Plato and Aristotle Dialogue Essay
Below is a free essay on "Plato and Aristotle Dialogue" from Anti Essays, your source for free research papers, essays, and term paper examples. -Plato and Aristotle Dialogue-
Plato: You should think on the differences between a simple candle light to that of the most powerful source of light that we know of. Aristotle: Do you mean the sun?
P: The sun is a super power of this world that we as simple humans may never fully understand. The sun is the goodness that is brought to us every single day and goes away with the darkness of night or in this simple case the evils of this world. A: Why is the sun like the goodness of our world?
P: Well my dear friend would you rather be in dark dungeon or a nice sunny field of wild flowers? A: A nice sunny field of wild flowers, but what does that have to do with the fact of the sun being the goodness of life? P: Ah, now that is a true question that one day we hope to find the answer to, but let’s think of this you chose a nice sunny field of wild flower over the dark dungeon. So with that you in fact have already confirmed my suspicion that sun is a good thing and not a bad thing. A: Yes, but how do we know that the sun was not created by something that was not good. I mean even if what you say is true about the sun, then why is it that after being exposed to its power for an extended amount of time that it makes humans skin turn red and blister. P: Well, maybe the one above is trying to create an equal balance of good and evil to start a balance of a neutral effect. A: So you are saying that too much of a good thing can in fact, be a bad thing. P: Well, yes that is what I am saying.
A: So in fact the sun might very well be a neutral player in the world of good and bad for the simple fact that to little is a bad thing and too much is also a bad thing, but just the right amount could very well be one of the best feeling in the world as we know it. P: I believe that might have been the missing thought to my question, thank you sir. So my dear friend what is your thoughts on my theory of knowledge? A: I believe that the soul is immortal but I am not...
Justice has always been an interesting topic for philosophers and also for ordinary people. Justice can be defined briefly as “the fairness in the way that people are treated” (Collins Cobuild, p. 910). Plato and Aristotle, two leading figures of ancient Greek civilization, were earliest philosophers who thought about justice and developed theories about the sublime aspects of being just. This assignment is an attempt to prove that pursuing a life of justice would make living more worthwhile than being unjust or a combination of just and unjust life. In order to reach this point, I am going to explain the concept of justice and its superior aspects from the perspective of both Plato and Aristotle by taking help from their famous works “The Republic” and “The Nicomachean Ethics”. I will also give place to counter arguments and their rebuttals. I will make my own comments at the final part of the assignment. Plato (427 BC-347 BC) was one of the earlier and most important philosophers of the world and is also known as the founder of “The Academy”. Plato’s most famous work is “The Republic” in which he tries to draw the qualities of a just individual and a just state by explaining the sublime nature of justice. In the first two books of The Republic, dialogues between different characters focus on different meanings of justice. During the conversation two conventional definitions of justice (“giving a man’s due” and “doing good to your friends, harm to your enemies”) are refuted brilliantly by Socrates and finally take the form of “doing good to your friends if they are good and doing harm to your enemies if they are bad” (Plato, p. 13). In the following parts of Book one, Thrasymachus appears with all his anger towards Socrates. Thrasymachus defines justice or what is right as “what is the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document