aristotle can begin by accepting that whereas it is indeed true that the parts prior to the whole or the polis - the single associations, respectively - do not contain the virtue for the achievement of eudaimonia in themselves alone, it is through the conjunction of them all that the capacity for this virtue emerges. Indeed, the parts of the city-state are not to be taken distinctively. For instance, whereas five separate individuals alone may not have the capacity to each lift a 900 lbs piano, the five together, nonetheless, can be said to be able to accomplish this. Similarly, it is the city-state with all of its parts that can achieve the good life. In any case, it remains that humankind is essentially political since it fulfills the function of reason, and this function is best performed under the city-state.
Aristotle's democracy was a democracy that endorsed equality to its fullest. Instead of forcing the thoughts of everyone through one biased individual, it allowed every person to have a voice. America is not a democracy. It tries very hard to make the people of the world think it is, but it is not. It goes against much of what Aristotle spoke of with fervor. Not everyone has an equal opportunity, nor does everyone have a voice. In fact, equality continues to diminish despite steps taken to push it further. Most of America is a simple façade that can be stripped away with minor effort. It is a mere pretense of democracy that would die out if it were to attempt to become anything
A longstanding debate in human history is what to do with power and what is the best way to rule. Who should have power, how should one rule, and what its purpose should government serve have always been questions at the fore in civilization, and more than once have sparked controversy and conflict. The essential elements of rule have placed the human need for order and structure against the human desire for freedom, and compromising between the two has never been easy. It is a question that is still considered and argued to this day. However, the argument has not rested solely with military powers or politicians, but philosophers as well. Two prominent voices in this debate are Plato and Machiavelli, both of whom had very different ideas of government's role in the lives of its people. For Plato, the essential service of government is to allow its citizens to live in their proper places and to do the things that they are best at. In short, Plato's government reinforces the need for order while giving the illusion of freedom. On the other hand, Machiavelli proposes that government's primary concern is to remain intact, thereby preserving stability for the people who live under it. The feature that both philosophers share is that they attempt to compromise between stability and freedom, and in the process admit that neither can be totally had.
Plato states that as the just city (i.e. an aristocratic society) develops, it will inadvertently fall into depravity, because despite the excellent constitutions of its wise leaders, they are still fallible human beings. He outlines four distinct forms of government—of which he considers to be depraved—that the just city will transform into, with each one being worse than its predecessors. The four systems, which are ordered by their appearances in the line of succession, are: timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and finally tyranny. The focus of this essay will be on Plato’s criticisms of democracy. Since democracy is recognized and practiced by most of modern western societies, it is especially relevant and important to examine whether this model
However, Plato now describes the Democracy that has been implemented by the lower classes with the aim of leading onto the democratic character. With new freedom and liberty, the average individual will arran...
Between the years of 508 BCE and 322 CE, Greece flourished under democracy. However, some question if the flourishing of Athens is due to the democracy that was in place as opposed to other factors relevant in building a successful community. This investigation will examine the effectiveness of Athenian democracy in Greek society. Relevance of Athenian democracy can be seen in foundation of many democracies found worldwide. In this investigation the right to vote, protection of minorities, use of social class, the structure of democracy and how Greek democracy has influenced the world will be addressed. The place investigated will be Greece, specifically the capitol Athens. The effectiveness of Athenian democracy can be seen in social structure, protection of minorities, and right to vote, as well as its structure and influence of other countries around the world.
Moore, J.M. Aristotle and Xenophon on Democracy and Oligarchy. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1983.
In summation this paper discussed the three correct types of regimes according to Aristotle; furthermore it examined the deviations of these regimes. This was done by firstly examining a regime led by royalty, secondly by observing the characteristics of an aristocratic regime and thirdly by discussing a regime ran by constitutional government. Finally defining the three correct types of regimes the deviations of these regimes: tyrannical, oligarchic and democratic were examined.
In the fifth-century BC, Athens emerged as one of the most advanced state or polis in all of Greece. This formation of Athenian ‘democracy’ holds the main principle that citizens should enjoy political equality in order to be free to rule and be ruled in turn. The word ‘democracy’ originates from the Greek words demos (meaning people) and kratos (meaning power) therefore demokratia means “the power of the people.” The famous funeral speech of Pericles states that “Our constitution is called democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people.” However, only citizens (free adult men of Athenian descent) could participate in political matters. Women and slaves held no political rights, although they were essential in order to free up time for the citizens to participate in the matters of the state. The development of Athenian democracy has been fundamental for the basis of modern political thinking, although many in modern society UK would be sceptical to call it a democracy. Plato and Aristotle in The Republic and The Politics respectively were critical of the Athenian democracy, by examining the culture and ideology present the limitations and possible downfalls of a democratic way of life. Within this essay I will outline these limitations and evaluate their validity.
The existence of the city-state (polis) requires an efficient ruler. A community of any sort can possess order only if it has a ruling element or authority. This ruling principle is defined by the constitution, which sets criteria for political offices, particularly the sovereign office. Aristotle defines the constitution as “a certain ordering of the inhabitants of the city-state” (III.1.1274b32-41). It is not a written document, but an immanent organizing principle, analogous to the soul of an organism. Hence, the constitution is also “the way of life” of the citizens (IV.11.1295a40-b1, VII.8.1328b1-2). Here the citizens are that minority of the resident population who possess full political rights (III.1.1275b17–20). Once the constitution is in place, the politician needs to take the appropriate measures to maintain it, to introduce reforms when he finds them necessary,...
Aristotle points out that throughout the process the type of governing was always monarchical from the household all the way up to the polis. The polis though is not a monarchy or oligarchy because of the natural maturi...
Democracy is control by the people. On the surface, this appears to be a superior form, but as Plato warned it is slow to react, oppresses of the minority, and lacks skilled leaders (Perry,
During the age of Pericles, the ideal form of government was believed to be a government formed by all of the citizens regardless of wealth or social standing. This was known as democracy, literally meaning “ government of the people” [Document 3.] This government favored the many instead of the few. Athens was a direct democracy, meaning every citizen participated in debates. Western civilization used this philosophy of government by many, and created an indirect democracy where citizens elect officials to make and enforce laws.
Plato and Aristotle’s philosophies on the best governments are complex though it is possible to separate their opinions and lay out their cities so that it is understandable through topics that they both touch on greatly. Aristotle and Plato considered the different types of government that existed in their time periods and dissected them to understand which ones were the best. From their understanding, they separately decided on the best...
Aristotle’s visions of the ideal government have been an influential teaching to political philosophy. His teachings seem to strongly reflect the ideas of communism and authoritarian systems. Aristotle’s emphasis on moderation and the perfection of the people prove this. Even though his book Politics by Aristotle seems to lead more towards a communism type of system, Aristotle’s writings have had an effect on many present systems today.