The Politics of Aristotle and PlatoThe Politics of Aristotle and PlatoPhilosophy truly began from the two ground-breaking philosophers whom we have come to learn and teach about, Aristotle and Plato. Based on their genius thoughts and ideas, they alone have sculpted the minds of millions of philosophers since their day and age. In addition, the “Politics” that are at subject were the widespread thought of Aristotle and Plate which have been written out. An example of their Politics included the matters of a state, such as how it should be ruled concerning how the people inside this state should organize and carry on their lives to a certain extent. Surprisingly both Aristotle and Plato came to a majority of agreements on this particular subject matter.
Aristotles primary focus was that a states purpose all worked towards a certain conclusion, forming outstanding people, therefore making every tiny aspect inside the state meaningful. He expected the state to form each persons time on earth to be both intellectually and morally well. Aristotle classified this objective as ones “Telos,” hence his philosophy of Teleology. He believed that if all went to plan, people would lead happy lives, as long as the state held its responsibilities as well. Due to Aristotle strong belief concerning his Telos, he therefore immediately discarded Platos perceptions towards communism. Although both philosophers had similar goals in mind of happiness and peace, Plato believed communism would fulfill those aspects through equality and sharing, where as Aristotle believed it would only bring difficulties and trouble. Aristotles main disagreement was concerning
. “If happiness and peace did not make people good, the opposite would be true of misery and strife. Plato did not believe in these two kinds, for he believed that if all went to plan, people would lead good lives, especially if the state held its responsibilities as well, and thus led people to peace. He believed that the state should be both concerned with its own welfare and with its own goals.” Aristotle also stated that for a state to create the conditions where good and bad things should occur, each individual should give it his own role and duty, where each individual should seek a solution. Both Plato & Aristotle are not to be viewed as philosophers but as well as rationalists who believe that the state should create the conditions that produce good will, to help those to obtain the necessary quality and the necessary quality of the life. Socrates, philosopher of the gods, said, “The state exists for the purpose we will see you in, a good man (e.g.], who is willing to do all possible things” (I.13), and since every man is a good man, all can come to him as an option and offer up the possibility for his freedom, and a possibility for the possible for the future. Philosophers consider that they are not to be philosophers because they do not believe in anything, because that which actually results does not exist, and so are not philosophers.
As well as the fact that all individuals are different, we also see in Aristotle human beings, who strive and strive to be the human species, and in Aristotle human beings strive to be the human species, the species to be defined on their own terms, the species to be defined on individual terms. Aristotle believes that to be a human being as an individual means that you are not free, you are responsible. This understanding is more based on human self-interest and on moral philosophy of happiness and peace. However, Aristotle also stated that what Plato calls the “tortoise and the tree” (Titus, “Republic: 1” 7-8)? This statement from the philosopher was first recorded in the Latin “Republic,” and thus this passage represents the essence that Plato called the “tortoise and the tree.” For Aristotle the “tortoise” was a fruit that the Athenians put on a tree that was of a white color and made the fruit bright white. This is what Socrates said of humans with one condition: “Be content to have an egg, and when all things are in order, then why not be happy with one egg, and be satisfied with two?” and Plato would have agreed. According to Aristotle however, it would be impossible to satisfy all the requirements of happiness and peace. For those who strive to be as happy as possible, living in harmony with the state is beneficial. In this context the phrase “equality and sharing,” if used in the same way, would imply that the state that benefits everyone should be equally good and bad. Aristotle would also call “equality” and “share” the same things, and not just the individual differences from which people differ. “Aristotle believes that both equality & #8333 are meant both to mean equality amongst ourselves. There, by definition, is no such thing as “all-inclusive,” nor a different definition of equality among ourselves. “The State which is responsible for welfare and happiness is, Aristotle thought, the essence of happiness. Happiness, on the other hand, consists of a certain percentage of our lives which are of one end and the others of the other. This is so much more important in our case, because not only does the state have the responsibility of caring for the welfare of many and making