Socrates vs. Plato's Philosophy Essay

Socrates and Plato remain some of the most influential philosophers of all time from the ancient Greek civilization. While Plato was a student of Socrates, they shared and differed regarding several issues, which influenced their philosophical thoughts. In the Apology and the Republic Socrates and Plato, discuss in detail their philosophical ideologies, which have similarities and differences in various areas.

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

Save 25%

Firstly, the two philosophers were greatly interested in politics and justice among another aspect of society. In political thought, both had pessimistic views regarding democracy. For instance, in the Republic Book Six, Socrates enters into a dialogue with a character referred to as Adeimantus, where in trying to make him see the flaws of democracy compares the society to a ship. In this narrative, Socrates asks Adeimantus about who would be the best to decide who would be in charge of the ship going into the sea. Adeimantus responds that it would be better for the educated people on seafaring to decide who would be in charge of the ship. In equal measure, Socrates argues that only those with knowledge of justice and other important aspects of the society ought to be the ones to elect leaders and not everyone. Consequently, while Socrates is not against democracy, he advocates voting by only those who have learned and had a grasp of the society, as they are in the best position to select leaders who are in a better position to handle those issues.

On the other hand, Plato, a student of Socrates is opposed to democracy, and unlike his teacher, views the political approach as highly ineffective. Plato, in his writing, The Republic, seeks to establish a Utopian society, where there are justice and effective laws. However, to achieve such as society, Plato argues that only philosophers can guide the process. Accordingly, he argues that philosophers, by virtual of their wisdom and understanding of the ills and needs of society, are in a better position to rule. In this case, philosophers have a better understanding of justice, and how it can be achieved, and thus, can overcome the shortcomings of unphilosophical leaders that characterized Ancient Greece. The arguments of Plato are reflected in the Republic (IV.428b-429a) where he is of the opinion that for a city to possess the virtue of wisdom, which he equates as important for leadership, its rulers must know. Accordingly, since philosophers majorly possess the knowledge, then leaders should ideally be philosophers (Rep. V.475d-480a).

The kind of knowledge that Plato advocates for regarding those who are ideal for leadership relate to knowledge on what the just, the fine, and the good are. In this case, such knowledge demands an understanding of corresponding Forms, where the Form of Virtue and Good feature prominently. Plato argues that "Once they have seen the Good itself, they must each, in turn, put the city, its citizens, and themselves in order, using it as their model" (Rep. VII.540a8-b1). However, such knowledge means that a person has an understanding of other Forms, especially those related to virtue and values. Such knowledge is important in as much as it offers a way of using one's character, those of others, and the city. Only a philosopher has the kind of grasp to guide the society to be virtuous and just.

The other important aspects of the philosophies of Socrates and Plato relates to their understanding of the concept of virtues. According to Socrates, virtue is knowledge. In other words, there is a close relation between virtue and knowledge. In support of his arguments, Socrates offers three important claims of why virtue is knowledge. Firstly, he argues that all living things aim for what they perceived as good, and therefore, secondly, if one does not have knowledge of what is good, he or she is not in a position to do what is good as they will always aim at the wrong target, and thirdly, if a person knows what is good, he/she will do good, as he/she will aim at what is good (Apology, 38a). Consequently, according to Socrates, to know is the only way a person can virtuous life. From such an argument, since knowledge can be learned, so can virtues. Thus, people ought to seek or get taught on virtues, as this allows them to do what is good.

An important addition to the understanding of virtues based on Socrates is that people do not choose to do bad. Instead, it their lack of understanding of what is good or bad, which makes them make wrong choices. Furthermore, he points out that people actively seek the good, and only ignorance or lack of knowledge makes it difficult for them to choose good as they do not know what it is. In this case, Socrates argues that a person would not intentionally harm himself or herself, and in fact, when harm occurs, it is only because an individual believed he or she was doing well. Since knowledge is the ultimate indicator of the ability to be virtuous, it is essential for the society to strive to offer such knowledge to its people or for the people to seek the knowledge on their own, and thus create a society without harm, and which strives for good through knowledge. However, Socrates argues that what a person knows is ultimately within his conscience or soul, and only his/her knows what he/she knows.

On the other hand, Plato's Republic discusses his notion of virtues, which has glaring differences but still equates the concept to knowledge. In this analogy, Plato goes straight into the concept of human soul, which he views as central to what virtues are. In this explanation, he argues that the human soul constitutes three important components, which include reason, appetite, and spirit. Firstly, appetite relates to the part of the soul that has animal instincts and desires for pleasures. On the other hand, reason relates to rational thought and calculations before actions, while the soul concerns the emotions of an individual. In this case, establishing a balance between the three components is the only way of achieving virtues. In this process, the reason is essential in making decisions regarding the wrong and right, while spirit offers a reason for the motivation for acting in a given way, and lastly, the appetite should obey.

While such a description of knowledge seems to be a balance of the soul where knowledge does not play a role, it is not the case in Plato's description of how a person acquires knowledge. In his definition of virtue, it is evident that Plato is of the opinion that the Form can only be achieved when reason is in charge, while the spirit and appetite comply. However, with such an understanding, it follows that "reason" which is equitable to knowledge, plays a major role in ensuring that a person chooses what is virtuous. Consequently, just like Socrates points out, Plato's analogy of virtue seems to support the importance of knowledge, which influences reason, and thus virtues, as essential in the process. Following logic, it follows that a person who knows the need to align the three component of the soul as guided by Plato can be virtuous. In this case, such individuals, with an understanding that virtue is the best good, would strive to align their souls in the proportions identified by Plato, and thus do what is the best good, and become virtuous.

Conclusion

Briefly, while Socrates was the teacher of Plato, the latter did not always agree with the former, yet each had important perspectives on philosophy, which remain influential even in the modern societies. Their similarities can be depicted in their notion of both philosophers poke holes into the state of democracy that existed in ancient Greek civilization, and instead, offer an alternative where philosophers or the knowledgeable play a major role. However, they differ in the level of involvement of philosophers in politics whereby Socrates wants the knowledgeable people to select leaders, while Plato wants philosophers to become the leaders. On the other hand, the two philosophers believe that virtue can only be achieved in a knowledgeable society. However, Plato offers a more detailed analogy of the concept of virtues, where the notion of soul features predominantly as discussed above. Overall, the Plato and Socrates offer compelling reasons for their views on different aspects of their philosophy.

Works Cited

The Republic of Plato. Vol. 30. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1945.

Plato, Apology. "trans. Hugh Tredennick." The Collected Dialogues of Plato, ed. E. Hamilton and H. Cairns,(New York: Bollingen Foundation, 1961) (1954): 31-33.