Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aristotle and Plato compare contrast
Analysis about the republic of plato
Aristotle and Plato compare contrast
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aristotle and Plato compare contrast
Introduction
Plato and Aristotle are renowned Greek philosophers who arguably proved to be great thinkers in their lifetime. Plato started his work in Athens as a philosopher and he played a big role in the development of the political philosophy. Apart from his philosophical works, Plato also took part in the development of science, mathematics and Christianity. In the republic, he sets out to define what is justice and its role to the society. On the other hand, Aristotle dealt mostly with political science. Just like Plato, Aristotle started an academy called Lyceum whereby its members did research in politics and philosophy. One of the philosophical works that Aristotle authored is the Nicomachean Ethics which focused on happiness and how it is achieved. Therefore, the two philosophers’ works are comparable since they dealt a lot with human element of character.
In The republic, Plato believes that individual justice is very important in any political body. It enables any person to play their role in the society and achieve pleasure. The soul of an individual is structured into three parts. There is the rational part
…show more content…
One of the main similarity is their take on justice. They both agree that justice brings good life. According to them, justice brings equality. In this context, Plato believes that justice and the law play a very important role in guiding the behavior of the individuals in a society.Aristotle writes, “Justice is considered to mean equality, in oligarchies, again inequality in the distribution of office is considered to be just,” (Hacker 91). Another similarity is that the two philosophers were mostly concerned with ethics. They had ideas and plans which aimed at improving the lives of those in their society. In order to achieve harmony in any given society, virtues ought to be followed. Plato and Aristotle in their excerpts agree that it is by observing virtues that someone achieves
32) Plato was a more significant philosopher than Aristotle, because Plato learned from Socrates, and took what he learned, and turned it into something better. He founded an academy, wrote dialogues, and lectured many subjects to various people.
Though Plato was Aristotle’s teacher, their ideas could not differ more in relation to Doryphoros. While Plato would feel that it is worthless, Aristotle would feel that it is very valuable to the process of learning more about our very natures. The duality of their opinions is very similar to the duality we can see in Doryphoros mentioned above. Plato was on a kind of warpath with creative expression, yet student Aristotle embraced it with calm analysis. In Doryphoros we see their opinions in juxtaposition to one another. If nothing else, Doryphoros expresses the masculine, logical side of human nature with near effortlessness.
Plato and Aristotle are two rhetoricians than had a great impact on the history of rhetoric. Although they were similar in many ways, their use and definition of rhetoric were different. Plato had the more classical approach where he used rhetoric as a means of education to pass down his beliefs and practice of rhetoric to his students. He believed that it should be used to educate the masses, provoking thought, and thereby preserving that knowledge. Plato thought that rhetoric should be used to convey truth, truths already known to the audience, revealed through that dialectic critical thought. Plato also operated on absolute truths, things that are right or wrong, black or white. Aristotle was more modern in that he used rhetoric as a tool of persuasion in the polis. He thought that the main purpose of rhetoric was to persuade, provoking emotions for his audience as a tool of persuasion. Aristotle’s rhetoric was more science based, using enthymemes and syllogism to foster logical thinking. He believed that rhetoric was a means of discovering truth. His rhetoric was highly deliberative since he used it mainly for persuasion. I will discuss their differences in more depth in the following essay.
Aristotle and St. Augustine have both been influenced by Plato. Their philosophy on morality, politics, and the purpose of life has been platonically influenced. St. Augustine is the true heir of Plato because he has taken Plato’s ideal state, and revealed the implications of the lives that the citizens of the earthly city lead, in the City of God. Plato’s state is an ideal state, that would not function in reality. St. Augustine has taken Plato’s notions, and have furthered the implications of living a life that strives towards a common good. The consequences, whether negative or positive, cannot be seen in the earthly state, but can be seen in the City of God.
Firstly, Plato's concept of reality contrasts with Aristotle's concept. Plato's theory of ideal forms claims that a perfect world exists beyond the world around us. Our world contains forms imperfectly copied from the ideal forms of the world beyond. In contrast, Aristotle's theory of the natural world states that our world is reality. Aristotle thought the world consists of natural forms, not necessarily ideal or imperfect.
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?
Aristotle and Plato were both great thinkers but their views on realty were different. Plato viewed realty as taking place in the mind but Aristotle viewed realty is tangible. Even though Aristotle termed reality as concrete, he stated that reality does not make sense or exist until the mind process it. Therefore truth is dependent upon a person’s mind and external factors.
Although Plato and Aristotle lived during the same time period, both philosophers developed two divergent theories of knowledge.
Plato believed that everything had an ideal form, but Aristotle looked into the real world and studied that. Instead of inventing a system of government, Aristotle explored more of practical things that you can realistically put into effect. Aristotle’s main aim was to “consider, not only what form of government is best, but also what is possible and what is easily attainable”. Meaning that he wanted everyone to be able to relate and adapt to his form of power. He wanted people to be servant to his laws because if the law were an order, it would make a good society. He ended up maintaining a government somewhat like a democracy, where the middle class is strong. Aristotle produced natural domination as one of his biggest theories. Aristotle believed that people were born into being a ruler or in slavery. He wanted people to accept what they are and do what they were born to do. It was the only way that he thought the world would be able to work and not come out with a lot of problems. This is way he believes that everyone is born with a color that tells you your placement in the world. Your placement is not genetic and can’t run in the
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.
For both Plato and Aristotle, virtue was considered essential for happiness. For Plato, wisdom is the basic virtue and with it, one can unify all virtues into a whole. Aristotle, on the other hand, believed that wisdom was virtuous, but that achieving virtue was neither automatic nor did it grant any unification of other virtues. To Aristotle, wisdom was a goal achieved only after effort, and unless a person chose to think and act wisely, other virtues would remain out of reach
Philosophers Plato and Aristotle had different views on music. Plato believed that the right kind of music engaged the mind and enhanced temperance and courage within a human being. Aristotle held that the addition of music heightened the theatrical experience for the viewer.
... state. In Plato's argument for the ideal state, the fundamental bonds which hold together his republic are unity and harmony. He explains how the just state is held together by the unity of each individual in each social class, and harmony between all three social classes. Plato explains how the ideal state must have citizens who are united in their goals. It is not the happiness of the individual but rather the happiness of the whole which keeps the just state ideal. At the same time, Plato argues that there must be harmony within the individual souls which make up the state. The lack of unity and harmony leads to despotism through anarchy which eventually arises within a democracy. Plato makes a clear argument, through The Republic, that without the unity and harmony of the individual and the state there can be no order and therefore there can be no ideal state.
Most knowledge proclaimed by historians about Socrates are collected from Plato’s (Socrates’ student) writings, for Socrates’ teaching were never recorded/ written. Plato was one of Socrates’ most famous students, who was very inspired by Socrates’ enforcement of the significance of morals and continued to spread wisdom, Plato gained as a pupil. Aristotle, student of Plato and a well-known philosopher, respected and accept Plato’s and Socrates’ beliefs, despite disagreeing with some ideas. Now apparent, Socrates influenced some of the most famous and impactful philosophers as of today.
Both men lived in 4th century BCE Athens, so much of their background and experience was shared. Aristotle was the younger of the two, and he was Plato’s student. Where leadership is concerned, both philosophers agreed that the “best men” should rule, and that the purpose of leadership was the betterment of the State. They also agreed that education was paramount to forming these best men. They disagreed, however, on whether or not leaders were born with inherent qualities, or if these qualities depend solely on education. They also disagreed about whether or not a strict separation between leaders and followers is required, and what form of government the best State should take.