Ancient Greece is an interesting case study on the roots of the concept of democracy. Ancient Greece was radically different than all other forms of government known at the time.
It represents an interesting microcosm of unique historical factors and it produces some of the greatest and most time-honored thinkers of all time. Two of these philosophers were Plato (427 B.C.E- 347 B.C.E) and Aristotle (384 B.C.E- 322 B.C.E). Both of these theorists were among the greatest political thinkers of their era, each contributing in their own way to the philosophical underpinnings of democracy. While both these thinkers share a common history with democracy and the ideal government, there are many aspects that make each of their opinions distinct and opposite.
The first diverging point for both Aristotle and Plato is that, while both speak of …show more content…
He actually states that there are four different forms of democracy, which seem to be more operative than Aristotle’s previous, general, theoretical definition of democracy. The first form of democracy is defined by when the “poor are no more preeminent than the well off, and neither have authority, but they are both treated as similar” (Aristotle 1291b31). The second form of democracy is when “offices are filled on the basis of [wealth] assessment,” although the property requirement may be small (Aristotle 1291b39). The third form of democracy exists when all citizens can hold office, but the rule of law remains in place. The final form of democracy is realized when “the multitude has authority and not the law” (Aristotle 1292a4). While each of these forms have varying levels of the importance of the rule of law, they are all classified as a democracy because the masses in power are implied to rule according to their own self-interest. If they were to rule for the good of the whole in a purely altruistic way, then Aristotle would define it as a
It represents an interesting microcosm of unique historical factors and it produces some of the greatest and most time-honored thinkers of all time. Two of these philosophers were Plato (427 B.C.E- 347 B.C.E) and Aristotle (384 B.C.E- 322 B.C.E). Both of these theorists were among the greatest political thinkers of their era, each contributing in their own way to the philosophical underpinnings of democracy. While both these thinkers share a common history with democracy and the ideal government, there are many aspects that make each of their opinions distinct and opposite.
The first diverging point for both Aristotle and Plato is that, while both speak of …show more content…
He actually states that there are four different forms of democracy, which seem to be more operative than Aristotle’s previous, general, theoretical definition of democracy. The first form of democracy is defined by when the “poor are no more preeminent than the well off, and neither have authority, but they are both treated as similar” (Aristotle 1291b31). The second form of democracy is when “offices are filled on the basis of [wealth] assessment,” although the property requirement may be small (Aristotle 1291b39). The third form of democracy exists when all citizens can hold office, but the rule of law remains in place. The final form of democracy is realized when “the multitude has authority and not the law” (Aristotle 1292a4). While each of these forms have varying levels of the importance of the rule of law, they are all classified as a democracy because the masses in power are implied to rule according to their own self-interest. If they were to rule for the good of the whole in a purely altruistic way, then Aristotle would define it as a