Paper Example on Plato's Search for Justice: Fear of Punishment or Doing What's Right?

Question 1

In his book, The Republic, Plato is keen to understand why men behave justly. Is it because they dread societal sentences? The author is eager to know whether the societal, more substantial elements scare others into the submission in the name of the law or whether individuals act just because it is right for them to do so. Besides, he seeks to answer whether justice, regardless of its punishments and rewards, is a good thing in and itself. The author aims at defining in a way that could explain that truth is worthwhile in and of itself. He faces these challenges by employing a single solution: encompassing truth in a way that appeals to human psychology, rather than to perceived behavior. First, he illustrates the basic idea of political or societal justice and then to come up with a parallel concept of individual judgment. According to the author, an ideal society entails three main classes of people, such as producers (farmers and artisans), guardians (rulers), and auxiliaries (warriors). Justice in society is seen when all these classes are right. As such, each group must accomplish its correct and the only function. Besides, each group must be in a position of power concerning others ("SparkNotes: The Republic: Overview," n.d.). For instance, rulers must rule, auxiliaries must help uphold rulers' convictions, and producers should not allow themselves to exercise whatever skills nature granted them (painting, blacksmithing, and farming). Therefore, justice is seen as a principle of specialization that requires individuals to fulfill their roles in society and only those that nature fitted him and not interfering with other peoples' businesses.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The author shows that political justice is mirrored through individual judgment. According to him, a person has three structures analogous to the three classes of society. First, there is a rational part of the soul that is often interested in the truth and is held responsible for the political inclinations. Second, there is a spirited portion of the soul which looks out for honor and is accountable for our feelings of resentment and anger. The last one is the appetitive part of the soul, which lusts for all sorts of things, particularly money, since it is used to acquire and fulfill other desires. As such, a just man is explained in comparison with the just society. In an only person, the rational part of the soul rules, the spiritual part supports while the appetitive part submits and follows wherever the reason leads. Precisely, in a just man, the soul aims to fulfill the rational role while the just society seeks to fulfill the will of their rulers.

The Similarities between the Just man and the just society

The parallels between the just man and the just society run deep. The three parts of the soul dominate the three classes of society. For instance, producers are governed by their appetites - the urge for luxury, money, and pleasure. On the other hand, warriors are governed by their spirits, which ultimately offer them courage while they govern rulers strive for wisdom and their rational faculties. Plato further explains that the world exists in two realms; the visible field which we grasp through our senses and the intelligible part which we only understand with our mind. The visible world encompasses us, and it is what we see. In contrast, the intelligible world consists of forms- abstract, redness, sweetness, and beauty that exist in permanent relation to the visible realm and make it possible. Besides, the author has maintained that only the minds of the philosophers due to their training to grasp the forms can know anything at all. Generally, philosophers must see the type of the well such as beauty, knowledge, beauty to become able rulers

Is Plato a fan of democracy?

Plato represents democracy to represent a democratic man who takes great interest in everything he can buy with his money. The author believes that he is overly concerned with his money over how he helps people and often does what he whenever he wants it. As such, he indicates that he is not a fan of democracy due to excessive freedom associated with it. Besides, he argues that in a system that allows everyone a right to rule, selfish people who do not care about others attain power.

Question 2

What is Good Government?

According to Aristotle, the best government is that that make decisions to promote the societal common good. He explains the systems are perverted when decisions made aim at improving the wellbeing of some people in society, for instance, the strong, the poor, the rich, or the Cetera. Government by a single person for the common good is a monarchy, while for private benefit is tyranny, and if a minority leads it, it is aristocracy.

Man as a Political Animal

Aristotle described men as political animals as an indication that they live in a more polis. He described the man as a political animal because he is a social creature that has the power to speak and reason morally. Generally, a man becomes a man, among others, by living in law and custom governed society. They developed their potential and realized its natural end in a social context which is he sees as a life of virtual reflected in the eudemonia (highest good) which is often described as happiness

Polity

Aristotle describes polity as a combination of democracy and oligarchy and works best when society has a robust middle class. In the republic, the interests of people are balanced in a way that promotes good. It is the best possible arrangement

In a constitutional Array, Aristotle believed democracy was the best. He supported his arguments by explaining that the nation governs for the interests of all people in society, not just a few people/leaders. Besides, he believed that the success of a polity hugely relied on the quality of leadership and their perception of common interest.

Generally, there are two kinds of governments; one is the actual obedience of the citizens to the law while the other is the extent of the goodness of the rules they submit to and that they obey. As such, we must be attentive to the law and its content, and they follow and, therefore, explaining why Laws must be continuously reevaluated to help them remain consistent with the common interests.

There is one characteristic of a polity that Aristotle was pleased with; the happy life depending on the unhampered virtue, which is a mean and growth which then is in a mean, and in a mean that is best and often attainable by everyone.

Aristotle believed that if society consisted of larger middle-class chances of establishing and maintaining polity were high since there exists no extreme need or wealth. Thus their perceptions about common interest will likely produce the enormous benefits to all. And therefore, that is the reason, and he believed that polity was and is the best possible constitutional anarchy.

The Role of Middle-class Play in a Healthy Polity

According to Aristotle, the presence of a robust middle class is vital in any society that seeks the common good. They help bind the nation into a whole by limiting the rich people's tendencies to tyranny and the poor from slavishness and, therefore, creating a city that all individuals are free, "a city of the free." Further, he believed that a larger middle class helps in the stabilization regime, especially when the middle class is more reliable than both extremes (Editors, 2018). They help bring balance when moved to either side and thereby preventing the rise of excess at the opposite extremes.

Question 4

The Prince

In his work, The Prince, Machiavelli explains and offers instructions to rulers on how they should behave. In his work, he presents various themes as discussed below

Statesmanship and Warcraft - Machiavelli believed that the presence of a strong military indicates that there are sound laws. As such, the prince is responsible for helping conduct a good war and fortify its cities as well as how to treat their newly acquired subjects.

Goodwill and hatred - the author insist that a prince should avoid the hostility from the people he is ruling. It necessary for him to be feared. However, too much hatred can lead to his downfall. Besides, he should go for the goodwill of his people to enhance the stability of his reign

Virtue - Machiavelli identifies virtue as qualities that are liked and praised by others, for instance, generosity and loyalty. He maintains that a prince should always act virtuously. However, acting virtuously for the sake of it is detrimental to the principality. As such, a prince should shun vices such as dishonesty and cruelty.

Human nature - Machiavelli discussed the theme of human nature by outlining various traits that are inherent to it. Generally, individuals are self-interested, although they can win or lose their interest in others. In prosperous times they are trustworthy and turn deceitful, profit-driven, and selfish.

The Historical Context That Influenced Machiavelli

Machiavelli penned his opinion of what helps mold an effective leader in his book The Prince. He wrote the book after being expelled after the Medici family took over Florence and imprisoned and tortured him (Editors, 2018). Generally, he observed various characteristics that he believed in bolstered influence and power.

Why Machiavelli Wrote the Prince

Machiavelli wrote the prince as a manual and a gift to the monarchy for Medici, who by then seized the control of Florence. Precisely, he hoped that the book would help Medici to overlook his ardent republican leanings to assist in maintaining his responsible position in the new order.

Does A Prince Need To Be Loved Or Feared?

Machiavelli believed that men have respect for power, but when power is too kind, they will often try to take advantage of the situation. He believes that a prince needs to be feared and not loved though he maintains there is no need for too much hatred from the people since it can lead to his downfall. According to him, a prince cannot be uncertain since it a sign that displays weakness (Editors, 2018). In essence, he used Cesare Borgia to explain that he used cruelty to achieve obedience and order in Romagna. Besides, he suggests that a man can control half of his actions while the other half can only be controlled by fortune. As such, it is right to conclude that Machiavelli believed a leader needed to be feared and not loved. Some of his critics thought the ideas were too harsh and that they were immoral. The truth, however, is that he was honest with what he had observed in history.

Question 5

What Is the Main Idea Associated With Social Contract?

Social contract theory states that a man lived in the state of nature in the beginning due to a lack of government to regulate and law to govern them. The original idea is that there exists a state of nature in which individuals enjoy complete liberty among certain other elementary natural rights. People often enter a civic society to enjoy the benefits associated with it, and in doing so, they agree to certain restrictions on their freedom. They enter into a social contract.

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke's Versions of The Social Contract

Thomas Hobbes legal theory is usually based on the social contract. According to Hobbes a man lived in a state of nature prior to social contract. In the state of nature, a man's life comprised of selfishness and fear and often lived in chaotic circumstances of constant fear. Living in a state of nature can be described as short, brutish, nasty, weak, and solitary. A man desires security and order to secure self-preservation and self-protection in his attempt to avoid misery and pain, and thus its right the man entered into a contract with the state. As such, we can conclude that Hobbes supported absolutism.

On the other hand...