Efforts of the Great Philosophers in a Bid to Create Awareness about the Democracy - Essay Example

Presis for Chapter Four and Critical Comment about the Conclusion Drawn by the Author in the Epilogue [Name] [Institutional Affiliation] [Date] A) Precis for Chapter Four This chapter carefully and systematically dissects the manner in which the great philosophers (Socrates and Plato) came to condemn the democratic space in Athens. It does so by first laying the foundation and insight into the manner in which constitutional democracy in Athens was arranged. One of the key things that most democrats in Athens fought for was power. Ascension to high political offices was synonymous with acquisition of more wealth, earning a good name as well as increasing friends and strengthening friendship ties. However, losing power could be equally catastrophic as one would end up in poverty, miserly or death. In addition to power, the need to get wealth was central among the democrats. This went along with the struggle to survive. Regardless of the fact that public speaking was a respectable and indispensable art in Athens, the city made no deliberate effort to formally train young people how to do it. More often, this art was a prerogative of a few who naturally (or via practice) knew how to express themselves and argue out effectively. There was a tremendous demand by young people to know how to speak persuasively. That is why many sophists and rhetoricians came to the town to teach these young people. These teachers took everything as gospel truth, and none of them questioned the wrongs in the society. It is within this context that Socrates came up. He quit his job of artisanal stonemasonry and started challenging the learned men of the time and the ambitious young men. He spent most of his time addressing gatherings in the gymnasium, marketplace, and homes and in banquets as opposed to giving speeches in the assembly. He would soon gain momentum and young, ambitious men like Plato found some sense in his speeches. They, in the end, discovered in him a substitute form for a good life. As a result of his contradicting teachings, Socrates earned himself public disapproval. Most of his fellow citizens found him as flouting the city laws. At one time, he was sentenced by the jury to take poison drink. Socrates ideas had much sense that any Athenian would think of. For instance, he disapproved of the hypocrisy that reigned among those in power. He would not understand why they (those in power) condemned tyrants while they were tyrants in their deeds and thoughts. He further ridiculed the fact that it was unacceptable if an individual to amass wealth for himself, but acceptable for the emperor to do that. Socrates praised the courage that Athenians had to go to battle but provoked them to think the cause for which they were fighting for. Socrates revealed a league of citizens that blindly followed the officials said and demanded. One outstanding feature in Socrates attempt to democratize Athens was his praise of virtue and knowledge. According to him, virtue and knowledge were the keys competencies for anyone seeking political power. He affirmed, in his teachings and speeches that those in leadership positions ought to preach virtue and live up to it. It did not make any sense proclaiming the essence of virtue yet lead lives that lacked the very same virtues one portended to proclaim. On the other hand, we can interpret Socrates service in the army as an attempt to fight democracy in that capacity. As an individual, he never sought any leadership role or elective post. Instead, he avoided addressing in assemblies. He restricted himself to the marketplace, homes and the gymnasium. It is paradoxical that Socrates proclaimed himself as the only person to worth seeking political power yet he never attempted. Late in his life Socrates ended up with myriad followers. All of them were ardent followers of the art of knowledge and virtue. They acknowledged that the two were the driving forces towards a democratic society. Arguably, they might have cultivated aspects worth keeping from his teaching or better still become effective democratic citizens. In all honesty, Socrates made fine contributions towards making Athens a better democracy. From page 22, and onwards, the chapter contrasts and compares the life of Plato and his contributions to that of Socrates. He was born to a family that would guarantee his success. He had opportunities to take up promising positions but declined all of them to take another cause that he was interested in. Plato was one of the young, enthusiastic men who followed Socrates everywhere to follow his teachings. In his adult life, he ended up initiating a higher institution of learning where he taught and wrote articles. Plato adopted a distinctive form of dialogues to articulate issues of concern. One of his major works was “The Republic”. In this text, he examines ideal politics. Plato strongly opposed the Athenian aristocratic politics. These forms of politics in Athens had promoted exploitation of the poor, injustice, undesired greed and tyranny. In the Republic, a text that later politicians drew thought from, the ideal politicians ought to have the interests of the commoners at heart. Similarly, he claims that the justice meant that all citizens have the right to enjoy equal civic rights. This was a contravening approach to Athenian politics where citizens were ordered in ranks from the most important to the least important. Plato through his works affirmed and preached against ruling for oneself. He opposed leaders who ruled with the aim of benefiting themselves rather than the rulers. He underlines that the aim of governing is to benefit those who are ruled and not oneself. He thus called for sacrificial, selfless and rulers endowed with virtue and knowledge. In another text, the statesman, Plato unveils two things. One is an attempt to define the political knowledge. He does so by evoking the opinion of a knowledgeable member of the state and that of a ruler. As it is, the ruler fails implying that those who rule do not know the meaning of ruling. This brings out a wider picture of what transcended in the Athenian society where people ruled without any apparent motive apart from gaining power to oppress the poor. Secondly, via the statesman, Plato underscores the indispensable need for the rule of law in governance. He advocates rules, policies and laws to limit those in power from oppressing the poor and misusing their powers. This justifies the need for a constitution in any democratic society. Plato tends to associate dictatorial regimes to lack of rule of law; that is to limit the actions of those in power and the ones who are ruled. As the chapter rolls up, it touches on the thirteen letters. In one, the letters, Plato is seen to be making physical efforts to salvage his course of seeking democracy. He physically travels all the way to Sicily to save a young, ambitious man of his class from inheriting a tyrannical regime. Three of his visits land him in trouble. In fact in one instance, a seaman is bribed to sell him to slavery. Given that Plato attempts three times to save this man shows distinct and impeccable resilience that people need to embrace in the fight for democracy. This particular act contrasts him to his predecessor, Socrates, who only spent his time teaching on democratic ideals that he never attempted to demonstrate. B.) Critical Comment about the Conclusion Drawn by the Author in the Epilogue In summary, the chapter epitomizes the efforts of the great philosophers in a bid to create awareness about the democracy. Both have a common interest, which wants to educate the masses on ideals of democracy. Their hope was that some of their followers, political men and women would embrace their ideals for a better society. This however earned them disapproval of the society and only a few followers. To a large extent, the two of them have opted for different approaches for political emancipation in Athens. While Plato’s approach to democracy was through writing his thoughts down ,addressing people and teaching in his Academy that of Socrates was addressing people in the gymnasium ,marketplace without ever appearing to give speeches in the assembly or law courts. Plato, being Socrates’ follower has drawn much thought from Socrates. A critical analysis of Plato’s works earns him the title a “copycat” of Socrates’ ideologies. He has barely come up with his ideas beyond philosophizing politics about the rule of law. Plato’s works lack originality in thoughts but portrays a more aggressive, resilient and bold character. He not only writes about democracy but acts on what he says .For instance, he attempts on three accounts to save a young man from inheriting a tyrannical rule. Just like Socrates, Plato was too ideal to be true .Both of them were oblivion of the realistic Athenian life, culture and society which they thrived. Their impeccable ideas, for instance, of a truly virtuous and knowledgeable man neglected the fact that human beings are imperfect. I would be virtually impossible to find a man of that cadre .Not even the two Philosophers would fit those shoes. As one reads a chapter, they can’t pause to wonder and ponder who the man with such outstanding virtues, the philosophers, are eluding to. Is it angel? Probably in earth. Read More