Desire and Myths are the central themes of this essay, the aim is to compare and contrast what Plato, in The Republic, and Hobbes, in Leviathan, suggest their role is in maintaining and/or subverting political order. Plato views political order as being the hierarchy of reason in the soul and the city, and Hobbes views political order as being the rule of the Sovereign over all the people to maintain peace. In this essay I will argue that Plato and Hobbes desires subvert political order leading to
splitted into three parts. The first part will focus on Plato’s description of citizen’s duties, followed by Aristotle’s view on it. The comparison and highlighting of the differences and similarities between philosophers will be given at the next part. Finally, it will be concluded that Aristotle and Plato have a range of notable differences as well as similarities in their views on citizen’s role in the society. PLATO Plato, in his book called “Republic” gave a broad amount of his thoughts on what it is
Plato’s Republic was written by Plato, based off of Socrates’s conversations. In book I Socrates is confronted by Thrasymachus, who claims that “Justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger” (338c). Socrates refutes Thrasymachus’s claim with the elenchus, doing so by analyzing the ambiguity of his words, questioning Thrasymachus, and exhibiting Thrasymachus’s contradictions. Socrates challenges Thrasymachus’s claim with the elenchus. Thrasymachus’s response was more of a political
Müge Neda Altınoklu Şenay 24 Mart 2016 Dilemma of Justice Equity rather than equality? The ancient concept of justice is fundamentally different from its modern meaning. In modern times, although the institutional meaning of justice means to judge crimes or to resolve conflicts between individuals according to the laws, and although in a less institutional sense, we speak of justice in a sense of social justice that assume the fair distribution of economic wealth, power, rights and duties in