free essay on Machiavelli and Plato - ECheat
Machiavelli says the prince only has to seem good, not be good. Socrates insists that seeming is bad, being is good. Is it better to remain in the cave with Machiavelli, or see the light with Socrates? Write three pages for Machiavelli and against Socrates, write another three pages against Machiavelli and for Socrates.
Both Niccol� Machiavelli and Plato, in their works The Prince and The Republic (respectively), address the concepts of seeming and being in relation to political power and leadership, however they do so in two distinct manners. In the Republic, Socrates insists that seeming is bad, and being is good. Using a parable of people in a cave, he states that the only way to know the difference between what seems and what actually is reality is to experience it in its purest form, instead of through images. Machiavelli, on the other hand outlines the different ways that a prince could rise to power, and justifies any and all means that a prince could take. He states that a prince only has to seem good when it fits his purposes, not actually be good. He encourages an aspiring prince to be deceitful and conniving in order to gain and maintain power. Before concluding which political theorist is correct, it is interesting to examine whether it would be better to remain in the cave with Machiavelli or see the light with Socrates.
The citizens of Socrates’ Republic are divided into three classes. Those who are deemed fit to rule, the philosopher/rulers, are those who have been chosen to pass through several stages of training and preparation. They are the most fit to rule, because they are the only ones who (at the end of their training) know the difference between what seems to be reality and what reality actually is. They have gained this knowledge because they have spent the majority of their lifetimes preparing to rule. The other two classes of people in the Republic, the warriors and the moneymakers, c...
Plato and Machiavelli Plato and Machiavelli both wrote a
professional essay on Niccolo Machiavelli and Plato
This article seeks to explore the aspects of CSR in light of Machiavelli’s THE PRINCE and Plato’s REPUBLIC. These two philosophers sought to explain and justify how the rulers of large, socially important institutions, i.e. civil government, operate for the good or ill of those who live within them. As corporations are themselves similar mini-states, akin to the city-states and poleis in the times of Machiavelli and Plato, and as some CSR proponents seek to have the corporation take on many tasks that have, in the past, been performed by the state, exploring CSR through these two works provides useful insight. Our topic, however, is not the paths of justice in the ancient or renaissance world, but whether these two philosophers can help us understand how CSR can be applied today; perhaps even to warn us of its abuses or encourage CSR’s healthy application.
Machiavelli And Plato: Virtue Vs. Justice
Plato and Machiavelli essays Plato's Republic and Machiavelli's The Prince are each hugely important texts in the history of philosophy Even though they were Machiavelli Plato Rebuplic Prince Comparison Essay Question: Compare the Characteristics of the true guardians, as described by Plato (Republic, bk VII, Jul 30, 2007 Plato's philosopher-king ruled over the warriors and. tradesmen of his ideal republic with rationality Aristotle's polity Machiavelli's prince used deception and illusion. for the better economic good of the state All have their
However, in many cases Machiavelli seems to. be arguing against Platonic philosophy According to Monarch notes on The Republic: The basic idea referred to is A Prince's main duty is the preservation of his country and the protection of