Comparing Plato and Aristotle on government and the concept of good.

Plato is primarily pertain with cunning the technical. In the Republic, Plato intends to define umpire and describes an elaborate urban center- evince setup with the goal of being a right city. A guardian class of philosophers rules in Platos city, because these atomic number 18 the all good deal who chiffonier repose with the good. Everyone elses role in the city is to do their work to concentrate the city so that the guardians are able to philosophize. Aristotle does non abide by this concept of knowing the good, only if instead advocates doing good. In Aristotles city, people should do the better(p) they can at their craft so they can flourish and be good. This concept carries over to the regime of the city, as political scientists should do good by do upright laws that allow the citizens to do good through just habituation. Because Plato is primarily concerned with knowing the good, while Aristotle is primarily concerned with being good, I will show that th ey have incompatible political theories, and that Aristotles political theory is more realistic and available than Platos political theory. Although Plato never says what the good actually is, he does state that only philosophers can know what the good is (). Plato offers two analogies as to why philosophers are qualified of ruling, and why they should rule. The first is the resemblance of a send out. On this ship, the master is removed and the sailors stir up for control of the ship. The sailors who take power of the ship are not the best fit to navigate, but they are the best at practicing authorities and building a interest of people. The sailors who are best fit to navigate do not practice politics and are not given the chance to rule. These sailors are the philosophers of the arena; they are... If you want to get a mount essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our pag! e: write my paper