|
|
Plato and Aristotle come to very different conclusions about the ideal political state. Both men possessed a superior intellect; indeed, this could be an illustrative example of how, in practice, Plato's ideal state could not in reality hope to remove politics totally if rule was held by more than one person, even if those people all were of superior intellect and training. It seems likely that the differences between Plato and Aristotle are grounded in the two men's fundamentally different world views, the difference in purpose of their philosophies, and the differences of their visions. They differ radically on these issues, but are close in others, such as their views of democracy and preference for rule by an elite. Aristotle is the pinnacle of the logical aspects of philosophy. He favors a relativist view of all things. Aristotle was not so much interested in finding absolute and abstract truths as he was with instead cataloging his world, much like a scientist would do. Aristotle favors what is real and concrete. He favors the ideals that are both real and obtainable in a particular time and particular place. Aristotle's philosophy is grounded; it deals with the realities of here and now. In fact, part of Aristotle's project was solving the problems of dualism inherent in Plato's metaphysical ideas. Concrete things are real for Aristotle: plants, trees, rocks, human beings, horses, and swords are real. Aristotle favors a view of the state as organic; that is, a state which is a natural organism that has, through time, evolved naturally. It is not a planned or designed thing. This shows, surely, Aristotle's interest in biology and science. Plato favors just the opposite things. Plato is an absolutist in search of absolute truths about the world. These absolute truths can then be translated into something to be lived by and to be aspired towards in all aspects of the world, including moral matters and political matters.
|
