Democracy Is Based On True Leadership
Plato was a well-known Greek philosopher who created foundational principles on subjects such as government, education, and citizenship. The Republic, arguably one of Plato’s most influential works, is depicted through many dialogues between his fellow philosopher Socrates and other characters who discuss a political theory for a model state. The Republic’s goal strives to demonstrate an ideal city-state must possess and hints at Plato’s ulterior motive to expose Athens as a city in chaos rather than one in order. Plato views on government offers no fondness for democracy due to the fact that he believed not all members of society are capable of making just decisions and succumb to corrupt desires. Instead
…show more content…
This further raises the question as to whether Plato’s model of a republic is more beneficial. A democracy does embody positive attributes; such as letting the people take part in elections and having the freedom to choose their leader. In spite of this, the American vote is still uneducated. When it comes to national policies Americans only comprehend the relevance of worldly events based on one-sided information from politicians. The media contributes to this, portraying a narrow-minded view of the world, showing only portions of what could impact life in the States. Without complete information of outside nations, the democracy in America is flawed and elections are based more on favoritism and who can make the other look worst. This can lead citizens to favor the more socially appealing contender even if he/she is not the right person to lead. In the article “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy” the author Ogochukwu Okpala stresses that, “to allow the public to vote based on emotions rather than an informed decision could be detrimental to the structure of a society.” The logical alternative is to educate the public that way they may vote for only the truly wise to determine what is best for the nation …show more content…
If Americans were to face this problem by following Platonic ideas of government the selection of fraudulent political leaders would greatly decline as well as distrust towards politicians. Platonic education would enhance the sovereignty of reason over desire therefore creating justice in the soul (Okpala). In present day politics, Platonic philosophy is rooted into political affairs and if used correctly could rebuild a society where there is mutual trust between citizen and state. Plato justifies these beliefs with the following dialogues in The
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).
Democracy is rule by the people; the people elect governing officials based off of their personal values and beliefs. Different political parties rule the political scene and are serving to represent the people’s opinions in the best ways possible. Previously, I had a belief that my political view was essentially the only one possible and therefore it was the best. These views changed quickly once I learned the different political parties, their views, how they represent the people’s views, and how public opinion shapes politics. The government is formed around differentiating opinions on which policies should be in place and which social aspects need to be considered first. Not only is the government guided by opinion, but the people’s lives are guided by opinion as well. Each individual holds a different view, and each view can have an influence on society. Fortunately, after roughly eight weeks of studying American Government, I now have a better sense of complexity and the value of
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.
The United States is run by a democracy. There are many pieces to democracy that must be in good health in order for democracy to be effective and work. In this essay I will critique some of the most important parts of democracy in America and go deeper. I will first focus on the strengths of United States democracy and then I will dive into categories of democracy that I believe to not be thriving. I believe that the current conditions of United States democracy are becoming a hindrance to this nation, because the opinions and freedoms the public possess are being stripped away through poor media, education, and economy.
The Romans called their political system not democracy but republic. Republic is something that belongs to the people. In Rome the right to take part in the governing belonged only to the men and those who had the statute of being citizens. The differences of republic and democracy are because of the origin of the two terms Greek and Latin language. The ancient Greeks discarded the tyranny as well as the disorder. Plato as well as Aristotle stabilized the complete democracy which was not based on the laws, with the power of the crowd and considered it as a form of ruling based on the jealousy and sweet talk of demagogues. Both of them considered the democracy to be wrong kind of state governing. Plato considers the democracy as nice and various public orders but without the necessary governing. The main good of democracy is freedom.
In Plato's Republic democracy made a controversial issue in a critique by Socrates. The theory of the soul accounts for the controversy as it states that the soul is divided into three parts: the rational, the spirited, and the appetite which are ranked respectively. The idea of the soul's three parts and the soul being ruled by a dominant part is used as the basis for identifying justice and virtue. However, the theory of the soul is not only used to identify justice and virtue, but also used to show that the virtue within a city reflects that of its inhabitants.
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...
The political culture that defines American politics shows that despite this compromise, America is still very much a democratic society. The very history of the country, a major contributor to the evolution of its political culture, shows a legacy of democracy that reaches from the Declaration of Independence through over two hundred years to today’s society. The formation of the country as a reaction to the tyrannical rule of a monarchy marks the first unique feature of America’s democratic political culture. It was this reactionary mindset that greatly affected many of the decisions over how to set up the new governmental system. A fear of simply creating a new, but just as tyrannic... ...
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.
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.
One of Plato's goals in The Republic, as he defines the Just City, is to illustrate what kind of leader and government could bring about the downfall of his ideal society. To prevent pride and greed in leaders would ensure that they would not compromise the well being of the city to obtain monetary gains or to obtain more power. If this state of affairs becomes firmly rooted in the society, the fall to Tyranny begins. This is the most dangerous state that the City become on i...
The Republic is the most important dialogue within Plato's teaching of politics. It deals with the soul, which, as we know from the beginning, at the level where one must make choices and decide what one wants to become in this life, and it describes justice as the ultimate form of human, and the ideal one should strive for both in life and in state. Justice as understood by Plato is not merely a social virtue, having only to do with relationship between people, but virtue that makes it possible for one to build their own regime and reach happiness.
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.
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
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