NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... e state will posses prudence, moderation, and justice, and above all to rule and be ruled. His belief contradicts Plato theory of one controlling class, governing the political matters and decisions that affect the state. The Theory of Democracy that Aristotle states is that democracy is a perversion form of government of polity (Class Notes). He clearly states, The people at large should be sovereign rather than the few best. Plato on the other hand, would not permit citizens to engage in public participation concerning governmental issues, as Aristotle would have enjoyed.
Plato also felt that public judgments of disapproval and approval were based on emotional belief, instead of factual knowledge. He believes that if a revolution occurred it would happen within the corridors of the palace, hence palace revolution. This type of revolution happens when there is a transmission of power from one holder of power to another. Aristotle perceives such an event occurring between the wealthy and less fortunate in society. He feels to prevent such actions, one must participate in them.
Plato thinks that in a utopia a disgruntled group of Guardians will emerge and disengage themselves from the ruling law of the state. He feels that an oligarchy two things may initiate a possible revolution: the first one is the ruler and their offspring would grow to be weak, sympathetic, and second is that the number of poor individuals will grow larger and there for be taken advantage of by the ruling class. Aristotle states that to know the factors that caused the revolution, which destroys the constitution, is to also know the principal of effect, which in turn ensure its preservation. Aristotle and Plato also have contrasting views on ethics, psychology and metaphysics. In regards to ethics, Aristotle believes that virtue is necessary for happiness, while Plato says virtue is enough for happiness. The psychological difference between the two is that Plato feels the body is a prison for the soul; body and soul are two different entities, capable of maintaining independence from one another.
As for Aristotle, he claims that the body and soul are two different things, one consisting of matter the other form. He sees everything in the universe being composed of matter and form, so its not surprising that he perceives human being are too. To him form is simply the way matter is arranged. For example, a cat is composed in a feline way; that is what makes a cat.
Human being for that matter, have a unique method of structure, too; that is their form. In fact, Aristotle strongly feels that nothing in existence can be without form and matter. If you eliminate its structure and form, you have nothing left. Therefore, for Aristotle, the concept of soul without body or body without soul is incoherent. In regards to form, Plato expressed how things should be through utilizing vague language and poetry. In respect to friendship, I firmly believe that Aristotle's views on friendship holds value in todays society.
First, we will touch on the various points that Aristotle makes regarding friendship, then expand on his main principle in connection to modern time, if possible. Aristotle distinguishes between three types of friendship: friendships of utility, friendships of pleasure and friendships of virtue. The idea behind friendship of utility is that it is founded on the idea of usefulness. The interaction among friends is only valued if there is usefulness between the two individuals. An example of this would be any automobile dealer and car buyer. Factoring in that they know each other, both need what the other can provide.
The bond that unites the two people is based on usefulness. As long as they each can provide what the other needs, it satisfies the friendship. The second concept would be friendship of pleasure, which is the amount of pleasure generated between the participants. An example of this would be two people engaging in a social event, such as an outdoor festival. Each of the participants enjoys the others company. They are friends because of the pleasure they bring to themselves.
The last kind of friendship is the friendship of virtue. This friendship is special and unique, such that it can only be between two people. Rather than utility and pleasure, where it can establish a group of people, this type of friendship is connected solely between two people. This type of friendship is also unique because it can only hold any true value if both individuals are of the same virtue. People in general might regard these definitions of friend objective.
Some believe that doing something for someone is solely based on the act of self fulfillment. Aristotle, I believe is not incorrect in stating that the idea in friendship in utility and pleasure is for our own sake, and the concept behind friendship of virtue is for the sake of the friend. These three categories are arranged in a certain format that there are influenced by the next level. These bonds of friendship can arise from various forms of potential fraternal groupings. Present day possibilities can include: various college organizations, union members, national communities and any other form of group that people find a common denominator. For Aristotle Aristotle is more philosophically inclined than Plato is; he tends to get rid of ideas that are irrelevant, and he believes that the concept of forms existing separate from matter is superfluous.
He dives right into the heart of the matter. You can see Aristotle as someone who believes the world in which he occupies very satisfying just the way it is. His focus is always connected with things that are consistent with ideal experience, without introducing unnecessary notions of concepts that cannot be proven. Plato's vague, poetic language in metaphysics and physics did not stimulate inspiration; it made him uncomfortable. Both Plato and Aristotle were two men who envisioned methods on ways to improve their existing society.
Plato, the political philosopher, was in pursuit of philosophical truth. Aristotle was more concerned with citizenship and institutional politics. They both had developed ideas and concepts to improve society as a whole. Aristotle and Plato have had a tremendous impact on political scientists of today. In Aristotle case, he was responsible for developing various democratic ideas.
Even in modern democracies like our own, Aristotle's ideas hold true. When we vote in the election of the ruler of our country we, theoretically, are voting for the single most excellent citizen of our nation. That is, we are voting for that citizen who can do the best job of working toward our common interest. The citizen of a state who has the greatest ability to work towards the salvation of the constitution has a great gift that can benefit all citizens. It only makes sense to allow that particular individual to lead the rest of the citizens in working towards the common interests of the state. In conclusion, these men were great thinkers.
Their opinions on society and its function were quite different, but they both had the same concern, to build a better way of life for their societies they in lived in and for the societies that would come to be in the future.
Free research essays on topics related to: aristotle, friendship, body and soul, plato, aristotle states
Research essay sample on Body And Soul Aristotle States
