A Comparative Analysis of Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas' Essays

This document presents three essays exploring the philosophical ideas of Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas. The first essay analyzes Plato's analogy between the city and the individual in his work, *The Republic*, discussing his concept of justice and its implications. The second essay examines Aristotle's views on friendship, categorizing its different types and its importance in the political community. The third essay delves into Aquinas' position on law, including the nature of human and divine law, the scope of human law, and the necessity of divine law. Each essay provides a critical evaluation of the philosopher's arguments, drawing on relevant scholarly sources and offering a comprehensive overview of their key concepts.

Last Name 1
Student Name
Professor Name
Subject Name, Code
Date
Essay 1: Plato’s Analogy in the Republic
Plato’s analogy between the city and the individual found in the Republic
Plato’s Republic in the mid-nineteenth century had been one of the most read dialogues
(McPherran 94). In his book Plato discusses the analogy between the city and the individual. He
started off the discussion in an accepted method by stating that the unjust person cannot be better
off compared to a just person. He continues this discussion of his comparing similarly unjust
cities being worse off than cities which are just. The analogy compares the structural and values
of an individual to that of a city. In Plato’s philosophical theory, he lays stress on the idea of
justice. He states this analogy as he claims the same type of justice is to be applied to an
individual as that is applied to a city. Implications from his statement reveal that if a city’s
individuals are just then the city ought to become just. In his analogy he goes on to compare that
in case a city is just and possesses the virtues of courage and wisdom then the individuals within
the city will be courageous and wise as well. Justice in a city is predicted by him to be a heuristic
device which is implied to seek out for justice within individuals (Santas 42). He further
continues to justify his analogy stating that it is an individual’s interests to be just against being
unjust. Though the analogy might appear to be confusing yet it aims at explaining the virtue of
justice through such comparison.
Critically evaluation of the analogy

Last Name 2
The critical evaluation of the analogy between city and an individual appears to be rather
confusing. David Sachs argues that Plato’s work could not defend the concept justice (Ferrari
408). The city-individual analog classifies the working class being inferior to the guardian and
ruling class. It states that the inferior class needs to succumb to the authority of the later. Sach
argues that Plato’s work is a fallacy of irrelevance. The work in Republic aims at defending the
idea in one’s self interest to be just and to represent him as a balanced soul by acting justly to
another person. The analogy between psyche and city is that defending justice might keep a
person happy.
Conception of justice which Plato tries to support with the analogy
Plato tries to set out the idea of justice by his work in the Republic. The conception of
justice that Plato tries to support with the analogy is that a just person is more likely to be happy
similarly a just city is like to be happier (Purshouse 120). The idea of justice is related to people
doing good and staying away from theft, robbery, murder or adultery. Plato presents a person
with a balanced soul in performing socially just actions. A logical and casual connection is
established between psychically just and remaining socially just as well.

Last Name 3
Works Cited
Ferrari, G. R. F. "Williams and the City-Soul Analogy (Plato, Republic 435e and 544d)." Ancient
Philosophy 29.2 (2009): 407-413.
McPherran, Mark L., ed. Plato's' Republic': A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Purshouse, Luke. Plato's Republic: a reader's guide. A&C Black, 2010.
Santas, Gerasimos. Understanding Plato's Republic. John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Last Name 4
Essay 2: Friendship Aristotle
Aristotle varieties of friendship
Aristotle in his works defined the precise features of friendship. He states that friendship
is necessary and splendid in nature, comprising of mutual feeling of goodwill between two
people (Curren 34). He stated three types of friendship; the first is based upon utility. In this type
of friendship both the people in mutual relationship derive some benefits from one another. The
second type of friendship is based on pleasure. In such a type of friendship both people are
drawn to one another’s good qualities or good appearance. The first two types of friendship are
said to be accidental in nature, as the friends are motivated by their own need and there is no
individual need in the friendship. These two types of friendship is said to be short-lived in nature
as absence of need and pleasure changes over a period of time (Lu 44). The third type of
friendship is dependent upon goodness. In this type of friendship both the people admire the
other person’s goodness and assist the other person to strive for goodness.
Aristotle thoughts on friendship being important to the political community
Aristotle’s thoughts on friendship and its basic characteristics have an impact on the
modern political philosophy. His states friendship between citizens in a just state is an
experience, people undertake for their own sake. He states that friendship is integral to the
political community as citizens wish each other well and conduct activities for themselves, even
if they do not know each other very well (Cherry 1410). There is an intention of common good,
hence political friendship is defined as a concord where the friendship of utility compromises
moral and legal friendship. An elaboration on political friendship can be seen in varied
constitution, where the different relationship amongst citizens, amongst cities and amongst

Last Name 5
human beings is defined. It is in political friendship that a concord is created in the society; it is a
way in which violence is prevented in a society. Aristotle provides a model for friendship that
can be used to define contemporary communities and its growing demands for global unity that
is way beyond justice. Works of Aristotle defines friendship being an integral virtue, an
emotional concern aimed at living well with one another (Hauser 110). He regards political
friendship as being the greatest virtue for a state in safeguarding against revolution that preserves
the state’s unity.
Critically evaluate his argument
The concept of friendship as defined by Aristotle can be acceptable. However the concept
of friendship being an integral component within a state cannot be acceptable. Citizens within a
state do not function for one another. The recent robberies, thefts, revolutions and terrorists
attacks are proof that the idea of friendship does not hold true for a state. Therefore, there is
absence of the very idea of friendship within a state and cannot be regarded as being crucial in
political community. Every political community around the world having parties contesting
against one another, hence the idea of friendship does not hold true. Again the political parties as
well as citizens in every country are against one another which are a very proof against the idea
of friendship. Therefore, Aristotle’s idea of friendship in contemporary community does not hold
true.

Last Name 6
Works Cited
Cherry, Kevin M. "The problem of polity: Political participation and Aristotle's best
regime." The journal of politics 71.4 (2009): 1406-1421.
Curren, Randall. "Aristotle’s educational politics and the Aristotelian renaissance in philosophy
of education." Ideas of education. Routledge, 2013. 33-49.
Hauser, Gerard A. "Aristotle on Epideictic: e Formation of Public Morality." Fifty Years of
Rhetoric Society Quarterly. Routledge, 2018. 110-128.
Lu, Catherine. "Political friendship among peoples." Journal of International Political
Theory 5.1 (2009): 41-58.

Last Name 7
Essay 3: Aquinas’ position on law
Aquinas’ position on law, including who can make human law, what the scope of human law
should be, and why human law still needs divine law
Aquinas discussion on law initiates with the nature of law in general. He was the first and
foremost theologian who distinguished philosophy from theology. He described law as being the
general rule and measure which directs a man to conduct an act or refrain from it (das Neves,
César, and Melé 770). He defines law being directed by its very nature towards being good. He
recognizes four kinds of law, the eternal, the natural, the human and the divine. His teachings are
central to moral and political teaching. According to him, everything in the terrestrial world is
created by God and is imbibes certain nature which defines its essence. Therefore his inclination
towards the natural perfections which God has created (Hayek 50). He believed in human
subjugation to the eternal law, which is also referred to as the natural law. He states that the law
of nature or the law made by God is imposing upon human beings. The scope of human law is
from the principles from where one can draw conclusions. He states that the natural law is
present in the heart of all men and cannot be abolished and they are universally acceptable as
well (d'Entreves 17). Human still needs the divine law so as to direct them towards
understanding moral directives. The law is naturally derived and is written in hearts of all men
hence they need to pursue them. It is based upon the principles to avoid evil and accept good to
be done. He states that the law are principles without which human reasoning will not function
appropriately, thus it needs to be adopted.
Critically evaluate his argument

Last Name 8
The law stated by Aquinas cannot be accepted in all its senses. Though the concept of
natural reasoning can be accepted to some extent. His concept on natural law does lay the basis
for laws and moral reasoning (Selznick 17). However, humans require laws which are binding on
them and such that they can function effectively in the society. Law required by human society
needs to include greater aspects complexities. The law of nature cannot alone suffice the
requirements demanded by the human society hence Aquinas demand for implementing law of
nature cannot be accepted. Moreover, he states that the law enacted upon humans can be created
by God, which cannot always be the case as at several instances there remains a need for the
society to create and implement a law for its citizens for the purpose of justice. The concept of
justice is very loosely stated by Aquinas and needs to include broader concept requiring
intervention from the human society. The concept of justice as defined by Aquinas cannot be
alone binding upon human beings. The concept that human beings will conduct themselves for
the good is again a question that needs to be evaluated.

Last Name 9
Works Cited
d'Entreves, Alexander Passerin. Natural law: an introduction to legal philosophy. Routledge,
2017.
das Neves, João César, and Domènec Melé. "Managing ethically cultural diversity: Learning
from Thomas Aquinas." Journal of business ethics 116.4 (2013): 769-780.
Hayek, Friedrich August. Law, legislation and liberty, volume 2: The mirage of social justice.
Vol. 2. University of Chicago Press, 2012.
Selznick, Philip. "Sociology and natural law." The Law and Society Canon. Routledge, 2018. 47-
71.