Renowned philosophers throughout history have extensively explored the ideal social and political organizations in search of humanity’s optimal way of life. Examples of such thinkers include Aristotle and Plato, whose works influenced each other. Their groundbreaking perspectives have greatly impacted politicians and future intellectuals, sparking unprecedented discussion and controversy in the Western World.
Both Aristotle’s Politics and Plato’s Republic offer a wealth of knowledge about human behavior and societal values. In his work, Aristotle goes as far as referring to and criticizing his mentor, which compels contemporary scholars to examine both perspectives and derive diverse interpretations. The books thoroughly discuss topics like justice, governance, happiness, and innate human nature, all of which profoundly influence modern thinking and individuals’ way of life.
Both Plato and Aristotle have their individual perspectives on the definition of an ideal state, with both agreeing that the purpose of a state is to ensure justice and maximize utility for its citizens. This is achieved through the establishment of leaders who possess wisdom, virtue, and knowledge and exercise power and control. While there are similarities between the two philosophers, each presents their own distinct approach to addressing this question. Both Aristotle and Plato extensively discuss the attributes of an ideal government and identify the detrimental aspects of flawed constitutions in terms of politics and society.
Plato and Aristotle discuss the essence of humanity, focusing on wisdom, justice, and moderation. In modern society, democracy is widely regarded as the ideal form of government, emphasizing its connection to “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Nonetheless, Plato strongly opposes this notion and argues that democracy emerges from certain detrimental qualities.
According to the author’s argument, when a young man who has been raised in a miserly and uneducated manner experiences the pleasures and associations available from wild and dangerous creatures, this transition from having an oligarchic constitution to a democratic one occurs. Plato expresses concern that this shift will result in a government led by the needy, with greed prevailing due to the influence of the appetitive part of the soul. This will lead to polarization between social classes and disunity within the state (Grube 1992: 230).
Even though freedom is considered a virtue by Plato, he is concerned about democracy as it removes the existence of a ruling authority, which he sees as highly risky. According to Plato, although human nature is not inherently aggressive, individuals are essentially irrational and prone to losing balance in their souls. Therefore, he favors a government led by a philosopher king or a ruler who possesses inherent goodness, justice, and virtue.
Aristotle opposes democracy as it would be under the control of the poor, solely benefiting them. This means that either the wealthy would be ousted from the country or they would clash directly with the less fortunate inhabitants, leading to instability, unfairness, and uprising. However, Aristotle does not have a preference for any specific form of government. He believes that governance should be entrusted to individuals known as citizens or those who possess both ambition and capability to strive for greatness. These citizens should also be plentiful in number and originate from the middle class so as to avoid societal discord found in democracy and oligarchy.
According to Aristotle, there are six forms of government. These forms include the “three true forms” – kingly rule, aristocracy, and constitutional government – as well as their corresponding perversions: tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy (Jowett 2000: 147). The distinction between these categories relies on the nature of the ruler, which is a point of connection between the two philosophers. Aristotle contends that a constitution is just when it benefits society as a whole but unjust when it solely favors those in need. If power rests in the hands of one individual, it is classified as a monarchy if the leader is virtuous and as a tyranny if they are corrupt.
According to Aristotle, a government is classified as an aristocracy if its leaders strive for virtue. However, it becomes an oligarchy if the leaders lack this virtue. The leaders play a vital role in determining the quality of a government and shaping Aristotle’s ideal conception of it. In Aristotle’s perspective, the perfect rulers are educated middle-aged citizens who belong to the middle class. They possess knowledge of the state’s needs and only enact laws and govern in ways that benefit society as a whole. These rulers must actively pursue virtue and ensure maximum happiness for society overall. Additionally, they must work towards reducing the size of the “city-state” to effectively control individuals and maintain a stable government.
Aristotle’s preference is to maintain a government size where all individuals can convene in one assembly. He believes this promotes harmony and stability by ensuring everyone is on the same page. In contrast, Plato contends that philosopher kings are necessary for an ideal government. These kings serve as morally pure and virtuous monarchs who possess a multitude of desirable qualities (an inexhaustible list). The philosopher king embodies justice and is capable of establishing a just state. Aristotle acknowledges the alignment between his ideas and those of Plato, agreeing that a monarchy led by a perfect ruler would be ideal. However, he expresses skepticism about its feasibility.
Aristotle and Plato both share the belief that a state should be viewed as a collective of individuals instead of relying on an imaginary philosopher king. They also delve into the various forms of governments that may exist. Both philosophers assert that states have a designated purpose and consist of individual members. To be deemed legitimate, a state must fulfill specific responsibilities and obligations.
Aristotle believes that the state is a product of nature and holds more significance and self-sufficiency than the individual. He compares the isolated individual to a part that relies on the whole. Therefore, humans, being political beings by nature, must be part of a state in order to fulfill their needs and meet survival requirements. This raises questions regarding human interactions within a state and the possibility of establishing a completely just state. Plato argues for the existence of a city-state dedicated to the greater good, with philosopher kings playing an essential role in this endeavor. When citizens are united, society can maintain justice and promote happiness, which is one of the primary goals of the state. In his work “The Republic,” Plato encourages us to contemplate what we perceive as the greatest good and evil in order to determine the purpose of laws and desired outcomes for the city.
He then responds with a question: “when all the citizens rejoice and are painted by the same successes and failures, doesn’t this sharing of pleasures and pains bind the city together?” (Grube 1992: 136). Consequently, the philosopher kings will govern without faction and will be guided by the concept of the common good and the greatest utility for the entire community. This will prevent internal division and conflict in the nation. Plato Sonksen 5 firmly believes in this educational process that will train his philosopher kings and sees a connection with Aristotle. Aristotle also believes that education, preferably public rather than private, will help maintain a good political order and create a ruling class of middle-class, middle-aged individuals. Education thus becomes a significant responsibility of the state. It seems that Aristotle aims to use education and governance by elders to ensure that the next generation surpasses the previous one.
Once the state’s responsibilities are defined, individual responsibilities emerge. After the establishment of the state, every citizen is duty-bound to contribute to it. According to Aristotle, citizens have a responsibility to actively participate in politics. In his Politics, he states that a citizen, in the strictest sense, shares in the administration of justice and holds public office (Jowett 2000: 101). The presence of such citizens allows for prioritizing the greater good and achieving true justice since everyone has a stake. Moreover, citizens fulfill this duty because it is their responsibility as part of the state.
This perspective seems different from current thinking and helps explain some conflicts observed in United States’ democracy. Initially, citizens were officeholders working for the benefit of the state rather than using their positions for personal gain like some politicians who have turned citizenship into a paid profession.
Instead of Aristotle, Plato’s perfect city is founded on four virtues: wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice. Individuals themselves should strive for these virtues, as they contribute to the state’s inherent quality. Humans, being social creatures, cannot thrive alone and are not inherently evil. This is why they must pursue these virtues, for the greater good of the state. They can achieve this by focusing on their own designated tasks, which leads to justice and ultimately elevates the level of justice within the state.
According to Plato, justice is the act of doing one’s own work in a specific manner. He asserts that justice is what remains in a city after moderation, courage, and wisdom have been established. Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics discuss how individuals’ responsibilities contribute to the formation of an ideal state. Although these texts were written thousands of years ago, they are still relevant in contemporary discussions on social and political organization.
Both Plato and Aristotle present arguments on their beliefs regarding the ideal state, philosophy, leadership, citizenry, and responsibility. They explore different definitions of wisdom, knowledge, and virtue to arrive at their own individual conclusions. (Sonksen 7)
Bibliography
Grube, G. M. A 1992 Plato: Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company. Jowett, Benjamin 2000 Aristotle: Politics. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
