Aristotle vs. Plato

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that Aristotle's most significant break from Plato, in terms of philosophical and political thought, is that Aristotle eventually came to value empirical observation over abstract theorizing. The paper further explains that it is this emphasis on empiricism that led Aristotle to conclude that a monarchy in the hands of a just ruler is the most just and efficient form of leadership. The paper also explains that this view contrasts with Plato's belief, which held that society should be ruled either by a king that is a philosopher or a philosopher that is a king,

From the Paper:

"Out of these bases, the core political objections Aristotle makes with reference to Plato's Republic fall along the lines of the manner by which each philosopher believes that happiness can be attained. This division makes itself explicit in Book II of Politics when Aristotle advocates the position of women in society and property as being avenues by which happiness can be attained. Plato, on the other hand, "realizing the moral influence of the household and fearing that it would conflict with, and undermine, the public-spiritedness of the rulers, had advocated in the Republic the abolition of the household for the ruling class." (Mulgan, 38). Essentially, Plato does away with private property but Aristotle believes that communal property may actually have the effect of increasing disharmony and interpersonal disputes. To Aristotle, the sense of ownership provides happiness for the owner; the absence of this quality from a society could be potentially disastrous."

More papers on Aristotle vs. Plato:

• Comparison Essay # 25280 : "Aristotle vs. Plato on the Objectivity of Morality"
• Comparison Essay # 4607 : "Aristotle's Form vs. Plato's Telos"
• Analytical Essay # 135622 : "Plato vs. Aristotle on Proper Government"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: