Rules and regulations are key to a sustainable government. All philosophers have either opposing or similar views/beliefs about how a government should be ruled. Many suggest that a ruler is not necessary for a successful state and many suggest that a ruler is crucial. Three important philosophers, Aristotle, Mozi, and Jacques Ranciere, discuss their views on rule and how good rule is best established and preserved. First, Aristotle, a Greek philosopher, suggests that everyone needs to be ruled and also suggests that giving full sovereignty to a governing body might make room for abuse of power and suggests that a “polity” (democracy), which is least susceptible to corruption. Aristotle says the city-state requires an efficient cause, its …show more content…
One of the ten Mohist doctrine states that the humane (ren) should oppose an extravagant lifestyle and other luxuries enjoyed by rulers and high officials, because these luxuries could otherwise be used for feeding and clothing the common people. It is really important for Mohists that rulers are not corrupt or selfish, but instead giving. In Universal Love Mozi says “I have heard that the truly enlightened ruler thinks of his subjects first and of himself last. Only such a one can be considered a truly enlightened ruler” (translated by Burton Waston, 4). Mohists believe that the root of chaos is the absence of a political leader. A political leader is a ruler who installs a wise, virtuous sovereign and brings order to society. How is a power abusing, self-serving ruler prevented? Mohists believe that the sovereign rules by the mandate of Heaven, they believe the Heaven will punish any corrupt ruler by causing the overthrow of the ruler. Also, Mohists believe that a ruler does not decide what is just or unjust (similar to Aristotle’s views), but instead, teach and enforce them. Mohists believe in the ideal of a harmonious, peaceful social order and condemn military aggression and warlike rulers. However, they believe in a strong defense force as being crucial to state survival. . Mohists, give great importance to certain social relationships. An admirable relationship; ruler-subject, father-son, or elder-younger brother bond is just one in which both parties exercise the relevant virtues. Ultimately Mohist suggest that that the purpose of government is to achieve a stable social, economic, and political order. In the views of Mozi, best rule is established through peace and harmony and a ruler who truly cares about his
The dilemma starts off with the dispute between who assert that the policial or active life is the most choice-worthy and those asserting that the philosophic way of life is the best. Aristotle continues to explain three different opinions of what makes a happy course for a government. Firstly, some people ruling neighboring cities”
Lao-Tzu's political philosophy falls into more of an individualistic and carefree branch of politics, in which the way of governing is by not forcing issues. He believes that the ruler should not act powerful, and because of this, he will be respected. Lao-Tzu also believes that the best leader is one that is loved, not feared. Instead of holding power and forcing rules, Lao-Tzu wishes to teach simplicity, patience, and compassions. He views the latter as "the greatest treasures" and if one has the three qualities, one will be a better person.
Let us begin briefly by rehearsing Aristotle’s account of the growth and origin of the city-state. In the first place, Aristotle suggests, couples come to be because of the natural impulse for reproduction; namely, a male and a female pair form so that their race may continue to exist, for without this union, which arises not from deliberate reason but from the inherent desire for preservation, the continuing ...
In summation this paper discussed the three correct types of regimes according to Aristotle; furthermore it examined the deviations of these regimes. This was done by firstly examining a regime led by royalty, secondly by observing the characteristics of an aristocratic regime and thirdly by discussing a regime ran by constitutional government. Finally defining the three correct types of regimes the deviations of these regimes: tyrannical, oligarchic and democratic were examined.
Throughout history, it can be seen time and time again that rulers have different ways of rule. As expected, rulers may look over to different nations to see what is effective to prevent failures or encourage successes. With different forms of rule comes different thinkers and their take on the current methods of ruling which can be seen in Marx and Engels’ The Communist Manifesto, Machiavelli’s The Prince, and Locke’s Second Treatise on Government. Coming from different periods, it is expected that their perspectives are different. Assessing these works will ease the process of observing the differences between these thinkers and their thoughts on rulers who are above the law or have no morality and their notions of private property in society
Is the purpose of government today, similar to that of philosophers of the past, or has there been a shift in political thought? This essay will argue that according to Machiavelli’s The Prince, the purpose of government is to ensure the stability of the state as well as the preservation of the established ruler’s control, and that the best form of government should take the form of an oligarchy. In contrast, in his book, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes argues that the purpose of government should be to preserve the peace and security of men and, that the best form of government would be an absolute monarchy which would sanction such conditions. This essay will utilize themes of glory, material advantage, peace and stability to illustrate
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.
Private Property and the Rule of the Middle Class in Aristotle’s Politics. In his discussions of constitutions and cities in politics, Aristotle makes it very clear that his top priority is to provide people with the opportunity to pursue and achieve the good life. An integral part of this is the stability of the constitution. Although Aristotle explicitly states that a kingship is the best system of rule for any given generation, its lack of stability from one generation to the next disqualifies it from being the best in reality.
...kingship, aristocracy and polity are all good forms of ruling because each serves the interest of the people or community. Overall, Aristotle believes that we must not question how many rule, but instead ask how they are capable of ruling or do they rule in a manner that best serves the community. Aristotle’s Politics gives a simpler critique of democracy than Plato’s Republic, however it is convincing in the sense that in order to rule for the good of the community or the good life (Bios) one should only question that capability of those ruling rather than ask the quantity.
Aristotle’s emphasis is on the city-state, or the political world as a natural occurrence. He says “every city-state exists by nature, since the first communities do.” (Aristotle 3). Aristotle continually reiterates the notion that the creation of a community comes from necessity; individuals aim at the highest good of all, happiness, through their own rationality, and the only way to achieve happiness is through the creation of the city-state. Aristotle follows the creation of a household and a village to the creation of the city-state in which citizens are able to come together to aim at the “good which has the most authority of all,” (Aristotle 1) happiness. In turn, this necessity for the formation of a city state comes from the idea of man as a rational being. “It is also clear why a human being is more of a political animal than a bee or any other gregarious animal… no animal has speech except for a human being.” (Aristotle 4). For Aristotle, human beings are political animals because of their ability to speak, their ability to communicate pleasures and desires, and their ability to reason. Aristotle’s state com...
Plato and Aristotle’s philosophies on the best governments are complex though it is possible to separate their opinions and lay out their cities so that it is understandable through topics that they both touch on greatly. Aristotle and Plato considered the different types of government that existed in their time periods and dissected them to understand which ones were the best. From their understanding, they separately decided on the best...
According to Aristotle, "The rule of law is better than that of any individual”, suggesting every member of society, even a ruler, must abide by and follow the law. The rule of law is linked to the principle of justice, meaning that everyone within a society (including both private citizens and government officials) are subject to the law, and that those laws are administered fairly and justly. The intention of the rule of law is to protect against arbitrary governance. It is the basic underpinning of a free society.
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.
According to Aristotle, "The rule of law is better than that of any individual”, suggesting every member of society, even a ruler, must abide by and follow the law. The rule of law is linked to the principle of justice, meaning that everyone within a society (including both private citizens and government officials) are subject to the law, and that those laws are administered fairly and justly. The intention of the rule of law is to protect against arbitrary governance. It is the basic underpinning of a free society.
Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli have spent their lives in assertion of which form of government is good and who should be ruler, what type of ...