Cooperation and Contrast between Plato’s Regimes and Current U.S. Government
The U.S. government is a union of partially self-governing states or regions under a central government. It is composed of three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, whose powers are vested by the U.S. Constitution in the Congress, the President, and the federal courts. The separation of powers, which neither any branch working alone can change the U.S. constitution, is a kind of harmony that is similar to what is described in Plato’s aristocratic regime, where each class minds their own jobs to keep the state functioning. Besides, in my opinion, the current U.S. government is a combination of timocracy, oligarchy and democracy, which of four regime
…show more content…
The individual corresponding to timorcracy typically has a strong desire to excel and ruling. He loves honors and is confident, but is lack of education. He “must be a lover of hearing, although he is not skillful in rhetoric” (Plato 548e to 549a). With slaves, he will be brutal; with freemen, he will be tame; with rulers, he will be obedient. Also, he usually knees to physical training. For oligarchy, the corresponding individual must “give the highest place to money” (Plato 554a) but stingy. Also, he is diligent while he is squalid and narrows his desires to accumulate money as much as he can, by the same token, it will be hard for him to succeed. Beside, he is strongly lacking of education since he only focuses on money and wealth. Such a man has a good reputation in contractual relations, because at that time the evil side of his inner world is beaten by his virtue side. There is no harmony in his soul. Additionally, it is easy to see that kind of “drones’ desire” when he catches the opportunity to spend others’ money. The individual corresponding to the Plato’s democracy is arrogant and shameless. He enjoys indulgence and luxury, and spends his time, equally, to all kind of desires, necessary and unnecessary. His life, which he insists on, has no moderation and rules. Similar to that of democracy, the individual links to tyranny also motivates by all kinds of desires and spirits. His wasteful life makes him under a heavy debt. This tyrannical man will do everything to fulfill his desires, including robbery and
The U.S. Government is among the most successful governments known to man currently. The U.S. government is made up of a democracy, but this democracy was not put together on its own. It was first compiled by many other societies but mainly two in particular- the Greek and the Romans. These two historical powerhouses were and still are mainly known for their armies, agriculture, and their governments. These two formed the U.S. government that the world knows and fears and respects today.
The Constitution of the United States set up an intricate government with a very brief document. The Constitution is actually shorter than this essay, but was still able to set up all of the procedures that make our government act so slowly today. One process that takes an especially long time is passing a bill to make a law. Every governmental action has to be put into writing and then passed by the Congress and the Supreme Court. Too many government agencies have to examine every bill. The United States government only starts at the national level with the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches. Everything breaks down into more areas such as the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Federal government's semi-equal is the state government. State government breaks down into several subsidiaries as well. The court system is an excellent example of how a government system breaks down from a national to a community level. For instance, the high court in America is the U.S. Supreme Court. The step down from ther...
The national government is separated into three branches: the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial. As James Madison points out in Federalist Paper #47, if all the branches were combined to form one single overpowering division, then tyranny would for sure ensue. He states, “Liberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and distinct.” In order to retain the rights and liberty of our country, the government’s power must have balance. Each branch vests its power into smaller groups. Legislative vests its power to Congress, which consists of the Senate and House of Representatives. Executive to the President of the United States, and Judicial is invested in the Supreme Court. Our constitution outlines these ideals. Each branch does not overrule another and all are equal. [Doc
This sentence is a great transition from the previous paragraph into the topic of this paragraph, which is the ethical analysis of an artificial intelligence choosing between two bad situations. Artificial intelligence raises two main problems. The first is a classic ethical dilemma; what is morally correct when choosing between two bad situations? The second question is unique to the discussion about artificial intelligence; how do we precisely and accurately define the morally correct choice? In an attempt to answer these questions, we consider the classic trolley problem.
The U.S government works under princible called federalisim. Citizens regualte by two separate governments, federal and state. The federal government has limited power over all fifty states. State has power over their state, and no state can not make laws that conflict with federal laws. Federalisim is a system that allows two or more governments to share control over the same geographic region. The power is divided. The difference between federal and state governments power, the powers granted to the U.S. government are to collect taxes, pay debts, provide for the common defense and welfare of the U.S. The Federal Government can even boworrow money, regualte commerce within forgien nations and states. The power of the federal government
The United States is governed by a democracy. According to Dictoinary.com, democracy is “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system” (Dictoinary.com). This means that instead of having a supreme ruler, the citizens of a country have the right to vote for and choose their elected officials who will ultimately make the decisions for them. The benefit of a democracy is that depending on the public’s opinion, they can influence the government to run the way they want. This form of government provided the public with a great amount of freedom, yet is can potentially slow down the efficiency of governmental decisions. In order for a democracy to function well, public opinions must be somewhat similar to avoid gridlock. A democracy is good for public freedom, but must possess certain characteristics to provide effective results.
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.
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.
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).
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 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.
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.
Plato, having defined his perfect society, now seeks to compare contemporary 'imperfect' societies with his ideal standard. He initially criticises the imperfect society as a whole, before leading onto a criticism of any given individual within that society; the imperfect character. He has already dealt with the Oligarchic society and character and now moves onto Democracy and the democratic character.
Plato and Aristotle both established important ideas about politics and their government. The general idea these two men wrote about were tyranny and the rule of law. What the rule of law is stating is that no one is immune from the law, even the people who are in a position of power. The rule of law served as a safeguard against tyranny because laws just ensure that rulers don’t become more corrupt. These two philosophers explored political philosophy and even though they didn’t agree on much they’re impacts are still around the world today.
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.