Plato's Democratic Government in the National Society of Collegiate Scholars
It is interesting to demonstrate components and elements of Plato’s idea of a democratic government. Plato’s democracy is for the people because all are welcome to participate. The people have the power and there is a lack of rulers, all to provide equality for everyone. Today, I am the president of the National Society of Collegiate Scholars (NSCS), an organization here at Temple University. NSCS is an honors organization that recognizes students of high academia. Members commit to scholarship, leadership and service and as a result, are impacting their campus and local communities. In this paper, I will examine the connections between Plato’s democratic government
…show more content…
Plato’s democracy gives power to the people because it demonstrates equality for all and that comes with no rulers, ultimately causing chaos. Plato describes the structure stating, “And it would seem to be a pleasant constitution, which lacks rulers, but not variety and which distributes a sort of equality to both equals and unequals alike” (Plato, 558 c). Democracy is fair for all, however, it is a problem because there are no experts to guide the way. This is where I believe Plato’s democracy is slightly different than NSCS. The E-board provides structure because, without it, the meeting can become chaotic. Now, we still respect the thoughts and opinions of the members because we are all considered equal. Simply, the E-board takes the public opinions and organizes it for the general body meetings. Group meetings, whether it be a government or an organization should have some experts to provide …show more content…
Plato was not a fan of the democratic government. Democracy can create commotion between the people because of the lack of experts in ruling positions. Plato tells the story of a ship that was run by the sailors. The ship could not sail properly because everyone wanted to sail it. Similar to the democratic government. The government could struggle or ultimately fail because everyone wants to add the thoughts and opinions. In order to keep order within a group, there has to be someone to provide structure. NSCS embodies the characteristics of Plato’s democratic government but through experience, we’ve added experts to keep order amongst the group. E-Board consists of experts to provide structure in the general meetings. In conclusion, Plato’s democratic government still governs groups today and NSCS exemplifies this government within its
Socrates and I grew up alongside the Athenian democracy, and experienced her vicissitudes in the past seventy years. We have both heard and experienced cycle of five types of governments that Socrates had mentioned. (Plato, Republic 8.547e) Our democracy was established hundreds years ago under Cleisthenes and turned to tyranny under Isagoras. In our childhood, Athens was a timarchy, and then Pericles ruled Athens with the
Only the male citizens of Ancient Greece could have their voices heard. However, Plato disagreed with this concept of democracy, and designed a new way to govern the people in The Republic. Plato believed that one philosopher should have had absolute power, and he must have been, “…by nature quick to learn and to remember, magnanimous and gracious, the friend and kinsman of truth, justice, courage, temperance…” or he would have been unfit to rule. In Plato’s cave allegory, the ordinary people were represented in the prisoners who were chained in the cave, and the philosopher in the prisoner who was pushed out of the cave and saw the world outside. This single prisoner would then know the truth of reality, while the others maintained the belief that reality only consisted of the cave. From this allegory, it was understood that philosophers had a responsibility to lead the average citizens as only they could comprehend reality as it is. However, in order for the philosopher to guide the people, he would have had to take power from the people. The people would not participate in political matters and education would have been regulated. In Plato’s ideal society, the ordinary people had absolutely no power in their lives or their government. This model civilization was never accepted, and democracy continued in Ancient
During the age of Pericles, the ideal form of government was believed to be a government formed by all of the citizens regardless of wealth or social standing. This was known as democracy, literally meaning “ government of the people” [Document 3.] This government favored the many instead of the few. Athens was a direct democracy, meaning every citizen participated in debates. Western civilization used this philosophy of government by many, and created an indirect democracy where citizens elect officials to make and enforce laws.
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 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.
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.
Plato views the democratic state as a city “full of freedom and freedom of speech[,]” where its citizens “have the license to do [whatever they] want” and the right to self-determine. Plato however, sees this insatiable desire for freedom at the expense of neglecting everything else as the downfall of democracy. To clarify, a society that is staunchly protective of its equality and freedom will be particularly sensitive towards any oppositions that seem to limit them, to the point where it actively attempts to “avoid [obeying the law and] having any master at all.” Thus, “unless the rulers are very pliable and provide plenty of that freedom, they are punished by the city and accused of being oligarchs.” Since those in power fear the accusations of those being ruled, they become docile and submissive. On the other hand, those who are ruled are encouraged by their rulers’ meekness and, convinced of their inherent right to freedom, begin to behave as their own rulers. Thus, this blind chase for unconditional freedom will propagate disorder across the society, and eventually cause the people to see “anarchy [as] freedom, extravagance [as] magnificence, and shamelessness [as]
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...
Edinburgh : Edinburgh University Press, 2007. Douglas L. Cairns questions whether or not Plato’s Republic seeks to explain what is good for individual humans, or rather, on some quasi-moral good. Moreover, Cairns discusses the very Form of the Good, although he admits this pursuit is beyond recent studies in the field.
The issues with modern government are explained in Friedman’s chapters that cover the inefficiency in American democracy. This regression was theorized in Plato's Republic. According to Plato, democracy is an ineffective form of government that
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
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.
He thought that the election of the people was unfair justice. Plato had some of the same beliefs. He believed that government should only have rulers who had the intelligence and education appropriate for the matter. His thoughts were that a job should be done only by those who are best suited for it. To him, aristocracy was a perfect form of government.
The concept of written laws and their place in government is one of the key points of discussion in the Platonic dialog the Statesman. In this philosophical work, a dialog on the nature of the statesmanship is discussed in order to determine what it is that defines the true statesman from all of those who may lay claim to this title. This dialog employs different methods of dialectic as Plato begins to depart from the Socratic method of argumentation. In this dialog Socrates is replaced as the leader of the discussion by the stranger who engages the young Socrates in a discussion about the statesman. Among the different argumentative methods that are used by Plato in this dialog division and myth play a central role in the development of the arguments put forth by the stranger as he leads the young Socrates along the dialectic path toward the nature of the statesman. The statesman is compared to a shepherd or caretaker of the human “flock.” The conclusion that comes from division says that the statesman is one who: Issues commands (with a science) of his own intellect over the human race. This is the first conclusion that the dialog arrives at via the method of division. The dialog, however, does not end here as the stranger suggests that their definition is still wanting of clarity because there are still some (physicians, farmers, merchants, etc…) who would lay claim to the title of shepherds of humanity. For this reason a new approach to the argument must be undertaken: “then we must begin by a new starting-point and travel by a different road” (Statesman 268 D.)
... 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.