Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The concept of democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The concept of democracy
Socrates outlines a simple blueprint for understanding the progression of regimes in the Republic as he describes it. That blueprint is especially useful for someone who wants to study the text on its own terms: Socrates gives the reader a lens through which to view the evolution of various political arrangements.
Regimes arise, says Socrates (albeit, socratically, in the form of a question), “from the dispositions1 of the men in the cities, which, tipping the scale as it were, draw the rest along with them” (544e).2 According to that framework, the transition from any form of government to another has the same cause: a regime’s effects on the character of its people drive them to prefer a different regime. To determine whether democracy is
…show more content…
Poverty prompts them to scrutinize and to envy the rich, who have what they want. Soon afterward (being used to getting what they want, they are not patient), they decide to take it for themselves, and the rich, who have become soft (556c), cannot defend it. With disparity of power and money still fresh in their minds, they enforce equality, redistributing wealth and filling offices by lot (557a).
All that tells the discerning political scientist quite a lot about democratic souls. They are born from “stingy” oligarchical souls, but they, thanks to their fathers’ “lack of knowledge about rearing” (560b), lack the virtue of moderation. Quite the opposite: democratic men embrace their “unnecessary desires” (559a) “out of hatred of [their fathers’] stinginess” (572c). Democratic souls are rebellious ones. Rebellion leaves an opening for
…show more content…
Since luxuries abound in a democracy, anarchy cultivates tyrannical souls. Just as democrats found pleasures under oligarchy, tyrants find them in democracy. Except that now, with moderation long since forgotten to society and alien to individuals, pleasures run rampant, and the tyrant’s “gourmand” soul (579b) gorges unrestrained, growing corrupt without limit. Democracy thus provides the kind of person whose disposition makes them susceptible to corruption by nature a perfect environment in which to develop the soul of a
In the book one of Republic Socrates was concerned about what is justice. He forms a complex analysis of justice by discussing it with Polemarchus, Cephalus, and Thrasymachus. He refutes each proposition said by them, presenting implicit contradictions coming out of these man's arguments. All of this is to reach to, the Sophist, Thrasymachus. According to what's discussed in book one; Socrates sees that the Cephalus's and Polemarchus's common thinking for justice is insufficient. By entering into the dialogue in an aggressive way, Thrasymachus says that he can better explain the issue of justice. The right thing to do here is disregard justice. He blames Socrates for saying nonsense and for just questioning individuals' answers. Thrasymachus
...nstead the state consists of rulers who behave like subjects and subjects who behave like rulers. The people begin to desire a strong leader, who will make the difficult decisions for them and bear the consequences: the Democracy has become a Tyranny.
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...
There is considerable evidence for the praise of democracy in the Histories. An example of praise for democracy is Herodotus’s disregard for tyranny as a political system . Through the description of Peisistratos’s rule, Herodotus acknowledges the limitations and faults with having a tyrannical government. Herodotus describes Peisistratos rule as period of Athenians being oppressed, held down form being truly free, unable to reach its potential. According to Herodotus, even the best of all men, if they are presented with the power that comes with being a tyrant, that moral man will inevitably fall to power and corruption. Herodotus gives the impression that the Athenians under Peisistratos were oppressed and divided, because of this Herodotus, through evidence of Peisistratos’s rule, suggests that tyranny leaves the state in a weakened condition. However, Herodotus believed that in a democracy no one man can have absolute rule or power, so there can be no corruption of the law.
Socrates and I grew up alongside the Athenian democracy, and experienced her vicissitudes in the past seventy years. We have both heard and experienced cycle of five types of governments that Socrates had mentioned. (Plato, Republic 8.547e) Our democracy was established hundreds years ago under Cleisthenes and turned to tyranny under Isagoras. In our childhood, Athens was a timarchy, and then Pericles ruled Athens with the
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
The system of government we have today was starting to developed centuries ago by the Athenians and Romans. Both governments were established with the intent to give power to the people, even though it did not always play out that way in society. The Athenian democracy and the Roman republic were two very different governments in practice, but also maintained similar characteristics in both systems of government.
Democracy is the structure of government still used today in many countries.The definition of democracy is a system of government where people who rule directly are freely elected representatives.In addition, democracy comes from the Greek word demokratia. Demo meaning people and kratia meaning power of rule. For instance, here is an example, Great Britain has a democratic government since elected officials and laws are voted on by the people and also the representatives they elect. Therefore Athens exemplifies a democratic government. “Athenians would meet and vote on a simple question …. is anyone becoming a threat to democracy? If a simple majority voted yes,then they dispersed and reassembled two months later,
Plato’s The Republic and Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan are key texts within the conservative tradition. They each explore the human condition and its relationship to society at large. The two theorists recognize the need for a hierarchical form of government to maintain order; however, they differ in their account of the effect of desires, and emotions on political order and hierarchy. Plato asserts that desires lead to the ultimate corruption of society, whereas Hobbes believes that certain innate desires can contribute to peace. For Plato, all human desires must be controlled to maintain order, while Hobbes argues that people’s innate desire for life is central to maintaining the hierarchy.
Socrates: A Gift To The Athenians As Socrates said in Apology by Plato, “...the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more…”(Philosophical Texts, 34) Throughout history, many leaders have been put to death for their knowledge. In Apology, Socrates- soon to be put to death- says he was placed in Athens by a god to render a service to the city and its citizens. Yet he will not venture out to come forward and advise the state and says this abstention is a condition on his usefulness to the city.
...litical figure came close to challenging Socrates' unique philosophical plan. In the Republic, Socrates' ideas of how ignorant a democracy is, is portrayed in the Apology when Socrates' proclamation resulted in death. A democracy is supposed to be about individuality and freedom, however it was contradicted when Socrates was put to death because he had ideas for a better system of ruling. He wanted a ruler to be somebody who would see truth, not shunning certain ideas and keeping others solely because it is not understood. These ideas are portrayed in both excerpts.
In comparing the average citizen in a democratic nation, say the United States, to that of a non-democratic nation, for instance Egypt, it will be found that the citizen in the democratic nation is generally better off – free of persecution, free from fear of the authorities, and free to express his opinions on governmental matters. And while national conflicts occur everywhere, incidents like violent revolts have shown to be more prevalent in nations where citizens are not allowed to choose who governs them. It is slightly paradoxical that democracy, so inherently flawed in theory, can lead to such successful outcomes in practice. The question, then, becomes: “If democracy has so many weaknesses, why does it work?”
Human nature is not simply a measure of our human tendencies. It is both individual and collective. It does not explain why events happen. Instead, it explains the subconscious of each individual in the instant that events happen. The social order that best fits human nature is one where the informed opinions of everyone creates decisions and causes action. Madison’s argument for and against factions, Aristotle’s idea of ultimate happiness, and Locke’s concept of popular government and human rights all offer a significant component to the larger concept that is human nature. While some may argue that we will only fully understand human nature when we are met with death, still we can begin to capture a slight understanding to what governs human nature and the political order that helps it grow.
Throughout history different types of instrumental regimes have been in tact so civilizations remained structured and cohesive. As humanity advanced, governments obligingly followed. Although there have been hiccups from the ancient times to modern day, one type of government, democracy, has proven to be the most effective and adaptive. As quoted by Winston Churchill, democracy is the best form of government that has existed. This is true because the heart of democracy is reliant, dependent, and thrives on the populaces desires; which gives them the ability for maintaining the right to choose, over time it adjusts and fixes itself to engulf the prominent troubling issues, and people have the right of electing the person they deem appropriate and can denounce them once they no longer appease them. In this paper, the benefits of democracy are outlined, compared to autocratic communism, and finally the flaws of democracy are illustrated.
In Plato’s The Republic, the primary focus for a significant portion of the text is establishing the ideal state in order to determine the nature of justice and virtue. In doing so, Socrates, who is the primary speaker in the text, determines several requirements for the existence of the ideal state. The third requirement according to Socrates is that philosophers must rule as kings (or kings must adequately philosophize). Until this occurs, “cities will have no rest from evils” (473d). However, there is some objection, or anticipated objection, to Socrates’ requirement. Adeimantus, one of Socrates interlocutors in The Republic, raises the objection that those who actively philosophize into adulthood are made up of a great number of cranks and,