1

Course: International and Comparative Politics (ICP 161)

Course Title: Introduction to Political Theory

Research: Comparing and Contrasting Platonic and Aristotelian Political

Philosophies.

Semester: Spring 2008

Plato vs. Aristotle

 2

The contributions of Plato and Aristotle to philosophy and politics are issues that

cannot be over emphasized. Plato the tutor of Aristotle is from an aristocratic family in

Athens. He was a student of Socrates. Socrates almost successfully molded Plato in his

own image but since it was not a complete success, they had a hand full of differences.

Just like Socrates, Plato relatively molded his student in his own image. However,

because it was a relative success, they shared a number of similarities and differences as

well. It is interesting to know that even though Plato and Aristotle shared the same

political background and experience which was life in the Greek polis, they had divergent

views on certain political issues. It would have been expected that they would hold

similar political views since they lived in the same Greek polis and the life there was a

holistic one. The Republic and The Politics and Rhetoric written by Plato and Aristotle

respectively, reveals some similarities and differences in their line of reasoning.

A critical scrutiny of these books shows that the two Greek philosophers believed

in the power of logical reasoning- an epitome peculiar to the Greeks. According to

Ebenstein, “The imperishable contribution of Greeks to Western civilization lies in the

taming of man and nature through reason.” 1In the Republic, Plato conceives of two

cities. The first city which is allowed to evolve naturally unguided or interrupted by

reason and the second city which is Plato’s ideal picture of what politics should be in a

state. The second city, the platonic state is planned and guided by reasoning. According

to Plato, if the first city is left unguided by logical reasoning it degenerates into a

condition of fever characterized by wars (Aggressive or Defensive). These wars

according to him are caused by the inability of the natural community to meet its newly

expanding needs from existing resources. Although Aristotle conceives of the state as
1
Alan Ebenstein. Introduction to Political Thinkers, p1
 3

natural, he views it in two ways. First as an evolution of social institutions starting from

the family the lowest in values, to the village and finally the state. And the second is

based on a logical and philosophical view. According to this view, “the state is by nature

clearly prior to the family and individual, since the whole is of necessity, prior to the

part.” 2 Further more Aristotle in his Rhetoric asserts that:

“There are three means of effecting persuasion. The man who is to be in

command of them, it is clear, be able 1) to reason logically, 2) to understand
human character and goodness in various forms…..”3

From the Republic, Politics and Rhetoric, it is clear that both philosophers believe in the

power of reason and hence their effort to weave it into politics.

On the question of socio-political divisions in the society, the two philosophers

agree that a society should be stratified and should possess elements of inequality. The

platonic community in the Republic is divided into three classes of Guardians,

Auxiliaries, and Producers. The guardians are at the top of the social cadre and have the

task of ruling and the auxiliaries fight against the enemies while the producers work to

produce for the entire community. For Plato, the ruler who is to be a philosopher and king

is above all others in the community, and has the right to rule those incapable of the

knowledge he possesses, with or without their consent. This element of class distinction

and inequality between the rulers and the ruled is also expressed by Aristotle in his

argument. According to him, if a ruler or rulers “preeminent in virtue”4 can be found and

he exceeds others in virtue and political capacity, “such a one may truly be deemed a

God among men”5 and this superiority gives him the right to employ the use of force to

2
Ibid, p 59
3
Richard Mc Keon and C.D.C Reeve. The basic works of Aristotle, p 1330
4
Ibid, p 62
5
Ibid, p 62
 4

compel obedience from the ruled. Aristotle sounds much like his tutor and they both

agree that this class distinction or inequality is determined at birth.

Again, Plato and Aristotle say similar things about Monarchy, Aristocracy and

Democracy. They both prefer Monarchy to the latter. Their perception of democracy

seemed to run parallel even though Plato is a little more extreme in his argument.

With regards to monarchy, both Plato and Aristotle agree that a virtuous monarch should

rule with or without the consent of the ruled and are indifferent if it is a single ruler as in

the case of monarchy or a group of people in the case of aristocracy.

Though Aristotle holds some similar views with his tutor, he expresses a number

of views different from Plato. In the Politics Aristotle disagrees with the platonic

socialism for the class of Guardians and auxiliaries. The platonic socialism which

prohibits the ownership of private property by the class of guardians and fighters is based

on “the principle of austerity which puts little, if any, value on material wants and their

satisfaction.”6 For Plato, the objective of this communal sharing is the realization of

Justice. On the contrast, Aristotle argues that people should be allowed to own property.

He gives three reasons for this argument. First he says that it gives people the liberty to

practice generosity, secondly, it is an inherited antiquity and so experiences of the past

should not be abandoned, and lastly he argues that,

“Property should be in a certain sense common, but as a general rule, private:

when every one has a distinct interest, men will not complain of one another, and
they will progress, because every one will be attending to his own business.”7
For Plato, the possession of private property would distract the rulers from their

obligations and would lead to evil. However, Aristotle sees this differently, he says the

6
Ibid, p 5
7
Ibid, p 73
 5

cause of evil is not the possession of private property but the wickedness in the nature of

man.

On the issue of Unity, the two philosophers express contrasting views.

In Plato’s reasoning, a state should achieve the maximum unity possible. And the rulers

could use deception in achieving this end. However, this privilege is only meant for the

rulers and not the ruled. On the other hand, Aristotle argues that a state should not seek to

achieve maximum unity because it would lead to destruction of the state. According to

him,

“Since the nature of a state is to be a plurality, in tending to greater unity,

from being a state it becomes a family, and from being a family, an
individual, for the family may be said to be more than the state and the
individual than the family. So that we ought not to attain this greatest
unity even if we could, for it would be the destruction of the state.”8

Unlike Plato who sees truth as some thing static, and unchanging, Aristotle sees

truth as relative, dynamic and changing. This difference in their perception of the truth

leads to another significant contrast between the two. From the Republic, Plato is

dogmatic and idealistic while Aristotle appears to be flexible and realistic in his Politics.

While Plato insists on building a perfect state where true justice can flourish, Aristotle

says,

“ the best is often unattainable and therefore the true legislator and states man
ought to be acquainted, not only with (1) that which is best in the abstract, but
also with (2) that which is best relative to circumstances”9

In addition, Aristotle’s realism and flexibility can be seen in his Rhetoric. He says,

8
Ibid, p 72
9
Ibid, p 61
 6

“Equity bids us be merciful to the weakness of human nature; to think less about
the laws than about the man who framed them, and less about what he said than
about what he meant; not to consider the actions of the accused as much as his
intentions, nor this or that detail so much as the whole story; to ask not what a
man is now, but what he has always or usually been.”10

Further more, I would argue that another difference between Aristotle and Plato

lay in their perception of the existence of things. While Aristotle’s philosophy seems to

take a dualistic outlook, that of Plato appears to be tripartite. Aristotle talks about the

human psyche been divided into two parts: reason and passion while Plato divides the

human soul into three parts: the rational, the spirited and the appetitive. Some writers like

Frank Erich seem to share the same opinion with me but from a different perspective.

According to Frank,

“Plato assumes three absolutely separate regions of existence: the true existence
of idea, the empirical existence of the sensible world and in between the two a
realm of the mathematical”11

Lastly, a significant contrast between Plato and Aristotle that is worthy of note is

based on the issue of superiority of men over women. During the time of Plato and

Aristotle, the status of Athenian women was equivalent to that of slaves in the society.

Women were accorded no recognition in political affairs and by convention were more or

less not citizens. Though both Plato and Aristotle fought for the elevation of the status of

women, the latter seemed more bias than the former. Plato argued that women should be

treated as citizens just like their male counterparts. He goes further to say that it was okay

to have a woman guardian even though he acknowledges the fact that she would be

weaker than a male guardian. From the Republic, Plato says:

“To conclude, then, there is no occupation concerned with the management of

social affairs which belongs either to woman or to man, as such. Natural gifts are

10
Richard Mc Keon and C.D.C Reeve. The basic works of Aristotle, p 1372
11
Erich Frank. The fundamental opposition of Plato and Aristotle, p 174
 7

to be found here and there in both creatures alike; and every occupation is open
to both so far as their natures are concerned, though woman is for all purposes
the weaker.”12

The point worthy of note in Plato’s argument is his believe that women should be

accorded similar political rights to rule as their male counterparts even though they are

seemingly weaker. On the other hand, Aristotle’s stand on this subject matter contrasts

Plato’s. Aristotle agrees with Plato that women should be given political freedom but his

freedom is bias because he opposes the idea that women should rule. In his Politics he

argues thus:

“moral virtue belongs to all of them; but the temperance of a man and of a
woman, or the courage and justice, are not as Socrates maintained, the same; the
courage of a man is shown in commanding a woman, of a woman in obeying.”13

No doubt Aristotle is no feminist, he goes as far as proving biologically that the female

sex is inferior to the male. According to Salkever, “there can be no doubt that Aristotle’s

biology seems to give women a rank lower than that which they held in classical

Greece”14 The difference in the perception of the political roles of women by the two

philosophers is still an issue of debate to this day. Till present, except for a few countries

like Liberia, most countries of the world are yet to have female presidents even though in

these same countries women can be found occupying high political positions.

In conclusion, Aristotelian political thought shares some similarities and equally

significant differences with platonic philosophy and politics. These differences and not

their similarities have been the basis of debate among the Aristotles and Platos of this

age.

12
Alan Ebenstein. Introduction to political Thinkers, p42
13
Richard Mc Keon and C.D.C Reeve. The basic works of Aristotle, p 1144
14
Stephen G. Salkever. Women, Soldiers, Citizens: Plato and Aristotle and the Politics of Virility, p239
 8

Bibliography

Ball, Terence.“Theory and Practice: An Examination of Platonic and Aristotelian

Conceptions of Political Theory.” The Western Political Quarterly 25.3
(Sep.1972) :534- 545.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 13
March, 2008. < http://links.jstor.org>

Ebenstein, Alan. Introduction To Political Thinkers. 2nd ed. Belmont CA:

Thomson/Wardsworth, 2002.

Frank, Erich.“The Fundamental Opposition of Plato and Aristotle.” The American

Journal of Philology 61.1 (1940): 34-53.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 12
March, 2008. <http://links.jstor.org>

Kochin, Michael S. “Gender and Rhetoric in Plato’s Political Thought.”

Perspectives in Politics 2.1 (March 2004) :122-123.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 13
March, 2008. < http://links.jstor.org>

Lord, Carnes.“The Character and Composition of Aristotle’s Politics.” Political Theory

9.4 (Nov.1981): 459-478.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 13
March, 2008. < http://links.jstor.org>

Mc Keon, Richard, Ed: Basic works of Aristotle. New York: The Modern Library, 2001.

Moskop, Wynne Walker.“Prudence as a Paradigm for Political Leaders.” Political

Psychology 17.4 (Dec. 1996) :619-642.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 13
March, 2008. <http://links.jstor.org>
 9

Salkever Stephen. G “Women, Soldiers, Citizens: Plato and Aristotle on the Politics of
Virility.” Polity 19.2 (winter, 1986):232-253.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 12
March, 2008.<http://links.jstor.org>

Stern, Paul “The Rule of Wisdom and Rule of Law in Plato’s Statesman.” The American
Political Science Review 91.2 (Jun.1997): 264-276.
JSTOR. American University of Nigeria Library, Yola, Adamawa State. 12
March, 2008. <http://links.jstor.org>
10
11