Plato Vs Aristotle Analysis

Superior Essays
Machiavelli criticizing Plato and Aristotle

Machiavelli is a realist and is more concerned with how things should be in reality, and his clarifications are based on a real world. Plato is an idealist and he is just thinking of how the ideal world is, they leave in an imaginary world, while Aristotle is always talking about existing states (try to peruse virtue). Machiavelli wants everything to be real and exist in the real world, while Plato and Aristotle have assumes in their imaginary worlds. The two criticisms of Machiavelli to Plato and Aristotle are the idea of the good and imaginary world (Plato), and virtue (Plato and Aristotle). “It appears to me more appropriate to follow up the real truth of a matter than imagination of it”. Machiavelli
…show more content…
For the first criticism I think that Machiavelli was right in criticizing Plato. As, Plato is just giving us assumptions without any proofs that what he is saying exists. Plato is building he our imaginary states with his assumptions. How we as people are required to believe Plato and what he is saying and there are no proofs for what he is saying. As the story of the cave provided for Plato, all what he is saying in the story for the cave is trying to convince us that the story is an example of the real world and how to achieve the idea of the good. However, the story might not by convincing to some of the people and they wont believe in all what he is saying. Plato wants us to trust him and trust what he is saying; however, he doesn’t provide us with proof to believe in what he says so it is hard to trust him. For the second criticism, which is about virtue. In my opinion I don’t think that Machiavelli was right in his criticism to Plato and Aristotle. As there must be justice and virtue in our lives. Machiavelli thinks that since there are some bad people in this world, so we all have to be bad. This is wrong, as we as people are good in our nature, we don’t have to be bad just because there are bad people in this world. If want Machiavelli is right and we all became bad people, a lot of people will be unjust in this world and we …show more content…
We need to know, as we want to live in a better place and have a better world. Humans are always seeking for the better; humans are not satisfied with what they have. So we always want to change our world for a better place. It is the purpose for living to change the world for a better place, and that’s why we are learning and being educated to have tools to help us in the mission we have to do for the world we live in. It matters to how one ought to live. Since we live in a bad place full of evilness, so we need to change it to a better and good place to be able to live in it. I think that the tools given to us by education to help us change the world and know how one ought to live are moral virtuous and justice. We need have them in our lives in order to have the world we live in as a good place and satisfied with

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Plato’s Position on Justice in Comparison to Dante and Machiavelli Plato asserts his position on justice throughout “The Republic.” His views constitute a model for how society should behave based on the values presented by Socrates in the dialogue. From Plato’s teachings we can infer that to establish justice, we must establish several principles in our lives including proper education, moderation, and courage. Although Plato describes how to live a just life through the metaphorical creation of a city, as opposed to focusing on the individual or going about the concept in a more abstract manner, he also asserts that justice is the quality of the soul, and a soul can only be pure if temptations are ignored. Socrates concludes that education and obedience are parallels.…

    • 1281 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Machiavelli and Socrates Would Not Support the Same Prince While both Socrates and Niccolo Machiavelli grew up in times of political turmoil and economic instability, Socrates would not be supportive of Machiavelli’s concept of a good prince. Their concepts of an effective ruler are completely different – the extent of their similarities are their experiences with political fragmentation and war. Both aim to establish a long-lasting government, but Machiavelli believes a ruthless ruler without regard to morality is needed, while Socrates would suggest a virtuous ruler is vital to establishing a stable government. In The Prince And the Discourses, Machiavelli articulates what makes a good ruler and provides guidelines for how they should rule.…

    • 1534 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Niccolò Machiavelli and Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca went through different experiences that led them to have their own perspectives in human nature and create their ideals for good governance. The simple fact that Cabeza de Vaca was unfortunate enough to have a hard time throughout the expedition made him more open minded about human nature, while Machiavelli had a set idea of what human nature was and how it ties to good governance. Machiavelli's view on human nature is the same as what is a good governance a good leader and a good human being is someone who knows how to be respected and feared without being hated and how that leads to have the people the Prince governs happy and on his side. Cabeza de Vaca has a more down to earth view on human nature but that differs…

    • 2016 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Therefore, this detail improves the reader’s understanding of Plato’s argument by revealing that there is an extra layer to his words, and without this layer, it is impossible to fully comprehend his and Socrates’s message within the…

    • 1112 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Alisha Saxena Philosopher, Plato, in his published work, Allegory of the Cave, describes a dialogue with Glaucon about the importance of truth and human nature. This in depth discussion about reality is expanded on throughout Plato’s book, The Republic. Plato uses The Republic in order to convey how morality and virtue is of utmost importance. Plato’s purpose of Allegory of the Cave is to communicate that our perceptions of the truth are limited, and how the truth might not always be what is predicted or imagined. He further supports this purpose by using extended metaphors, intense, connotative diction, and an eloquent, questioning tone.…

    • 1108 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Plato and Machiavelli looked into what is best for people and a government structure that can bring to a better society, happiness, and wealth for everyone. Both Plato and Machiavelli focused on a civil society that would work to secure the rule of law and protecting individual’s freedoms, as well as stability as a whole. They agreed that a government or a ruler would have to work for conditions that will bring prosperity of his citizens and a pleasing and satisfactory way of living. These two philosophers were too realistic in emphasizing a political structure of how government should perform to keep its citizens satisfied overall. Plato, for instance, was expecting an ideal government or a “just’’ society that would promote justice for…

    • 1521 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Two are the types of lies around which he builds his argument: true falsehoods and spoken lies. Telling true falsehoods is seen as a pernicious and self-destructive action misleading the soul into ignorance, a condition of the individual incapable of appreciating the true nature of life and existence. On the other hand, telling spoken lies is an ennobling action with not direct repercussions in the soul, for the reason that spoken lies are not real lies, but mere imitations of the Idea lie. Contrary to the negative effect that true falsehoods have over the soul, spoken lies can help an individual to arrive to the knowledge of the truth. By contrasting these two concepts of lie, Plato establishes a moral basement to support a mechanism of control over his republic.…

    • 1041 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Machiavelli dives into politics with a very aggressive and pure mindset suggesting kings and princes to only worry about the end result without caring for the means of achieving it. Informing the readers that they should do anything it takes to get into and stay in power, the ends justify the means ideal. Machiavelli states that “Every one sees what you appear to be, few really know what you are, and those few dare not oppose themselves to the opinion of the many, who have the majesty of the state to defend them; and in the actions of all men, and especially of princes, which it is not prudent to challenge, one judges by the result.” essentially saying even if the means are unjust the people only see and judge you by the results. However, the “few” mentioned by him will eventually lead to a breach in society.…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Much of what is presented in the dialogue has arisen multiple debates among philosophers, psychologists, artists and even the average person. There are a few instances where I agreed with Plato’s beliefs as well as the opposite. One of the clearest concepts of his work is that the rulers of society must have no ulterior motive than to truly help their people and such types of power should not be associated with individual dominance and wealth. Another idea associated with this is that leaders should have true understanding. Though I do not believe all leaders must be philosophers that have attained enlightenment, they must display moral integrity to some extent.…

    • 1929 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Although Machiavelli and Socrates both lived during times of uncertainty, political fragmentation and violence, their philosophies about how the state should conduct itself are in direct contrast with one another. Machiavelli’s the Prince is founded on the principal that if a ruler wishes to maintain power, he should embody the ideology of pragmatism, while Socrates believes the state should follow him in his commitment to moral purity and justice. The inherent dissonance between these philosophies would lead Socrates to be unsupportive of Machiavelli’s concept of a prince, and consequently the political system Machiavelli would recommend he install, despite his apparent change in rhetoric from the Apology to the Crito. Throughout Plato’s interpretation…

    • 1488 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To begin, Aristotle defines and contrasts both practical and theoretical wisdom. Practical wisdom is defined by Aristotle as being, “a truthful rational characteristic of acting in matters involving what is good for man” (Aristotle Ethics, pg. 154). In other words, practical wisdom is concerned with deciding what a good course of action for man is. On the other hand about theoretical wisdom, Aristotle writes, “a wise man must not only know what follows from fundamental principles, but he must also have true knowledge of the fundamental principles themselves. Accordingly, theoretical wisdom must comprise both intelligence and scientific knowledge”(Aristotle Ethics, pg. 156).…

    • 1023 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.” Machiavelli uses this analogy as an attempt to teach the masses how to embrace their human significance. Machiavelli wrote The Prince at a time where there was political unrest and confusion in Italy, which is why it can be interpreted in many different ways, such as a political satire or epilogue of his political views; however, while the content may be confusing the true meaning of The Prince is to be understood as a satire. Machiavelli is continuously sarcastic through out the course of the novel about the government standings and the changing world.…

    • 1412 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    These examples include Machiavelli’s discussion of murder, robbery, and ingratitude (Jackson p.45). For example, Machiavelli suggests that the measures men like King David, ancestor of Jesus, must employ at the beginning of their reign, in order to establish their states, are “most cruel and inimical, not only to every Christian manner of living but to every human manner of living as well (Strauss p.49) .” Strauss does not make an exhaustive critic of Machiavelli’s work, but rather a comprehensive one. Strauss considered Machiavelli to be an extraordinary political philosopher, but he argued that Machiavelli’s work must be considered within the context of the Renaissance (Jackson p.32). Strauss argues that Machiavelli was a true enemy of true faith, calling him immoral and irreligious (Jackson p.41).…

    • 2341 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Plato and Machiavelli disagree about the circumstances which justify a lie. Plato believes that political leaders must lie if that is necessary to pursue justice and thereby lead the city well. Machiavelli also believes that lying is a method of establishing political order but, unlike Plato, believes that lying should be used as a method to maintain power for power’s sake – not for some greater purpose. Although in most circumstances Machiavelli and Plato disagree, occasionally, they agree. For example, they may agree to lie to the philosopher kings about the marriage lottery system in certain cases.…

    • 2022 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In many political philosopher’s eyes, there is a special relationship between the ideas of moral goodness and legitimate authority. Some of these political philosophers believed that the use of political power was only morally correct if it was exercised under a ruler who had virtuous morals. These rulers who had virtuous morals were then told that in order to be successful, they needed to make decisions in accordance with the standards of ethical goodness. This moralistic view of authority is what Machiavelli criticizes in his work “The Prince.” In Machiavelli’s book, “The Prince,” the readers are introduced to political values that do not necessarily give full recognition to morality or religion.…

    • 933 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays