Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
The Republic of Plato and The Prince by Machiavelli is among the greatest works in Political theory in studying political ideals such as democracy, power, justice, and understating political practices and institutions. Politics form the basis of our day-to-day life, where politicians chase their view of self-worth and urge to show their leadership skills. In analyzing political theory, two great thinkers, Plato and Machiavelli, form a basis for this discussion. Some philosophy scholars claim that Plato and Machiavelli are similar because they both write about great leaders in the history of philosophy. However, Plato’s ideas focus on rational realism while Machiavellis’s ideas on politics are more empirical. Although the two philosophers differ in their philosophical approach, they both form political views from significant philosophers who tried to establish justified theories concerning politics and the justice system. This paper discusses and compares Plato and Machiavelli’s political view of justice and how an ideal society should look, focusing on education and the value of morality.
Plato’s Republic
Plato adopts the Socratic method in explaining the Republic, which develops from Socrates’s discussions with various citizens in the Republic of Athens. The Republic speculates how different states defined and accomplished justice in the given period. In this context, the Republic represents individuals in the society where Socrates believes by criticizing the Republic on matters of justice; the community will learn from the criticism and practice fair justice.
Socrates’s argumentive theories from a general perspective to specific details are impressive: justice of the city or community to the individual’s definition of justice. For example, in book two, he talks about a just society where each person specializes in a specific profession to create an ideal city. The three disciplines include rulers, guardians, and artisans (Bloom 15). Socrates further defines each role in detail as follows. Rulers must exercise wisdom as counselors of the Republic because the citizens look up to them (Bloom 112). Knowledge contributes to wise decisions and counsel promoting a just society (Hacifevzioğlu 17). Wisdom enables us to distinguish between good and bad. It allows us to avoid doing the wrong things to our fellow human beings. Therefore, justice is necessary for a morally upright society (Abdi and Mohamed 5).
Politically, he shows the relevance of knowledge in distinguishing good and bad as a foundation for statesmanship. Artisans, farmers, and carpenters must do their jobs humbly and build quality items. As they work to make wealth, they should live an average lifestyle that is neither too poor nor extremely wealthy. Extreme poverty denies an individual the resources to obtain basic things, while too much wealth brings laziness and laxity in doing one’s job (Bloom 10). Both cases are not suitable for creating an ideal society; therefore, individuals must avoid extreme wealth and poverty. In addition, guardians are responsible for protecting citizens.
Consequently, it is important to have effective training in manners, loyalty, and toughness in dealing with war and guarding the Republic. I belong to a Benagali culture, and my parents from Bengali culture are very conservative. Therefore, I was born to do a lot of things, which I still follow today. My parents expect me to do certain tasks, study hard, and have a professional job. They expect me to pray and be kind to people. Like Socrates, my parents taught me to behave with wisdom, courage, discipline, and justice.
Machiavelli’s the Prince
Machiavelli is another political thinker whose ideas seem to object to political ethics by other philosophers. According to Machiavelli’s view on politics in the Prince, rulers are encouraged to be aware of practical politics. Machiavelli believes in ruling with absolute power than a democracy where he gives the prince ideas on possessing absolute power. According to Machiavelli, justice is only necessary if it brings political stability and ends barbaric practices. He suggests that using force or cheating is necessary for keeping the country’s peace. His theory on justified leadership focuses on how the Prince should vie for fame and power making him more feared and respected as a sovereign (Machiavelli 2). For the Prince to win and secure the throne, the Prince must be well equipped with ambition and a thirst for power.
In his justice theory, he argues that any prince who leads the people does not have to be virtuous (Machiavelli 3). Being too good can negatively influence the roles since people will take them for granted and therefore choose to behave in any manner. Machiavelli was never a philosopher such as Plato or a prince who possessed necessary Christian values like love and empathy, and morality for a just state. Instead, he is seen as a practical philosopher who advocates for empirical leadership (Hacıfevzioğlu and Ahmet 2). He assumes that all people are evil before making any law and acts accordingly as per the free field of action. He prefers being feared to be loved like a prince since one can not be hated and loved simultaneously (Machiavelli 3).
The most important factor in this theory is that strong leadership begets a strong state, and the leader must be feared and loved; however, it is much easier to rule a country by being powerful. For example, he states that “a prince should make himself feared in such a way that, even if he gets no love, he gets no hate either; because it is perfectly possible to be feared and not hated” (Machiavelli 46). This quote illustrates that people will feel like they will kill you if you are hated, so it’s best not to be despised.
Comparison Between the Plato and Machiavelli
Morality And Justice
The two thinkers differ in obtaining knowledge, where Plato used a more rationalist (or “idealist”) approach, Machiavelli uses an empirical approach. Empiricism involves direct and indirect observation or experiences, while rationalism involves intuition, reason, and truth before judgment. Plato’s Republic, Athens, was ruled by democracy. At the same time, Machiavellis Italy had much political strife from foreign invasion, fighting, and power-grabbing, contributing to different political ideas between the two philosophers. Platonic justice is achieved through metaphysical ideals considered supreme to other existing forms and defines it as the ‘form of good.’ Goodness does not bear injustice or produces bad decisions, suggesting that good people create a harmonious and fair republic.
Contrary to Plato’s philosophy, Machiavelli argues that ethics and metaphysical ideals are non-political principles of good leadership. According to Machiavelli, a ruler must possess power instead of virtues which weaken a human’s resolve in decision making. Machiavelli states that a ruler is the ultimate decision-maker and is justified to do whatever they choose. Machiavelli argues that justice is only necessary if it benefits the state and not as a tool for an ideal state. Human beings are neither good nor bad but only follow their ambitious feelings of obtaining power and security for the interest of the greater society. Machiavelli does not encourage violence but merely plans for it and argues that total honesty is not what a good Prince must possess. This perception of justice is against Plato’s view, where a leader should be honest and uncorrupt apart from the “noble lie!”. Plato also believes that justice exists universally, and everybody is entitled to it, just like education. In contrast, Machiavelli’s justice is precise, and the situation determines whether to get it or not (Heydari et al.).
Education
Plato’s idea of justice is connected to the better good of the Republic. According to Plato, education produces wise rulers who can differentiate good from bad and make wise judgments. Some philosophers may claim that this argument favors the elite society. Still, Plato argues that all community members have a role to perform that enhances the ideal Republic. According to Plato, education is meant to elevate all citizens regardless of social class or profession. A knowledgeable society makes justified decisions based on a careful analysis of the truth and reasons underlying a given circumstance.
Machiavelli, however, fails to explain the type of knowledge that should be passed and methods to use in education, while Plato shows the importance of learning in a wider score. Plato insists on the importance of teaching morals and values in school and at the society level. However, Machiavelli insists on educating leaders on the importance of possessing and executing power at a personal level (Bogiaris and Guillaume 92). Ignorance cannot be included in leadership, but wisdom is not necessary for handling issues affecting society.
Relationship Between Socrates Ideas and the Modern Life
Socrates’s ideas have a significant influence on the legislation of modern society. Lawyers apply the Socratic method of questioning in courts of law which involves questions, answers, and arguments that support given evidence. The level of justice follows constitutional guidelines that incorporate various forms of accomplishing justice given different situations. Errant citizens are judged according to relevant and legal actions which follow the constitution. For example, people with special needs, such as children, women, older people, and persons with disabilities, are catered for in the justice system and societal welfare. Youths are encouraged to pursue education and get professional jobs, while older people are allowed income generation through compensation and welfare groups since they cannot work. Philosophy is now applied to problems facing education, peace, unity, and the development of republics. It is used in promoting unity, equality, and campaigns for human rights in the world today.
Conclusion
The philosophical thinkers view life from different angles and try to come up with ways of explaining them. For example, while Plato views morality and virtues as principles of an ideal republic, Machiavelli is more inclined to a powerful ruling that is almost dictatorial. Plato focuses more on the welfare of the general state in creating a just and ideal society that is knowledgeable and virtuous. On the other hand, Machiavelli is seen as a ruthless philosopher thirsty for power and wealth. Although Plato’s rationalism is usually preferred in defining justice, both philosophers argue their points well, providing substantial evidence to back up their philosophical claims.
Works Cited
Abdi Rahman, Mohamad Rizal. “Socrates: His ethical and political beliefs plus their relevance on certain legal concepts1.”
Bloom, Alan. The Republic of Plato. Translated by A. Bloom. 2nd. Ed., Basic Book, 1968.
Bogiaris-Thibault, Guillaume. Rethinking Plato’s Place in Machiavelli’s Thought: Philosophy and Civic Education in the Machiavellian Corpus. Diss. 2018.
Hacifevzioğlu, Ahmet Umut. “The power of a statesman: The ideal leader according to Machiavelli.” Electronic Turkish Studies. 2018
Heydari, Ahmadali, and Alireza Omidbakhsh. “Platonic or Aristotelian aspects of life: A Harmonious World in Farabi’s Utopian Thinking.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. “The Prince [1513].” The Prince and other Political Writings, ed. S. Milner (1995).
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.