Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Plato's democracy
Plato was a philosopher in the time of the distinguished Greek philosophers. He wrote a book entitled The Republic in which he explains some of his philosophy on subjects ranging from education to government. Plato constructed a model by which he proposed all governments evolve. He called it the Five Stages of Government. He suggested that there are five forms of government, which evolve out of one another; Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy, Tyranny, and Aristocracy. A Timocracy is a government of the military and of honor. An Oligarchy is a government of money and of the rich. Democracy is a government of liberty by and for the people, and it coincidentally happens to be the government which we have right now. A Tyranny is a government of absolute power and dictation. And finally an Aristocracy is a government of philosopher kings. Each form of government arises out of another, and so they go about in a cycle. Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy, Tyranny, Aristocracy, Timocracy, etc. We can compare our government of liberty by and for the people, Democracy, to Plato's model of the five stages of government. However, we must first discuss the reasons for each of the government's evolution and how Democracy comes about. Plato submitted that all governments, no matter how good, would out of necessity progress into other forms of government. He said that this decay was due to corruption in the form of government. This corruption resulted in the demise of that form of government and out of its ashes arose the next form of government in the cycle. Plato proposed that most new governments begin as Timocracys; governments of the military and of honor. There are always exceptions to every proposal, so this was not absolute. Since a Timocracy is a government of honor, one would think that there would not be any corruption. To the contrary, the Timocratic man quests for power and has a fondness for money. These weaknesses eventually lead to the collapse of Timocracy and the creation of the next form of government, Oligarchy. The Timocratic man's fondness for money carries over into the Oligarchal state; for an Oligarchy is a government of the rich and of money. Man's fondness of money leads him to seek out profits and to strive to be better than his brothers. Soon one man has majority of power in the Oligarchy and the people cry out. This leads to the Oligarchy's ruin. T... ... middle of paper ... ...g out of the condition of war 3. To observe natural laws 4. To keep the covenants they make B. Why do we need a commonwealth? 1. Men compete for honor and glory, leading to war 2. People are selfish and look for the personal good rather than the common good 3. Men think that they're smarter than whoever is ruling them and that they can do a better job 4. Men can warp ideas of good and evil and influence others 5. Men can't let things lie--even when things are going well they complain 6. The covenant of men below a leader is artificial--they need something to tie them to their promises C. How do you erect a commonwealth? 1. Channel the opinions of many into the voice of one or a few men 2. This results in true unity rather than just consent or concord of the people D. Definition: One person, of whose acts a great multitude by mutual covenants one with another, have made themselves every one the author, to the end he may use the strength and means of them all as he shall think expedient for their peace and common defense 1. Commonwealth by institution: when the men form the commonwealth voluntarily 2. Commonwealth by acquisition: when the men are forced to enter the commonwealth
Niccolo Machiavelli, John Locke, and John Stuart Mill present three distinct models of government in their works The Prince, Second Treatise of Government, and Utilitarianism. From an examination of these models it is possible to infer their views about human nature and its connection to the purpose of government. A key to comparing these views can be found in an examination of their ideas of morality as an intermediary between government and human nature. Whether this morality must be inferred from their writings or whether it is explicitly mentioned, it differs among the three in its definition, source, and purpose.
Two great philosophers had individual concepts of tranny that both shared the idea that this form of government was flawed. The first philosopher is named Plato. Plato was born around the year 428 BCE in Athens. He began his philosophy journey when influenced by his mentor Socrates. Socrates was a Greek philosopher who greatly aided in creating what is known as the Western Political Thought. Socrates taught Plato to question all that was around him and go in search for answers. One of the concepts Plato was taught was to question the way that those in Athens were being ruled. Socrates taught Plato that ruling through oppression and force also known as tyranny was far from the correct way to govern. From Socrates learnings Plato developed his own ideas of tyranny. His form of expression,
Plato's philosophy of government sees the State as a larger version of the individual, and the soul of an individual is comprised of three parts. Plato states that these three parts include the appetite, the spirit, and reason (167), and these parts have goals and desires that pertain only to them. For example, reason finds fulfillment in the study ...
This select group rules at the expense of common people. Increasing wealth is commonly the main consideration.
Plato's Republic centers on a simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? The Republic sustains reflections on political questions, as well. Not that ethics and politics exhaust the concerns of the Republic.
Oligarchy is valued above a democracy although they are both ruled by the appetite of the soul. Those within an oligarchy pursue necessary appetites whereas democratic individuals pursue unnecessary appetites. Rulers are present...
Machiavelli believes that a government should be very structured, controlled, and powerful. He makes it known that the only priorities of a prince are war, the institutions, and discipline. His writings describes how it is more important for a prince to be practical than moral. This is shown where he writes, "in order to maintain the state he is often obliged to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and against religion" (47). In addition, Machiavelli argues that a prince may have to be cunning and deceitful in order to maintain political power. He takes the stance that it is better for the prince to be feared than loved. His view of how a government should run and his unethical conduct are both early signs of dictatorship.
Plato believed that change should start with government and then seep into the person. The government is more powerful and thus the people would obey the laws of the government. The problem with this thought is that governments do not last forever and societies are never stable. Once the government topples, the law is gone and the citizens have free reign to do whatever they would like. When the cat is gone, the mice come out to play. When the change is made within the person, the change lives m...
What are tyrants, one might ask. In the current sense of the word a tyrant is pejorative term, applied to an individual in power who is selfish and self preserving. A tyrant is an immoral being, ruling over those around him through force, a tax on the freedom of those he subjugates. Yet the question that one should be asking is where do tyrants come from? Plato proposed that tyrants are a product of democracy, that the liberty inherent to a democracy allows the self interested to manipulate the system(generally through appealing to the population at large) causing a system with little liberty. This paper aims to defend the claims of Plato concerning tyranny, particularly the origins of tyrants, as well as to propose the safeguards that democracy possesses to defend against tyranny. The two claims Plato makes that will be discussed here are that tyrants come from popular leaders, that tyrants require sycophants to support and protect them.
In The Republic by Plato, Plato constructed an ideal city where Philosophers would rule. Governed by an aristocratic form of government, it took away some of the most basic rights a normal citizen should deserve, freedom of choice, worship, and assembly were distressed. Though the idea of philosopher kings is good on paper, fundamental flaws of the human kind even described by Plato himself prevent it from being truly successful. The idea of an ideal democratic government like what our founding fathers had envisioned is the most successful and best political form which will ensure individual freedom and keep power struggle to a minimum.
The readings and information in our textbook in regards to Plato and the Greek government were very similar to today’s ideas of government with the examples of citizens choosing other citizens to represent them, which is the same as voting in Governors or Councilmen/Councilwomen. The fact that there were term limits held by some is similar to the way we do things in our government.
All in all, modern western democracies would most identify with Aristotle’s concept of government. This is because of his ideals for family, how he organizes the state, and his terms for justice. As stated numerous times, modern western democracies pride themselves for upholding the values of freedom. Aristotle’s writings in Politics allow for more freedom for individuals than Plato’s class based system of government. It seems as though the world has already progressed though Plato’s principles for his ideal state when Europe was divided into a system of aristocracies, with the few ruling the many. Society and governments have progressed in such a way that they represent the majority, yet most people are still able to live a full and meaningful life, to develop themselves to their highest standards.
An inspection of Aristotle’s table below will reveal some of the fears that were major concerns for the developing American attitudes toward governments. The Author asserts that the forms of government that were in place around the world brought with them a history of that American used to build a better instrument of governance. Another idea that was hidden within Aristotle’s Chart on Government and leads the framers toward a more considered conclusion, is that democracy was the only type of government the world had not tried. This became the impetus for the great experiment.
Plato’s thoughts about power and reason are much different than Aristotle. Plato looked at the meaning of justice and different types of governments. Plato looked into four different types of governments
In this work, Socrates presents four different types of political constitutions. The four types are as follows: Timocracy; Oligarchy; Democracy; and Tyranny. Socrates points out the kind of men grow out of these different constitutions and how one is in fact less desirable and transferred from its preceding form of government/constitution. All four are different stages of deterioration from the perfect, just style of constitution Kallipolis.