Plato vs. Aristotle

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By chinasamson
Words 961
Pages 4
Virtue can simply be defined as the quality in a person to do what is right and shun what is wrong. Virtue enables a person to attain moral excellence. It is not only a quality which has substance, but also one, which is extremely desirable. In ancient Greek, during times of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, moral philosophy was an essential discipline which got taught in schools. Most of the Great philosophers of that time heard a different version, accounts and views about the ideal, moral virtues. In this essay, attempts are made critically to analyze the views, opinions and beliefs of two of the most influential philosophers of all time- Socrates and Aristotle ( Prior, 2001). The essays will showcase the crucial differences between Aristotle account on virtue, and Socrates account of virtue. This essay will then attempt to give an analysis of which among the two arguments is the most plausible. It should be noted from the onset the Socrates and Aristotle have different and also similar arguments about virtue. They concur that virtue is a state but differ sharply on its functions. These accounts shall get discussed in the essay ( Anagnostopoulos, 2011).

The account on virtue as proposed, by Aristotle perceives morals virtues, to represent the characters that are a consequence of habits repeating themselves over and over again. His account explains that the virtues of a person can be traced between the two extreme ends of two cardinal states, which are scarcity and excess. His account divides virtue into two main sections. According to Aristotle’s account of virtue, these two main sections of virtues are intellectual virtues and moral virtues. He explains that intellectual virtues can only be acquired through the process of learning. On the contrast, moral virtues get acquired through choice and actions. His analysis of moral virtues leads him to the…...

Similar Documents

Plotinus vs Plato

...James Shelinsky The Meaning of the Arts Instructor: Josh Gillon 03/08/13 Plotinus vs. Plato Plotinus and Plato both see the nature of beauty as a product of a higher consciousness in the result of self-control. However, they both seem to interpret the idea in a different way. When it comes to the understanding of the nature of beauty the clear difference between Plato and Plotinus is that Plotinus believes that to understand the nature of beauty you must become Godlike and purified of all evil through the study of the “good” in beauty with self-control. Plato, on the other hand, believes that to understand beauty you must use self-control to resist the desire to possess what one may first see as beautiful to fully know the true nature of beauty. To Plato, one must learn to become a mirror image of that, which brings him desire through observation, rather than become pure or godlike as Plotinus believes. “There is no greater good than this that either human self-control or divine madness can offer a man” (Phaedrus 256B-256C). Plotinus believes that true beauty comes from absolute good which comes from the many forms of beauty that one may see or feel pleasure through. He believes to understand that “The soul must first be accustomed to look at beautiful practices, then beautiful works of men who are called “good”, and then to look at the soul of those who produce these beautiful works”(Plotinus 62). What this means is that Plotinus believes that you cannot see......

Words: 607 - Pages: 3

Plato vs. Aristotle: Virtue

...Political Science 201 November 12, 2013 Anna Umstead Plato and Aristotle, arguably two of the most influential Greek philosophers, discussed their differing views on virtue extensively throughout many of their works. Although they agree that virtue is a desirable characteristic that will lead to happiness, the ultimate good, there exists between the two philosophies salient differences. While Plato believes only philosophers are capable of true, inherent virtue, Aristotle believes all men can be virtuous with practice and dedication. GREAT. WAY TO GET TO THE POINT. BE SURE TO MENTION WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE ARGUING THAT VIRTUE IS INTRINSICALLY GOOD. HAVE IT SMACK ME IN THE FACE IT'S SO OBVIOIUS. (LIKE THAT TYPO). Plato’s Republic contains one of the greatest recorded discussions on the nature of justice. His definition of justice can be interpreted today as virtue, or the proper working of the soul. Plato argues in this work that virtue is inherently good only when it is manifest in the perfectly ordered soul of the philosopher. This philosopher is born just and inherently good, thereby making him the only individual capable of loving and seeking after virtue completely. …..... I'M GUESSING THIS ATTACHES TO THE NEXT PARAGRAPH? AND I'M NOT SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT “BORN JUST”. REMEMBER, IT ISN'T “INBORN” BUT IT IS NATURAL. YOU AREN'T BORN THAT WAY. YOU TEND TOWARDS IT, THOUGH. Only through virtue, or justice as he calls it, can a man receive happiness, and this hints at the......

Words: 1667 - Pages: 7

Aristotle V. Plato

...some playing around on a philosophy assignment. I had to do a dialogue between Plato and Aristotle. I call onto all experts, and those that enjoy the subject to read it and tell me what you think. Here it is…. Epitaphs Plato v.Aristotle Plato: Aristotle, may I ask you why you disagree with my theory of forms? Can you explain, or reveal your thoughts as to why? Better yet, express a theory you could replace my theory with. Aristotle: Sure, do you mind answering some questions for me? Just to confirm my understanding of your theory. Plato: Certainly. Aristotle: Is it safe to assume that the way you define the word ‘form’ in your theory of forms is synonymous with the word ideas? Plato: Yes. Aristotle: Ideas are perfect as long as they are in your mind. Would you agree with that statement? Plato: Yes, I would agree with that statement. Aristotle: This could be taken a step forward, a step so far that even you will disagree with it. Would you like to hear my progression based on your theory? Plato: Sure. Aristotle: According to your theory of form every idea a person has is perfect, and every attempt to bring life to that idea is imperfect. Is that right? Plato: Yes it is. I’ve said this before. Aristotle: Do you realize that someone could very well take your theory and assume you are insulting the Gods, or at the very least someone could interpret it in that way. Plato: What do you mean? You believe that I imply that God’s are flawed? You......

Words: 829 - Pages: 4

Dialogue Between Aristotle and Plato

...Joseph Nixon PHI/105 Dialogue between Plato and Aristotle Assignment P: Given the soul is imperishable, souls gather knowledge throughout their existence. Souls carry this knowledge in every earth-bound body they inhabit. The soul has learned everything during its prior worldly interactions as well as it’s time in the other world. It can be assumed a man’s soul has learned how the art of blacksmithing. This man’s soul, when reborn might not have the given knowledge to blacksmith an adequate sword, yet we should not be alarmed should he recall this knowledge. We must assume his soul learned the art of blacksmithing in a former life. A: I understand your argument, but submit the man you describe could learn the art of blacksmithing by simply seeing weapons and swords that have been created. The man can use the swords he has seen in creating one for himself. The man uses “similarity” to form his sword to the sword that has already been created. The man simply learns the art of blacksmithing through previously created weapons. P: How can you assume the man learned the art of blacksmithing? Is it not possible that his soul could have been a blacksmith in a former life. If this man was to create an exemplary sword, how can it be assumed he learned to create such perfection with it being his first time practicing the art of blacksmithing? A: Imagine you had no knowledge of geometry and namely circles. If I drew a circle and asked you to create a circle......

Words: 762 - Pages: 4

Dialogue Between Plato and Aristotle

...Student Notes of observed dialog between Aristotle and Plato Aristotle: So, let me get this straight, what you are saying is that this world we live in is not real? Plato: You seem not to understand what I mean. Aristotle: Because it is ridiculous. Plato: No, listen. What I am saying is that the environment or form that we live in is full of unevenness, imperfection and impurity this because this form is merely a copy of the ideal world that one would understand once they rise above our physical environment and grasp it intellectually. Aristotle: I understand you just fine but I disagree with you. I agree that our world is an imperfect world but I object to the notion that it is not real or that there is another invisible form out there from which it is cloned. I find that preposterous, everything is right here on earth, physically. Plato: No. What we see on earth ‘physically’ as you say are just mimics or artificial replicas of the real thing only with a large amount of imperfections. This is just an illusion of the real thing. Aristotle: How can that be when our natural world is real and physical? Let me explain it to you clearly, our world, this world is made up of many forms. Sure, they may not be ideal, pure or perfect but our senses identify with them. Plato: Well, our senses identify with them because they are copies of the perfect form and we have knowledge of them. Let me explain it to you. Knowledge must have as its item that which is freely actual as......

Words: 885 - Pages: 4

Thucydides vs Plato Essay

...Thucydides versus Plato Thucydides versus Plato on the nature of the Good Life Plato and Thucydides both had strikingly different views on their approach on the good life. Some have claimed that Plato is making normative claims, whereas Thucydides is making empirical claims. Let's start by taking a look at Plato. Plato's theory on the good life was based on the belief that everything has an objective or use that is typically suited for virtue, beauty, justice, and excellence of the precise thing, and everything will depend on the completion of that role. He considers the good life as being attained through the perfect love and lack of desire. Plato views the good life as the condition a person exhibits total virtue. Virtue tends to come from the absence of desires, or expectations , so true happiness means being pleased to the point one doesn’t have desires. He’s convinced that everyone has the power to be virtuous. He also believed the man and citizen are the creation of the City; they are it’s property (like slaves) and it’s children, and the individual has no right to assert individual rights against the City. In his case justice is accepted as a compromise, and valued, not as good in itself, but for lack of power to do wrong; no man worthy of the name, who had that power, would ever enter into such a compact with anyone; he would be mad if he did. The general in the Athenian army and a greek historian, Thucydides believed the good life was......

Words: 771 - Pages: 4

Plato and Aristotle

...Philosophy Assignment: Plato, Aristotle, and Hume Plato: One paragraph demonstrating why he is a rationalist: - “As long as we have this body, and an evil of that sort is mingled with our souls, we shall never fully gain what we desire; and that is truth. For the body is forever taking up our time with the care which it needs; and, besides, whenever diseases attack it, they hinder us in our pursuit of real being. It fills us with passions, and desires, and fears, and all manners of phantoms, and much foolishness; and so, as the saying goes, in very truth we can never think at all for it”. - This quote demonstrates why Plato is a rationalist because in it he outlines his belief that the body hinders our learning and prevents us from gaining truths. He describes how the senses can deceive us by presenting us with “passions”, “desires”, and “fears”, all obstacles in our quest for knowledge. Aristotle: One paragraph demonstrating why he is a moderate realist: - “Now it is by means of the sensitive faculty that we discriminate the hot and the cold, i.e. the factors which combined in a certain ratio constitute flesh: the essential character of flesh is apprehended by something different either wholly separate from the sensitive faculty or related to it as a bent line to the same line when it has been straightened out”. - This quote demonstrates why Aristotle is a moderate realist because he demonstrates why it is necessary to rely on the senses for......

Words: 442 - Pages: 2

Aristotles Poetics in Apology by Plato

...Jane Doe Professor Urkel ENG-225 24 February 2012 Application of Aristotle's Poetics in the work Apology by Plato According to Aristotle, the criterion that is expressed in Poetics should be based on the matter, subjects and method. For example; for matter, the melody, rhythm and language are the key considerations to be looked into. The subjects in Poetics usually bring out the character traits that are related to human characteristics. This is what brings out the difference between tragic events and comic events in a work of poetry. For tragic events, the character in most instances is usually considered to be more honest, serious and considered to be very important in society. While comic characters are usually considered to be less important in the society and not dignified. The method used could involve the use of direct speech, dialogue or quoted speech. These are the major poetic criteria used by Aristotle and applied in the work Apology by Plato. Plot structure and character are also an important part described Poetics. Plot structure is basically the plan of the work. For Apology, this can be considered into the action or the events that are taking place through this work. For example, there is recognition of the characters and an evidence of the suffering of the main character, Socrates. According to Aristotle, a good plot is one that is complex for the human understanding which can be seen in the Apology. There is the evidence of fear as well as pity for...

Words: 1227 - Pages: 5

Aristotle/Plato Oedipus the King

...Karolina Dymon Response 2 Oedipus the King Aristotle, In the play Oedipus the King, the city of Thebes is under a plague and many people are dying. Kreon, Oedipus’s brother in law ventures to find an oracle to get some answers on how he can help the city. He finds out that the only way the plague can be stopped is when the murderer of the late King Laius is caught and expelled from the city. King Oedipus vows that he will catch the murderer and help his city. Oedipus sends for a prophet and asks him about the murder. The prophet tells Oedipus that he is the murderer. Oedipus refuses to believe the prophet, before the prophet leaves he says a riddle saying that,” the murderer of Laius will turn out to be both father and brother to his own children, and the son of his own wife.” Oedipus angry at what the prophet has said threatens Kreon with death for conspiring with the prophet and telling lies. Jocasta, Oedipus’s wife explains to him that all prophesies are false and as proof tells him that the Delphic oracle told Laius that he would be murdered by his son, but his son was cast out of Thebes as a baby and Laius was murdered by a band of thieves. The description of Laius’s murder sounds very familiar to Oedipus and he asks more questions. Shocked, Oedipus tells his wife that he might be the one that murdered Laius. Outside of the palace a messenger approaches Jocasta and tells her that Oedipus’s father has died and that he has come all the way from Corinth to ask......

Words: 708 - Pages: 3

Plato and Aristotle

...Plato and Aristotle were both renowned philosophers throughout history who were known for their different perspectives of the Theory of Forms. Plato was one of Socrates’ students and he believed in idealism. Plato’s metaphysics which is also referred to as the Theory of Forms explains that there are two sides of the world of Forms. One of them is separated from the reality and one of them is the reality of the world. (Moore, pg 38) Aristotle was Plato’s student and he disagree with Plato’s believes. He was the first philosopher to explain what existence and essence is (Moore, pg. 63). One of Aristotle’s strongest arguments against the Theory of Forms was his Third Man argument. He explains that there must be a third thing or person to tires together a Form (Moore, pg. 65). Plato and Aristotle have excellent views of Theory of Forms and the Third Man argument; however there are points I agree and disagree with. Plato was one of the most important philosophers. Plato spends most of his life living in Greek. He was the first metaphysics thinker Theory of forms was one of Plato most important idea. He believed that we are living in two worlds; the world of appearances and the world of ideas. The appearances world is the world we are living in where we can touch and see around us. Our senses help us guide us in the visible world. In the ideas world, we can only sense it with our thinking. The intelligible world is in our mind, we control what the intelligible world looks like.......

Words: 1606 - Pages: 7

Plato and Aristotle on God

...Aristotle * Aristotle was born in 384 BC. 14 Years after the death of Socrates. His father was court physician to the king of Macedon. * At the age of 18 he entered Plato’s academy at Athens. (Plato was 60 years old) Aristotle remained in the academy until Plato’s death. * Aristotle became tutor to the son of King of Macedon who then became Alexander the great. * Aristotle rejected almost everything that Plato had argued – in particular the existence of forms, he said that human beings needed to work out what was good or bad or right and wrong by looking at the world as it was. * Aristotle and Plato both had huge influence for more than 2000 years of history but Aristotle had the greatest! Aristotle classified many types of animals and plants and considered that each member of different species and every living thing shared a distinct nature. Something was good if it fulfilled its nature and it was defective if it was not what it was intended to be. * Considered that a good human being fulfils the nature which is shared by all human beings. * Therefore, what it is to be good depends on knowing what it is to be human and * This can only be worked out by studying humans to understand what human nature is. For Aristotle something was good if it fulfilled its nature. Evil he held is not a positive thing at all. Evil is merely an absent of good, something suffers from evil if it is missing a good that should be present. Aristotle on God...

Words: 740 - Pages: 3

Plato vs. Christianity

...Throughout time there have been many different views of what afterlife is. Plato and Christianity are no different; between the two ideas there are many similarities and differences that can be distinguished. Plato believed in the idea of immortality and dualism. He believed that the soul was immortal both before and after death, and that the body was mortal and ceased to function after death. Plato believed that your soul has always existed and always will, and that your embodied life as a human is just a small part of your existence. Plato believed that the disembodied soul was the highest form of survival because the immaterial realm of the forms is the highest form of existence. In other words Plato suggests that your embodied existence is not nearly as ideal as your disembodied existence. The basis of Christianity is bodily resurrection. Like Plato’s theory Christianity also believes in the cessation of bodily functions after death, and also believes that the soul does exist for a time disembodied. However in Christianity the soul begins at birth and is not immortal, it dies with the body, and then is resurrected after an unknown period of time by God. Christianity suggests the theory that people follow the Christian Doctrine of Predestination. This is essentially the theory that humans cannot chose whether they will be saved to heaven and from hell. It is the idea that some humans are chosen by God as elect, and some humans are damned by God. In other words; a person......

Words: 331 - Pages: 2

Plato vs. Christianity

...Plato and Christianity are views with different ideas of afterlife. They differ in several aspects but both share the belief that the human person is immortal and death is the cessation of bodily functions but one’s soul exists for a time disembodied. Plato believed in immortality and dualism (the idea that humans are composed of two substances, a material substance or body and an immaterial substance or soul). Plato believed that the soul was immortal in both directions, past and future, in which you’ll always exist and believed that humans will survive past their deaths. Plato believed that souls were simple and that simple things could not be destroyed because they don’t have parts, hence leading to the idea that the soul survives death. After death the soul is disembodied. Plato believed that this state was the highest form of survival because the immaterial realm of the Forms is the highest form of existence. The physical world is the lower kind of existence because it’s constantly changing unlike the immaterial world. Hence, bodily existence is less perfect than disembodied existence. Christianity also believes in an immortal soul and that death is a transition to disembodied existence, however it carries the idea that this disembodied state is temporary until the act of resurrection performed by God (he creates a new body for the soul). Thus Christians believe the human person is mortal and death is the extinction of consciousness, but at resurrection God......

Words: 513 - Pages: 3

Thucydides vs. Plato

...Paper about Thucydides versus Plato on the nature of the Good Life 1: Thucydides versus Plato on the nature of the Good Life. Some have claimed that Thucydides is making empirical claims, whereas Plato is making normative claims. Is that true? Support your answer in your paper. Plato and Thucydides together had strikingly dissimilar views on their tactic on the good life. Many have demanded that Plato is making normative rights, whereas Thucydides has made empirical claims. Let's first take a look at Plato. Plato's philosophy on the decent life was based on the confidence that all has an objective or use that is classically suited for asset, beauty, fairness, and excellence of the exact thing, and all will depend on the conclusion of that role. He reflects the decent life as being reached and finished by the flawless love and lack of wish.  Plato states that the good life is the disorder a person exhibits regarding entire virtue. Virtue inclines to come after the nonappearance of desires, or prospects, so true contentment means being satisfied to the opinion one doesn’t have needs. He’s persuaded that everyone has the control to be virtuous. He too believed the gentleman and citizens are the formation of the City; they are it’s slaves and it’s broods, and the separate has no right to assert separate rights against the Urban. In his circumstance, justice is putative as a compromise, and appreciated, not as good in itself, nonetheless for lack of control to do wrong;......

Words: 1614 - Pages: 7

Plato V Aristotle

...Plato and Aristotle have similar views on the achievement of the good life but also many important differences. While both Plato and Aristotle believe that the good life is one that attains happiness and that only a philosophical life will bring ultimate happiness which will therefore lead to the good life, the main difference between the two is the status or nature of the good and thus happiness. In this essay I shall explain both Plato’s and Aristotle’s views on the good life and how it should be attained. Plato’s good life is an idealist view, as he came up with the theory of ideas (ideas come first, then the world) The ‘good’ to Plato is somehow different to the actual object we see, as the good is outside the world (in the world of ideas) To ‘see’ the good of ideas we must use our rationality. He believed that the entities are corruptible as they change (they possess becoming) To live a good life one must know what the good life is as an idea. The ‘good’ ‘moral’ and ‘truth’ are all ideas and the ‘Good’ is the idea of ideas. The good is an absolute term; being self-evident, transcendental and consistent. Plato believed that the Good life equals truth which equals knowledge which equals morality. According to Plato, to lead a good life one must have internal self-control – one must know one’s self. Plato also believed that you must have a self-disciplined mind to have a good mind. One way Plato explained his idea of the good life was by using the ‘Leaky jar analogy’ He......

Words: 1616 - Pages: 7