Plato: Advocating Morality, Righteousness, and Justice - Essay Sample

Introduction

Plato like other great philosophers adamantly dedicated their lives to the betterment of the society criticizing the social oppression, discrimination, and prejudice that the aristocrats and the ruling class subjected on the innocent and peasant and middle-class citizens. In a period when the Athenian democracy was at a verge of falling, Plato advocated for morality, righteousness, and justice. He continuously contended that justice is a human virtue and a quality of the soul which that enable every being to eradicate the irrational desires to accommodate self-satisfaction (Buckels, 2019). While others such as Cephalus and Polemarchus believed that justice is an external element that consists of giving what is proper and practicing the right conducts which controlled the maxim of Greek morality, and Thrasymachus stating that justice as the interest of the stronger, in which every man strive to dominate others to controls and exercise his jurisdiction, Plato adamantly declined and criticized all their positions claiming that justice is more of an inward element that stems from an individual (Levin, 2018).

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

Order now

Additionally, according to Plato, justice does not rely on the convention, chance or external forces but it is the right condition of nature of man and paramount to the human soul. Justice is an inward grace and its comprehension consequently promote internal peace and harmony (Buckels, 2019). Like Socrates, Plato contends that justice is a kind of harmony by striking an analogy between the human organism and social organism. He states that human organism possesses three elements encompassing Reason, Spirit, and Appetite which must live in harmony without one irrationally dominating the other but through consent and unanimous agreement each element plays its role in promoting a just and rational being (Buckels, 2019).

Moreover, Plato affirms that an individual can only be considered as just when each part of his soul perfectly performs its duty, role, and function without interfering with the function or role of other elements. He arrived at the conclusion of justice as a kind of harmony after critically analyzing the function of the three elements of human should that allows a human being to rationally co-exist in a society. For instance, Plato affirms that Reason should only rule on behalf of wisdom and forethought for the entire should control the appetite which forms the greater portion of the soul (Buckels, 2019). Therefore, as the spirit, reason, and appetite agree that reason alone to rule the bodily desires so is justice within an individual propelling harmony. Like his predecessor Socrates, Plato asserts that justice is like a manuscript that exists in both an individual and society, while individually it encompasses the human nature, which makes human self-consistent and good, in society, it advocates for social consciousness which develops an internal harmonious society (Levin, 2018).

Justice is a kind of harmony or specialization that enable humans to fulfil their duties without meddling or interfering with others, which propels the spirit and principle of correlational interaction for the ultimate survival. Despite other scholar viewing justice as an external force, Plato aggressively defends his theory by firmly ascertains that justice is an internal human virtue that links and interconnects humans and society and without justice, the society will consequently disintegrate. He concludes that as the elements of the soul, Reason, Spirit, and Appetite harmoniously exist, justice does not display strength but depict harmonious strength in bonding humans and society. Therefore, through the analogy, Plato

Contrast Aristotle's View of Community and Justice With that of Plato's

Aristotle and Plato significantly believed in the importance of justice within the Greek philosophy and both advocated for the respect of established laws and regulation. To both Aristotle and Plato, justice entailed the goodness and willingness to adhere to the grounded legislations which implied corresponding to the human rights and duties. Nevertheless, despite both acknowledging that justice entails a principle of capacity in which happiness, virtue, harmony, and unity can be formulated in the society in accordance to nature, they adamantly contrast in their philosophical understanding and framework of justice. For instance, extremely associates his philosophical theory of justice on the condition of the soul ascertaining that just like the human soul facilitates harmony between Reason, Spirit and Appetite so is a virtuous person in the society.

Plato immensely affirms that a just person feels harmony in which he strives to establish and propel good as Reason specifically controls Appetite and Spirit to make rational decisions (Levin, 2018). He concurs that as the three elements harmoniously coexist in the human soul with every element understanding its duty so is a just person who understands his role and responsibility in the society irrespective of his or her position. However, Aristotle extremely disagrees with Plato's stand opposing that it is a narrow ideology which cannot be encompassed a justice. Aristotelian justice is not only a condition of the soul, but it is also a kind or right activities. Rather than limiting justice or happiness to the condition of the soul, Aristotle focuses on the broader perspective of justice ascertaining that good human live or virtuous life must encompass rational activities guided by virtues as an individual can be just to himself but not the community.

Additionally, Platonic justice entails the stratification of society where the aristocrats in the society have total power over others. As he compares the ruling monarch with the element of Reason that desire and propels good in the society, Plato ascertains that it is better to have a principled monarch acting on behalf of the interest of the society rather than according citizens freedom and rights to act on their own selfish whims. According to Plato promoting inequality and advocating for specialization within the different sectors of the economy substantially amounted to justice as it would promote harmonious existence (Buckels, 2019). Moreover, Plato also suggests privatization of property where families would hold properties as a community where society would be one big family eradicating individualism which adamantly promotes social injustice in the societies.

Nevertheless, Aristotelian justice rejects Platonic justice by confirming and recognizing equality among members of different states rather than promoting a hierarchy of classes that promote totalitarianism. Ordinary justice id actions and behaviors that are specifically controlled by an individual's reason and rational thoughts. In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle depicts that by adopting a medium position which advocates for distributive proportionality that entails treating people in the same situation or same boat equally significantly promote harmonious community rather than stratification and marginalizing other groups as a subject which propelled kings and slaves ideology. Aristotle constructively disapproves Platonic justice portraying it a narrow and insignificant element such as individualism, withdrawing from the imperfect community and irrationally accepting social stratification (Gellera, 2017). Therefore, he ascertains that being just entailed actively contributing to society by engaging in diverse rational activities from social, cultural, economic to political engagements that define humanity.

Conclusion

Consequently, Aristotle's theory of justice is more convincing that Platonic justice as it depicts massive relevance to the contemporary world. Unlike Plato whose philosophy adamantly advocates a traditional society where totalitarianism was promoted, Aristotle inspires equality among all creature as he discourages taking extreme positions but rational medium and proportionally distributed. While contemporary society adequately justifies just and unjust actions, Aristotle's perception of a just man immensely promotes harmony and social progress (Leontsini, 2015). For instance, injustices performed out of ignorance are necessitated as mistakes, injustice conducted without premeditation, injuries and injustice did when plans go south are justified as misadventures. Nevertheless, the modern justification greatly aligns with Aristotle's theory that affirms that justice is not only a condition of the soul but a right activity which may be influenced by diverse socio-cultural phenomena. I greatly concur with Aristotle that promoting balance between lawful and equal by ascribing to the middle term where both loss and gains are neutralized immensely work in promoting just people and harmonious community (Gellera, 2017). Justice is an intellectual skill that eradicates emotional connotations to bring a community or a society into a balance, and a stable system of laws, customs, and rules. As affirmed by Aristotle, it is hard to distinguish the distinct balance between laws and social norm as only a just individual will be able to promote a responsible and rational acts and activities that obeys both legal jurisdictions and social norms. Therefore, despite both Plato and Aristotle advocating for diverse principles of justice, Aristotelian justice is more convincing and adamantly applicable to contemporary society.

References

Buckels, Christopher. (2019). The Teleology of Action in Plato's Republic by Andrew Payne." Journal of the History of Philosophy 57.2: 341-342.

Gellera, G. (2017). Nicomachean Ethics. Macat Library.

Leontsini, Eleni. (2015). Justice and Moderation in the State: Aristotle and Beyond. Philosophy of Justice. Springer, Dordrecht, 27-42.

Levin, Susan B. (2018). Poetic Justice: Rereading Plato's Republic by Jill Frank. Journal of the History of Philosophy 56.4: 748-749.