The City of the Sun
In Tommaso Campanella’s document, The City of the Sun, a new social order is introduced amongst the Solarians. Campanella presents his readers with a utopian society that is ordered by rationality and reason. This ideal visionary is a redeemed world, free from injustice and competition in the market structure. Campanella, however, grew up in a society that was exploited and based on irrational principles. Campanella, therefore, reconstructs a society that operates in opposition to the one that he considers to be corrupt and irrational. The document, The City of the Sun, can be used to critically compare the social and political order that exists today. Moreover, Campanella’s work reveals the weaknesses that exist in today’s society and its structure.
One characteristic of this utopian society is its system of meritocracy. In this system, positions of power are determined by one’s ability and excellence; factors such as gender or social class do not result in positions of leadership. For example, leaders and ministers are chosen according to which individuals learn the greatest number of skills and practices them best. Individuals who work extremely hard and acquire knowledge are judged to have the greatest nobility. Moreover, the Solarians have a Prince Prelate called Sun. Sun is elected by knowing a significant amount of information in diverse academic fields. For example, he must know all the mechanical arts and the mathematical, physical, and astrological sciences.
In his dialogue, Campanella stresses the importance of acquiring knowledge in this ideal city. He demonstrates this by describing the position of the Prince Prelate: “Once appointed, his tenure lasts until someone with greater knowledge and greater ability to rule is discovered (Campanella 45)”. Therefore, those who wish to live in great power, must strive for this achievement in the area of academics. Also, ones level of knowledge determines the pursuit of happiness an individual will receive in the city of the Sun. The Solarians are granted the opportunity to alter their status if they desire, and live a life according to their standards.
Campanella directly criticizes the society he grew up in by stating in his dialogue, why the Solarians mock the material world for the way it is structured:
Thus they laugh at us because we consider craftsmen ignoble and assign nobility to those who are ignorant of every craft and live in idleness, keeping a host of dissolute and idle servants about them to the great detriment of the state (Campanella 43).
The lawyer and scholar believed that there should be one universal government ruling the people, this government would be a led by a mix of all three classes. He states how a monarchy would be the ideal rule, but is extremely unrealistic as all humans reason equally. By instating a mixed form of government, people would feel more of a connection with the laws and more of a personal responsibility to follow them if they had a part in creating them. Additionally, all people would be seen as equal before the law as all have equal capabilities and through effort, a common good can be achieved; the only thing differentiating humans is their variety of gifts, besides this, there is no variation. A person’s economic status by no means defines their ability to lead, by all groups participating in government, there are no idle citizens that are not a part of the
Virtue manifests itself differently within Christine de Pizan’s novel The Book of the City of Ladies and Niccolo Machiavelli’s novels The Prince and The Discourses Letter to Vettori. Pizan describes virtue in a moralistic sense, one closer to Aristotle and Plato’s traditional view. On the contrary, Machiavelli has a warped sense of morality and his view of virtue is one without a moral tone; he argues that a prince must adapt himself to whichever situation he finds himself in. Despite their disagreement of the materialization of virtue, they both attribute it to powerful people. Glory is attained through establishing a good political community; it can be marked in preserving the rule, stability, freedom and military power. Although their expressions of virtue differ, their ideas are similar regarding the relationship between virtue and glory; virtue should indefinitely leads to glory.
One of Plato's goals in The Republic, as he defines the Just City, is to illustrate what kind of leader and government could bring about the downfall of his ideal society. To prevent pride and greed in leaders would ensure that they would not compromise the well being of the city to obtain monetary gains or to obtain more power. If this state of affairs becomes firmly rooted in the society, the fall to Tyranny begins. This is the most dangerous state that the City become on i...
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.
The term "civil society" is used to denote a central category of the European political philosophy. It is derived from Aristotle’s term politice koinonia and its Latin version societas civilis, societe civile, meaning civil society or that of private proprietors. The n...
Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince is a book of philosophy that suggests or condemns various methods to ascend as a prince and ways to rule newly acquired principalities. In order to convince the readers, Machiavelli integrates different forms of logical arguments, including syllogism and enthymeme.
William Faulkner is often considered to be the greatest writer in the America history. His fame rests largely on his novels, especially for his closely examination of the southern culture. "That evening sun" is a good example of it.
The Prince, written by Machiavelli is concerned with the issues politics, ruling a state and how a ruler or a leader should be. The key properties of a ruler are represented by Machiavelli in details and the inner and outer effects of the success in ruling are mentioned. One of the most important topics in The Prince is about the relationship of skillfulness (virtù) of the ruler and his good or bad chance (fortune) and their effects on gaining and keeping the power. Virtù, which has the present meaning of manliness, is used by Machiavelli as having skills, strength, intelligence and prudence of a ruler. It is the inner ability to gain the power and not to lose it easily. Fortuna, with the present use, fortune is explained as the word of God and the luck and opportunity that is given to the ruler. A ruler by fortune is dependent
Science fiction encourages people to think concretely about what their ideals involve. In the case of The Dispossessed Le Guin challenges the reader to consider the ramifications of separating from a greater society to create another. The solidity of Le Guin's vision and the complexity of her thinking is no surprise to a seasoned reader of science fiction. In this paper I aim to juxtapose Annares against Urras in order to highlight the necessity of permanent revolution the novel allows us to see in both societies. I believe Le Guin uses the two opposing societies to tell a larger story of permanent revolution through challenging the concepts of possession, class systems, and hierarchical organizations of culture.
In my essay I will discuss the differences between national cinema and Hollywood cinema by using Rio de Janeiro¡¯s famous film City of God. There will be three parts in my following main body, the first part is a simple review of the film City of God, I will try to use the review to show the film structure and some different new points from this, show the how did the ¡®Shocking, frightening, thrilling and funny¡¯ (Nev Pierce) work in the film. The second part is my discussion parts; I will refer some typical Hollywood big name films such as Gangs in New York, Shawshank¡¯s Redemption, and Good Fellas to discuss the main differences between City of God and other national films. The third part is my summary, I will use my knowledge to analyse why there have big different between both kind of films and their advantages.
In his philosophical text, The Republic, Plato argues that justice can only be realized by the moderation of the soul, which he claims reflects as the moderation of the city. He engages in a debate, via the persona of Socrates, with Ademantus and Gaucon on the benefit, or lack thereof, for the man who leads a just life. I shall argue that this analogy reflecting the governing of forces in the soul and in city serves as a sufficient device in proving that justice is beneficial to those who believe in, and practice it. I shall further argue that Plato establishes that the metaphorical bridge between the city and soul analogy and reality is the leader, and that in the city governed by justice the philosopher is king.
Niccoló Machiavelli claims in “The Qualities of the Prince” that a prince must have certain qualities that will allow him to seize and maintain his power as a ruler. Machiavelli asserts that these qualities will guarantee the ruler to be able to govern his subjects effectively. According to him, a prince must study the art of war, must understand generosity and to what extent he must be generous to be effective, must choose to either be loved or feared, and be able to keep his word to his citizens according to the situation. These qualities can still apply in today’s politics, and will be useful for a modern time politician as long as they are used carefully.
It is commonly believed by both lay people and political philosophers alike that an authoritative figure is good and just so long as he or she acts in accordance with various virtues. If the actions of a ruler are tailored toward the common good of the people rather than himself, then that ruler is worthy of occupying the status of authority. By acting in accordance with social and ethical norms, the ruler is deemed worthy of respect and authority. Niccolò Machiavelli challenges our moral intuitions about moral authority in his work, the Prince, by ruthlessly defending the actions made by the state in an effort to preserve power. In particular, all actions made by the state are done in order to preserve its power, and preserving the state’s power preservers its people. In doing so, whatever actions the state exercises are justified with this end goal in mind. Although such reasoning may seem radical, it is practice more readily that most people are inclined to believe. Machiavelli's moral philosophy is deeply embedded in the present day justice administration. Due to this, Machiavelli’s political thought can serve as a reference for illustrating how today’s administrators can benefit from following the examples of other great leaders, such as on matters of global warming.
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.
In order to be an active member of society, it is crucial for one to develop a complete understanding of how one views and acknowledges the problems that plague the world in light of unique ideologies; this can be done through the reflections of one’s worldview in regards to society and individuality. In essence, a worldview is a composition of one’s perception in relation to the world. Even though people are unique individuals shaped by unparalleled influences, one can explain their personal worldview by comparing and contrasting their ideologies with worldviews obtained through analyzation of literature. For instance, Machiavelli’s sense of aggressiveness in relation to control which supports Coveys’ ideology of proactivity seams more reasonable