Becoming a World Citizen Diogenes, a 400 BC Greek philosopher and a founder of the Cynic philosophy, is often referred to as the first person to declare himself a citizen of the world. But what would Diogenes think if he was to look at today’s culture? Most people, whether they want to or not, are connected to the rest of the world in some way. Diogenes had the ideas and philosophy behind being a citizen of the world, but only with today’s technology and interconnected life can we begin to see what an earth full of world citizens might actually look like. In this essay I will break down what Diogenes might think about our current world, as well as his opinions on the writings of Kwame Anthony Appiah, Ian Hacking, Leo Cabranes-Grant, and other …show more content…
The idea is that, “we can borrow good ideas from all over the world, not just from our own society. It is worth listening to others because they may have something to teach us. It is worth their listening to us because they may have something to learn” (Appiah). No one person knows everything there is to know, just like no society has all the answers on how to live. I think the world today is too caught up with competing with each other and trying to be the best country, and I think Diogenes would agree with me. He would say that if we are truly trying to be world citizens, we have to think about trying to be the best world we can be. He wouldn’t judge our accomplishments by country, but by the total accomplishments the world has. To put it into a metaphor, think about a group school project. Say you and 3 others are assigned this project but no one can agree on how to do it, so you all do your own project. When it comes time to present, you realize your individual projects pale in comparison to the other group’s combined effort. Even though your project might be impressive for one person, it still wasn’t as good as what others did collectively which is how it’s judged. Diogenes would look at what has been accomplished by single countries in the world and say “That’s okay, but imagine if you had been working together this whole time. Think of all that you could have …show more content…
If everyone followed his concept of being a world citizen, society would be much further along. Unfortunelty as history has shown, this isn’t the case. Humans divide things into categories to understand them better. These divisions strike deep into our mind and effect our thoughts, actions, and the way we view the world. I think if Diogenes was to view the world today he would be disappointed, but see the seeds of world citizenship. If we can learn that we are more successful working together and finding similarities rather than differences, I think we can adopt some of the principles that Diogenes was trying to preach over two thousand years
... against him. With regard to the second objection, Aristotle can begin by accepting that whereas it is indeed true that the parts prior to the whole or the polis - the single associations, respectively - do not contain the virtue for the achievement of eudaimonia in themselves alone, it is through the conjunction of them all that the capacity for this virtue emerges. Indeed, the parts of the city-state are not to be taken distinctively. For instance, whereas five separate individuals alone may not have the capacity to each lift a 900 lbs piano, the five together, nonetheless, can be said to be able to accomplish this. Similarly, it is the city-state with all of its parts that can achieve the good life. In any case, it remains that humankind is essentially political since it fulfills the function of reason, and this function is best performed under the city-state.
Philosophers as well as ordinary people have different ideals and morals. They sometimes agree on things, but most of the time they contradict each other on certain ideas or principles. Both Pericles and Aristophanes were wise men that analyzed certain aspects of life that are essential for a thriving society. Although Pericles has a point on democracy being the essential way to rule Athens, through seeing Aristophanes’ evidence I argue that unjust speech can corrupt the society because it makes people engage in selfish behavior and make bad decisions that affect everyone.
A world where people and things are integrated, purposeful, beautiful is a description of the Aristotelian epoch as written by Richard E. Rubenstein. Though this vision of an ideal society (where economic growth, political expansion, and cultural optimism contribute as characteristics of that epoch) is inspiring, they are not achievable, if not ever, not yet, at least. On the other hand, Platonic epoch was described like the contrary; where humans are still held back from the full potential of humanity, with vices like self-hatred, intolerance and fanaticism. This essay will support and give explanations about why the Platonic epoch seems to be more appropriate to describe the present time in the perspective of the writer.
In Utopia and the Aeneid, Sir Thomas More and Virgil describe the construction and perpetuation of a national identity. In the former, the Utopian state operates on the “inside” by enforcing, through methods of surveillance, a normalized identity on its citizens under the guise of bettering their lives. In the latter, the depleted national identity of the future Romans in the wake of the Trojan War must reformulate itself from the “outside” by focusing on defining what it is not. In both instances, the lines between the “inside” and the “outside” are clearly drawn and redrawn. The two methodologies are in actuality the flipsides of one another: in clearly defining the accepted national identity and contrasting with it the danger and instability outside this narrow conception, the state is legitimized in doing violence on a massive scale to either eliminate the constructed outside threat or to further the imperialistic project so that these lines remain intact and unquestioned.
In a democracy, people choose representatives to lead and govern them. However, these representatives might take unpopular steps. In such instances the people may show their disapproval of a policy and vent their grievances through acts of civil disobedience. Henry Thoreau said, “It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right.” It is both the right and responsibility of a person to fight an unjust law, and civil disobedience allows one to convey his thoughts and ideas in a passive, nonviolent way. In Sophocles’ Antigone, written in 442 B.C., we find one of the earliest examples of civil disobedience. The play emphasizes the right of the individual to reject his government’s infringement on his freedom to perform a personal obligation and highlights the struggle that one faces in doing so. More importantly, it shows how such actions help further the cause of democracy. It strengthens the belief that each individual’s opinion is important in a democracy and makes a difference. Eventually, we see Creon realize his mistake – his stubbornness – which teaches him that he should have room for more than one opinion. Also, women at that time were not considered equal citizens, but Antigone’s actions left people to rethink the extent of the equality in Athenian democracy.
During the time period of The Republic, the problems and challenges that each community was faced with were all dealt with in a different way. In the world today, a lot of people care about themselves. For many people, the word justice can mean many different things, but because some only look out for themselves, many of these people do not think about everyone else’s role in the world of society. The struggle for justice is still demonstrated in contemporary culture today. One particular concept from Plato’s The Republic, which relates to contemporary culture is this concept of justice. In the beginning of The Republic, Socrates listeners, Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, ask Socrates whether justice is stronger than injustice, and
...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.
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.
The citizens of Socrates’ Republic are divided into three classes. Those who are deemed fit to rule, the philosopher/rulers, are those who have been chosen to pass through several stages of training and preparation. They are the most fit to rule, because the...
One important contribution of Ancient Greek to the Western Culture is Democracy. The very term itself is of Greek derivation, meaning "People’s Rule". Unlike modern states which call themselves "Democratic". For example, Pericles Funeral Oration gave the greatest contribution to our today’s society. In .(Doc. 2) Pericles stated "Our plan of government favors the many instead of the few". Because of this quote it has contributed the society tremendously due to the fact that the democratic society is a direct democracy. Yet in a way, people have the power to overthrow other powerful representatives; Pericles Funeral Oration, gave us the idea of keeping the civilization as a democracy rather than Oligarchy, Monarchy, and many more. Moreover, Solon an Athenian tyrant discussed his thought about democracy. In .(doc. 4) Solon stated, "I drew up laws for bad and good alike, and set straight justice over each". Solon reveals that he has created laws for the good of others. He wanted every individual having the ...
However, Plato now describes the Democracy that has been implemented by the lower classes with the aim of leading onto the democratic character. With new freedom and liberty, the average individual will arran...
Throughout The Republic, Plato constructs an ideal community in the hopes of ultimately finding a just man. However, because Plato’s tenets focus almost exclusively on the community as a whole rather than the individual, he neglects to find a just man. For example, through Socrates, Plato comments, “our aim in founding the
In the fifth-century BC, Athens emerged as one of the most advanced state or polis in all of Greece. This formation of Athenian ‘democracy’ holds the main principle that citizens should enjoy political equality in order to be free to rule and be ruled in turn. The word ‘democracy’ originates from the Greek words demos (meaning people) and kratos (meaning power) therefore demokratia means “the power of the people.” The famous funeral speech of Pericles states that “Our constitution is called democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people.” However, only citizens (free adult men of Athenian descent) could participate in political matters. Women and slaves held no political rights, although they were essential in order to free up time for the citizens to participate in the matters of the state. The development of Athenian democracy has been fundamental for the basis of modern political thinking, although many in modern society UK would be sceptical to call it a democracy. Plato and Aristotle in The Republic and The Politics respectively were critical of the Athenian democracy, by examining the culture and ideology present the limitations and possible downfalls of a democratic way of life. Within this essay I will outline these limitations and evaluate their validity.
Although the Greeks coined the word “democracy” – the words demos “people” and kratos “rule” conjoined together to mean, literally, “rule by the people” – there is speculation about weather or not certain other peoples, such as the Sumerians and the Indians, managed to engage in democratic methods of governance first. However, the history of democracy is not what is being discussed here; we are focusing on Plato’s criticism of democracy, particularly with regards to the Athenian model and his...
Plato supposed that people exhibit the same features, and perform the same functions that city-states do. Applying the analogy in this way presumes that each of us, like the state, is a complex whole made up of several distinct parts, each of which has its own proper role. But Plato argued that there is evidence of this in our everyday experience. When faced with choices about what to do, we commonly feel the tug of many different impulses drawing us in different directions all at once, and the most natural explanation for this situ...