Plato And Plato's Republic

969 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Plato's philosophy on justice

Mid-term Exam question 2 In the book Republic, Plato is on a quest to define Justice as he builds the ideal city. His city is ruled by philosopher kings, the true rulers. Philosophers, in Plato’s opinion, are best fit to rule and judge because of their love of knowledge and wisdom. When arguing philosophers have the experiences of all regimes Plato says, “The philosopher to have tasted the kind of pleasure that comes from the sight of things as they truly are. ‘so far as experiences goes, then,’ I said, ‘he is the one who is in the best position to judge” (325). Plato believes, that because philosophers have all the parts of the soul that other types of rulers contain, plus the ability to be able to see the world for what is, they then have …show more content…

A tyrant to Plato is the worse form of rule, Plato writes, “the worst and most unjust is the most miserable, and he, in truth is the most tyrannical” (322). This shows how much Plato does not like the tyrannical regime because it is the furthest from the very thing he is trying to grasp justice. Plato reveals his idea of a regime hierarchy, “in terms of their goodness and badness, and happiness to its opposite, I will rank them” (322). In Plato’s, hierarchy of regimes, he lists the democratic regime next to tyrannical regime, to Plato the further a regime is from the Aristocratic (the most just society) the less just they become. I do not agree with Plato about his beloved Philosopher king, even though Democratic governments are not perfect. To me the Philosopher king theory, is too farfetched. I especially don’t agree with the cave analogy and the idea that the philosopher king is saving the world from their own ignorance. On the other, there are issues democracy government and those who get elected into office. Our county has had some really good presidents and really bad ones. Also we have had some bad and good congressmen. Yes, Plato is right that these officials do affect our lives when they cast their votes on measures, but it is the closest thing we have to the people in terms of a

Show More
Related

  • Justice and Moderation of the Soul in The Republic, by Plato

    3023 Words  | 7 Pages

    In his philosophical text, The Republic, Plato argues that justice can only be realized by the moderation of the soul, which he claims reflects as the moderation of the city. He engages in a debate, via the persona of Socrates, with Ademantus and Gaucon on the benefit, or lack thereof, for the man who leads a just life. I shall argue that this analogy reflecting the governing of forces in the soul and in city serves as a sufficient device in proving that justice is beneficial to those who believe in, and practice it. I shall further argue that Plato establishes that the metaphorical bridge between the city and soul analogy and reality is the leader, and that in the city governed by justice the philosopher is king.

    Read More

  • Are Human Estranged In Essence

    1176 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato firmly believed that only a select few should rule. This idea stems from his view that people are unequal in essence, as some truly enlightened individuals are able to understand justice and good whereas others could only see the suggestion of the phenomenas. He asserted that many people were

    Read More

  • Critical Summary Of Plato's Republic

    767 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Plato’s Republic Book IV, Socrates sets out to convince Glaucon that a person acts with three different parts of the soul, rather than with the soul as a whole. He does this by presenting Glaucon with a variety of situations in which parts of the soul may conflict with one another, and therefore not acting together. Socrates describes the three parts of the soul as the rational part, or that which makes decisions, the appetitive part, or that which desires, and the spirited part, or that which gets angry (436a).

    Read More

  • The Differing Perspectives of Greek Philosophers

    1350 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...blic, Plato goes on to recognize education as one of the most vital features of a well-run state. He understood the importance of having intellectual, sensible beings running a successful state. Our rational is what directs us towards logical decisions in your life, as well as maintaining us a distance away from corruption. Though Plato is completely correct in recognizing the importance of knowledge in state, I can’t fully agree with his belief that only intellectual individuals are ever capable of fully comprehending the Forms of justice and good. What he wanted was an “intellectual oligarchy” and even though oligarchies may prove effective in the transformations of a state, there is also a huge fault within such system. That flaw being that only the privileged few have a say, where more often than not, the needs and wants of the common people are not thought of.

    Read More

  • Plato's Idea of the Emergence of Tyranny from Democracy

    1813 Words  | 4 Pages

    To understand Plato's arguments concerning the rise of tyrants from democracy, one must first examine how Plato suggests that democracy evolves from oligarchy. Plato sees democracy as a degeneration of oligarchy, something that evolves from a failure to be properly disciplined and restrained in the fulfillment of desires. A democratic person is not necessarily a mindless hedonist, he or she may even be restrained in many regards, but would deny no one the opportunity to be and argue that the mindless hedonist is just as virtuous and honorable as the spendthrift oligarch. Plato explains that a democratic man one who “surrend(ers) rule over himself to whichever desire comes along, as if it were chosen by lot, until it is satisfied; and after that to another, dishonoring none but satisfying al...

    Read More

  • Plato's Criticisms Of Democracy Essay

    1158 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato views the democratic state as a city “full of freedom and freedom of speech[,]” where its citizens “have the license to do [whatever they] want” and the right to self-determine. Plato however, sees this insatiable desire for freedom at the expense of neglecting everything else as the downfall of democracy. To clarify, a society that is staunchly protective of its equality and freedom will be particularly sensitive towards any oppositions that seem to limit them, to the point where it actively attempts to “avoid [obeying the law and] having any master at all.” Thus, “unless the rulers are very pliable and provide plenty of that freedom, they are punished by the city and accused of being oligarchs.” Since those in power fear the accusations of those being ruled, they become docile and submissive. On the other hand, those who are ruled are encouraged by their rulers’ meekness and, convinced of their inherent right to freedom, begin to behave as their own rulers. Thus, this blind chase for unconditional freedom will propagate disorder across the society, and eventually cause the people to see “anarchy [as] freedom, extravagance [as] magnificence, and shamelessness [as]

    Read More

  • The Republic of Plato

    1306 Words  | 3 Pages

    Plato and Aristotle were both very influential men of there time bringing vast knowledge to the world. I honestly believe that Democracy does a lot of good but it definitely has some common side effects. Out of all of Plato's significant ideas, his best was the idea of democracy opening political decisions to the majority who cannot think on behalf of the community. Aristotle on the other hand is very optimistic when it comes to democracy so it becomes a rather interesting compare and contrast between these to men.

    Read More

  • Justice in Plato's The Republic

    961 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Plato’s The Republic, he unravels the definition of justice.  Plato believed that a ruler could not be wholly just unless one was in a society that was also just. Plato did not believe in democracy, because it was democracy that killed Socrates, his beloved teacher who was a just man and a philosopher.  He believed in Guardians, or philosophers/rulers that ruled the state.  One must examine what it means for a state to be just and what it means for a person to be just to truly understand the meaning of justice.  According to Socrates, “…if we first tried to observe justice in some larger thing that possessed it, this would make it easier to observe in a single individual. We agreed that this larger thing is a city…(Plato 96).”  It is evident, therefore, that the state and the ruler described in The Republic by Plato are clearly parallel to one another.

    Read More

  • Plato's Republic

    1033 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Plato’s Republic, Glaucon is introduced to the reader as a man who loves honor, sex, and luxury. As The Republic progresses through books and Socrates’ arguments of how and why these flaws make the soul unhappy began to piece together, Glaucon relates some of these cases to his own life, and begins to see how Socrates’ line of reasoning makes more sense than his own. Once Glaucon comes to this realization, he embarks on a path of change on his outlook of what happiness is, and this change is evidenced by the way he responds during he and Socrates’ discourse.

    Read More

  • The Republic of Plato

    1279 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Book one of the Republic of Plato, several definitions of justice versus injustice are explored. Cephalus, Polemarchus, Glaucon and Thracymicus all share their opinions and ideas on what actions they believe to be just, while Socrates questions various aspects of the definitions. In book one, Socrates is challenged by Thracymicus, who believes that injustice is advantageous, but eventually convinces him that his definition is invalid. Cephalus speaks about honesty and issues of legality, Polemarchus explores ideas regarding giving to one what is owed, Glaucon views justice as actions committed for their consequences, and Socrates argues that justice does not involve harming anybody. Through the interrogations and arguments he has with four other men, and the similarity of his ideas of justice to the word God, Socrates proves that a just man commits acts for the benefits of others, and inflicts harm on nobody.

    Read More

  • The Noble Lie: Plato's Republic

    1371 Words  | 3 Pages

    The concept of the noble lie begins with Plato in the Republic, where in search of an ideal state he told of a magnificent myth^1.The society that Plato imagined was separated into a three tier class structure- the Rulers, Auxiliaries, and the labor or working class. The Rulers, he said, would be selected from the military elite (called Guardians).The rulers would be those Guardians that showed the most promise, natural skill, and had proven that they cared only about the community’s best interests. The Auxiliaries were the guardians in training, and were subject to years of methodical preparation for rule. The lower class would be comprised of the workers and tradesmen, who being the most governed by their appetites, were best fit for labor. The introduction of the "noble lie" comes near the end of book three (414b-c)* Where Plato writes "we want one single, grand lie," he says, "which will be believed by everybody- including the rulers, ideally, but failing that the rest of the city".* The hypothical myth, or "grand lie" that Plato suggests is one in which, the Gods created the people of the city from the land beneath their feet, and that when the Gods made their spirit the precious metals from the ground got mixed into their souls. As a result some people were born with gold in their souls others with silver, and others with bronze, copper,or more even common metals like iron and brass. It was from this falsehood that the first phylosophical society’s social hierarchy was established. The myth goes as follows: Those the Gods made with gold in the souls were the most governed by reason, and who had a predisposition to contemplation which made them most suitable for rule. Those with silver in their souls where the most governed b...

    Read More

  • Comparing Aristotle and Plato

    791 Words  | 2 Pages

    The understanding of Plato's regime is one that involves both the self and the regime. Aristotle on the other hand shows that development of state can be achieved without being the most wise. He also looks upon the regime with a positive regard rather that the pessimistic view of Plato, that things will always get worse. Aristotle understands that the coming together of people with common interest will always yield a city, and then onto a regime. Plato takes the planned out way, making sure that everything is in order before the regime or city can be formed. Both ideals of a regime are ones that would yield strong frivolous and successful places of habitation, yet we have never had a chance to see them in today's world. If only now we could see how virtuous they could be?

    Read More

  • Analysis of Plato's The Republic

    2022 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Republic is an examination of the "Good Life"; the harmony reached by applying pure reason and justice. The ideas and arguments of Plato center on the social settings of an ideal republic - those that lead each person to the most perfect possible life for him. Socrates was  Plato's early mentor in real life.  As a tribute to his teacher, Plato uses Socrates in several of his works and dialogues.  Socrates moderates the discussion throughout, as Plato's mouthpiece. Through Socrates' powerful and brilliant questions and explanations on a series of topics, the reader comes to understand what Plato's model society would look like. The basic plan of the Republic is to draw an analogy between the operation of society as a whole and the life of any individual human being.  In this paper I will present Plato’s argument that the soul is divides into three parts.  I will examine what these parts are, and I will also explain his arguments behind this conclusion.  Finally, I will describe how Plato relates the three parts of the soul to a city the different social classes within that city.

    Read More

  • Plato’s View of Division of Labor in Plato’s Republic

    981 Words  | 2 Pages

    Plato’s view of division of labour is divided into three types of peoples’ task in life which are workers as farmers, military type and guardians. Actually, the ruling task of Plato’s Republic is the guardian’s responsible who had achieved the greatest wisdom or knowledge of good. Due to that, Plato claims that “philosopher must become kings or those now who called kings must genuinely and adequately philosophise’’ (Nussbaum1998, p.18). However, people argue about the reasons that the philosopher should rule the city, while the philosophers prefer to gain knowledge instead of power, thus they don’t seek this authority. Therefore, the argument should alter to why the philosophers are the best ruler to govern people. Indeed, Plato states much evidence to prove his view. Firstly, these kinds of kings are interested in simple life and helping people for better communication. Secondly, as Plato points out that each type of workers has a deficiency and conflict in his erotic attachments such as a worker is a lover of money, but the philosopher is a devotee of wisdom and knowledge. Thirdly, their disapproving of being a king comes from their fear of being unjust (Nussbaum, 1998).Not only these evidence does Plato claim, but he also adds the characteristics of being a king and the education system of philosophy.

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Justice In Plato's Republic

    1440 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Plato’s Republic, the main argument is dedicated to answering Glaucon and Adeimantus, who question the reason for just behavior. They argue it is against one’s self-interest to be just, but Plato believes the behavior is in fact in one’s self-interest because justice is inherently good. Plato tries to prove this through his depiction of an ideal city, which he builds from the ground up, and ultimately concludes that justice requires the philosopher to perform the task of ruling. Since the overall argument is that justice pays, it follows that it would be in the philosopher’s self-interest to rule – however, Plato also states that whenever people with political power believe they benefit from ruling, a good government is impossible. Thus, those who rule regard the task of ruling as not in their self-interest, but something intrinsically evil. This is where Plato’s argument that justice is in one’s self-interest is disturbed. This paper will discuss the idea that justice is not in one’s self-interest, and thus does not pay.

    Read More

More about Plato And Plato's Republic

Open Document