Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato's thoughts on morality and justice
Justice according to plato
Plato's concept of Justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Plato's thoughts on morality and justice
Wisdom, courage, moderation and justice are four essential virtues the ideal state must be built upon, as explained by Socrates in Plato’s Republic. Throughout the eight books of Socratic dialogue the ideal state and ideas of justice are debated, on both individual and state levels. The guidelines for a perfect state and how it will come about are thoroughly described. Socrates covers every aspect of political life and how it should work stating that “until power and philosophy entirely coincide… cities will have no rest form evils” . In Plato’s Republic Socrates emphasizes the superiority of the philosopher and their abilities to rule as kings above others. He believes that they are best suited to rule as a result of their pure souls and lust for knowledge, the desire for truth over opinions and things that are tangible. The philosopher is best able to fulfill the four essential virtues of the state and thus must be the king. He evokes the idea of a cave, a parallel to the effects of education on the soul and a metaphor for human perceptions, to describe how humans will act and show distinctions between groups of people. This conception of the ideal state has been heavily criticized by his successors, but when applied according to how Plato perceived the state and human capacity, in theory the idea of the philosopher-king is extremely convincing. According to Socrates the soul is made up of three parts, and each person is governed primarily by a different one. Which aspect of the soul occupies a person affects their access to the four virtues deemed ultimate. The appetitive part of the soul is at the bottom of the divided line; it controls the unnecessary desires and is undesirable to be governed by. The spirited element of the s...
... middle of paper ...
...n them it is their ability to suppress the negative parts of the soul that measures superiority. The producing class is unable to move past the appetitive part of the soul making them too interested fulfilling personal wants to rule in the interest of the good. The auxleres are stuck in the spirited part, able to see the truth outside of the cave but unwilling to leave the comfortable environment of the cave. They crave easy honor and are not suited to rule a just city as honor so often gets in the way. The guardians will be trained to be philosopher kings; they are able to suppress the desires of the lower parts of the soul to achieve rationality and reason. Philosophers have a natural lust towards truth and knowledge and are unchanged by personal desires. Since rationality is equated with justice philosophers are the obvious choice to preside over the just state.
There is a diverse amount of themes that could be compared in Republic by Plato and Leviathan by Hobbes. Through these books the two authors each construct a system in which their ideal state can thrive. Both writers agree that government is necessary for the good of the people, however what that government entails drastically differs. Their images of a utopian society are largely based on their perception of human beings. Seeing as how their views on human nature are quite opposite from the other’s, it is understandable that their political theories have many dissimilarities. Broadly speaking, the main reason for their contrasting states is that Plato believes humans are inherently good, whereas Hobbes holds a considerably more negative stance
As with all other topics discussed in “The Republic of Plato,” the section in which he discusses the myths of the metals or the “noble lie” is layered with questioning and potential symbolism, possible contradiction, and a significant measure of allusion. In Chapter X of “The Republic,” Plato presents “The Selection of Rulers: The
According to Plato, the soul is composed of three parts: Reason (logical), Emotion (spiritual), and Appetite (appetitive); these three parts of the soul also resemble a Just society. Emotion and appetite are considered the less worthy with reason being the most significant because its’ passion isn’t lustful, rather it seeks knowledge and education. Plato stresses that Justice is a very important trait in the soul of an individual because a Just person is a person ruled by reason and not easily deceived by his or her emotions and appetites. A soul that is primarily ordered and governed by reason, has the ability to control its’ emotions and appetites thus being a Just and healthy soul. The logical part of the soul is what makes a Philosopher King possible.
In the book Republic, Plato is on a quest to define Justice as he builds the ideal city. His city is ruled by philosopher kings, the true rulers. Philosophers, in Plato’s opinion, are best fit to rule and judge because of their love of knowledge and wisdom. When arguing philosophers have the experiences of all regimes Plato says, “The philosopher to have tasted the kind of pleasure that comes from the sight of things as they truly are. ‘so far as experiences goes, then,’ I said, ‘he is the one who is in the best position to judge” (325). Plato believes, that because philosophers have all the parts of the soul that other types of rulers contain, plus the ability to be able to see the world for what is, they then have
“One of the best known and most influential philosophers of all time, Plato has been admired for thousands of years as a teacher, writer, and student. His works, thoughts, and theories have remained influential for more than 2000 years” (“Plato”). One of these great works by Plato that still remain an essential part of western philosophy today is, The Republic. Ten books are compiled to altogether make the dialog known as The Republic. The Republic consists of many major ideas and it becomes a dubious task to list and remember them all. Just alone in the first five books of the dialogue, many ideas begin to emerge and take shape. Three major ideas of The Republic; Books 1-5 by Plato, are: the question of what causes the inclination of a group,
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.
Traditionally justice was regarded as one of the cardinal virtues; to avoid injustices and to deal equitable with both equals and inferiors was seen as what was expected of the good man, but it was not clear how the benefits of justice were to be reaped. Socrates wants to persuade from his audience to adopt a way of estimating the benefits of this virtue. From his perspective, it is the quality of the mind, the psyche organization which enables a person to act virtuously. It is this opposition between the two types of assessment of virtue that is the major theme explored in Socrates’ examination of the various positions towards justice. Thus the role of Book I is to turn the minds from the customary evaluation of justice towards this new vision. Through the discourse between Cephalus, Polemarchus and Thrasymachus, Socaretes’ thoughts and actions towards justice are exemplified. Though their views are different and even opposed, the way all three discourse about justice and power reveal that they assume the relation between the two to be separate. They find it impossible to understand the idea that being just is an exercise of power and that true human power must include the ability to act justly. And that is exactly what Socrates seeks to refute.
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.
We have chosen to write our essay on the ideas and reasoning (being vs. becoming) of Plato. (Essay #1) Virtue consists in the harmony of the human soul with the universe of ideas, which assure order, intelligence, and the pattern to a world in constant flux. The soul, on this view, has three parts, which correspond to three different kinds of interest, three kinds of virtues, and three kinds of personalities, depending on which part of the soul is dominant. This being the three kinds of social classes that should be based on the three personalities, interests, and virtues—shown below in a chart. This relates to the same ideas we discussed in class, the pyramid, based upon controlling self-esteem and upon those two controlling appetite. This leads us into the being vs. becoming state.
The role of virtue in Plato’s Republic is to give structure to the ideal State. This is because it is argued that, man, left to his own convictions and outwardly just will give into the temptation to be unjust when it benefits him and when he has certainty he will not be caught. In Book IV Plato, through Socrates as a character discusses the virtues that make up this ideal State, they are wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice. Wisdom, courage, and temperance are correlated one to one to the three classes that make up the State. Wisdom is an attribute of the Guardian class, Courage is an attribute assigned to the Warrior class, and Temperance to the Artisan class.
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.
When challenged on his beliefs on ideal rule, Socrates presents a system that would assure the best candidates would hold power. Guardians should include qualified men and women, that will be known as “philosopher kings” and “philosopher queens.” Their children along with members
In Plato’s Republic, the main argument is dedicated to answering Glaucon and Adeimantus, who question the reason for just behavior. They argue it is against one’s self-interest to be just, but Plato believes the behavior is in fact in one’s self-interest because justice is inherently good. Plato tries to prove this through his depiction of an ideal city, which he builds from the ground up, and ultimately concludes that justice requires the philosopher to perform the task of ruling. Since the overall argument is that justice pays, it follows that it would be in the philosopher’s self-interest to rule – however, Plato also states that whenever people with political power believe they benefit from ruling, a good government is impossible. Thus, those who rule regard the task of ruling as not in their self-interest, but something intrinsically evil. This is where Plato’s argument that justice is in one’s self-interest is disturbed. This paper will discuss the idea that justice is not in one’s self-interest, and thus does not pay.
The objective of this essay is to examine to what degree Plato’s argument that philosophers should be the rulers of the Republic is well-founded and logical. Plato asserts that philosophers should become kings, or vice versa, as they retain a higher level of knowledge that most people do not. According to him, this is what is required to rule the Republic successfully. In this essay, I will explain why Plato’s idea for the "philosopher king" rule is not persuasive or realistic. But also that certain aspects of his ideal kind of ruler do appear in the modern state. For my dispute, I will dissect Plato’s argument for the philosopher king and its limitations. Furthermore, I will consider what aspects of a philosopher king's rule are logical in
In Republic, Plato applies his account on the structure of training human cognition to understand justice and further process the personal development through discussion; to counsel towards improved political circumstances. He establishes the ideology that intellectual pursuits are staged based on age and knowledge, therefore clarifying, he describes how justice can only be obtained by the individuals who have conceived and developed their ability to the fullest. According to Plato, the ultimate goal in all of education is the form of good, which particularly means perfect goodness in all forms; thus good is beyond being. As humans we are subjected to learn from concrete existence and physical evidence but the values of abstract concepts are