Justify a war Essay
Justify a war
If the character, Agamemnon, was seeking advice, which philosopher would he choose as best advisor and which of these; Socrates, Homer, Aristophanes, would he choose as least advisor? Why? First, it is necessary to remember that Agamemnon was a king. According the Homer, this man had extraordinary power and the highest social position. He had a great authority among his neighbors, which helped him to organize the army. However, Homer described him as a man who always needed the advice.
Sometimes Agamemnon allowed his emotions to dominate over his wisdom and experience. He is powerful warrior and good command, but he is imperfect governor for peaceful life. If this character was seeking advice, he’d probably gathered all the wise men in his kingdom. Homer would likely tell him about the god’s will, which determined the actions of rulers. Socrates would call him to be the philosopher king – the wise ruler who thinks about the interests of the state in general and the common people on particular.
And Aristophanes would probably be skeptical about the ideas of two previous speakers; he was known as the father of satire and his skepticism as for the issues of the wars, state governing and rulers was well-known all over ancient Greece. However, choosing the best advisor Agamemnon would probably choose Homer. Both Socrates and Aristophanes didn’t approve the idea of the war. Perhaps, their advices as for peaceful life and wise ruling could be useful fir Agamemnon, but he didn’t need such advices. It is known that every person hears what he or she wants to hear.
Agamemnon the king seek the “casus belli”, the event to justify a war. The will of gods was the most appropriate philosophy for him, and the kidnapping of Helen was just the secondary reason. Homer. The Iliad. Richmond Lattimore, translator. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1951) 2 Compare and contrast Greek comedies and tragedies. Include choice of plays, production, plot subject material, audience participation, and costumes Aristotle was the first who compared Greek comedies and tragedies in his “Poetics”. “A tragedy, then, is the imitation of an action that is serious…
in a dramatic, not in a narrative form; with incidents arousing pity and fear, with which to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions” (Poetics, VI. 2) Both these genres had their beginnings in the Greek theater. The tragedy appeared in the middle of 6th century BC, the comedy followed the tragedy fifty years later (though these dates are very rough, we don’t really know much about these times). As for the choice of plays the tragedy is the serious play, which is based on the solemn issue of social, religious or personal nature.
The comedy is the play humorous actions of characters solving the same personal, social and religious issues. The plot subject material was also different. “Tragedies were based largely on the myths or stories of the old narrative epic poems, of which only two main ones, the Iliad and the Odyssey, both written by Homer, survive. (Fornesca, 2010) “ The first comedies were devoted to the god Dionysus, thus the plot of comedy was based on the festivals, the holidays in the wake of Dionysus In the center of tragedy usually was protagonist, the idealized figure who became the victim of fate.
The center of the comedy usually is the figure who goes through all the troubles. The tragedies are focused on the feelings of pity and fear in audience; the aim of the comedy is the amusement and laugh. The characters of comedies and tragedies used different masks to show emotions. The clothes of tragic characters showed their social statuc and gender (women weren’t allowed to the stage). The clothes of comic heroes were different, initially they looked like satires, the disciples of Dyonisius. Rehm, R. Greek Tragic Theatre (1992) 3. How did Aristotle’s ideas about government and society differ from those of Plato?
Which one fits the United States system of government best and why? Though Aristotle and Plato were closely linked, Aristotle was a pupil of Plato, they had different view, Aristotle criticized the ideas of his teacher. Political theory of Plato includes the description of ideal government for the utopian society. Based on the traditional for ancient Greece ethics of virtue, Plato created the prototype of communist or totalitarian state government. In the Dialogue “The Republic” he divided the ideal society on three groups: “rulers, auxiliaries and labourers.
” (Gaarder 91) Rulers, according to Plato, should be the guardian class, they had to be educated and intelligent. The children in the guardian class should be learned how to rule from the early childhood. The consequence of this system is the absence of social mobility. This system is totally antidemocratic. However Plato was sure that every member of this utopian society can be happy knowing his in her position in society, as well as social function and the designated role. Aristotle disagreed with his teacher. He believed there is no single system of state government, which could be suitable for every society.
The appropriate system of governing depends on the aims of the state. Aristotle described three good system of governing: monarchy, the power of aristocracy and the system he called polity, which corresponds to modern democracy. For every system Aristotle highlighted the weak sides. Thus, the monarch can become the tyrant who oppresses people, and the power of aristocracy can enslave the people they rule. As for polity both Plato and Aristotle both feared that this system of governing might lead to the rule of the ignorant many over the educated few.
” It is clear that the modern system if governing in the USA corresponds to the views of Aristotle, and possible the fear of ancient philosopher wasn’t ungrounded. Gaarder, J. Sophie’s World ( Sofies verden Norw). Hardback & Paperback, 1991. 4 Using the play, “The Apology” define Sophist. According to that definition, was Socrates a Sophist? Give the reasons for your answer. The sophists were the group of philosopher contemporary to Socrates. Their task main was teaching the Athenian youth to create the convincing arguments and to convince the people.
They taught their students to argue both sides on the issue. Their philosophy was the kind of relativism; they thought there is no truth, just the different and conflicting opinions. It the negative meaning sophist is the person who plays both sides. Plato in his “Apology” describes Socrates trying to convince the jury he was not the sophist. Perhaps the rhetoric of Socrates and the sophists had the common features; however sophists charged fees for their teaching, and Socrates stayed poor. The sophists used their knowledge for their own gain.
They really taught their students to be prominent and to manipulate the people’s mind, the skills that could be used for political end, but enrichment was their primary aim, according to Plato. Plato thought that trading with the knowledge could be the field of bias and manipulation. He supposed sophists in telling their students the things that weren’t good for them. Unlike them, Socrates didn’t profit from his reaching. That is why Plato set Socrates apart from sophists. In many of Plato’s dialogues Socrates reveals the emptiness of their teachings.
At least, the principal difference between Socrates and sophists was in attitude to knowledge. The sophists claimed that they gained access to special knowledge through the investigation and experience, and this knowledge could be taught. Socrates was confessed he knew nothing – he meant the more he learned the more he understood the infinitude of the knowledge. It is no wonder that sophists was among the people who accused Socrates and became the reason of his death. Rowe, C. J. “Plato on the Sophists as Teachers of Virtue. ” History of Political Thought 4 (1983), 409-27.
University/College: University of Chicago
Type of paper: Thesis/Dissertation Chapter
Date: 22 September 2016
Let us write you a custom essay sample on Justify a war
for only $16.38 $13.9/page