جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « جمهوری » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

The issue of gender was extensively discussed for the first time in Plato's dialogues, especially in the Republic, and since then, many views have been raised about it. In this article, we will explain and analyze Plato's perspective on why and how women benefit from equal education and the necessity of their entry into the economic, political, and social fields in his utopia. Furth  ermore, we will investigate the idea of gender equality in the context of punishment, emphasizing the theory of comprehensive punishment, purposeful and basic justice. In the present study, it will become clear that the determining components of the Platonic theory of punishment are not related to the element of "gender." Instead, they focus on the element of "soul" rather than the human body. In other words, among the three general life periods of the soul (previous life, together with the body, and after separation from the body), "punishment" is related to the middle period of the soul's life. Secondly, according to Plato, the goal of punishment, even in cases where physical punishment may be considered, is originally and essentially aimed at the soul, not the body. Thirdly, achieving stability, security, and justice in society, which are essentially the Platonic ideals, is possible only in the shadow of the theory of punishment independent of gender. This is why he defends the idea of gender equality in the Republic

in modern times, two fundamental crises have raised the need to pay attention to laws. The first crisis was the "religious and civil wars" in Europe, and the second crisis was the "tyranny and oppression" of political systems. Montesquieu was one of the thinkers who pondered those crises and offered a solution to correct them. He can be considered the most prolific thinker who, by a Copernican revolution in political philosophy and law, set out to formulate the conceptual foundations of the separation of powers in accordance based on the English Constitution. Montesquieu was a moderate and conservative writer who influenced the Enlightenment, the Founding Fathers, and the authors of the Federalist Papers, one of the most important classical work of American political philosophy. The Federalist Papers were influenced by Montesquieu. Accordingly, the present article seeks to show the impact of Montesquieu's teachings on the thought of the authors of the Federalist Papers on how the rule of law was established in the first democratic republic in modern times. Such an understanding helps us to gain a more accurate understanding of the importance of this influence in modern times.

The quarrel between Plato and the poets in the Utopia and try to exclude them from there is a very important subject in the Republic. He in the book III explains the limits for poems and determines the poems that can be read for youths and the poems that cannot be read for them. This radical Platonic approach to the poets and their poems can be linked today to the many different media especially TV and its programs. In Plato's view, our reaction to the different events in the everyday life is a copy of our reaction to the poem. This problem is today linked to the TV and other social media like cinema. TV in only an instrument for distribution and transmission, and does not present any new method for interpreting reality. In another word, TV only present reality as it is and TV is like the Platonic poet in this respect. We can recite the Platonic objection on poem, also on the TV and its functions. In the present article we will try to survey the nature and the functions of TV by the Platonic method of critiquing poets in the Utopia.

One of the most common ways of governing throughout the history of political philosophy that many philosophers have studied is democracy, and one of the first leading philosophers in this field was Plato. For example, democracy in his intellectual geography is the worst kind of government that, unlike other forms of government, does not have the ability to focus on positive things. In fact, he sees democracy as the rule of ignorant people who are far from ideal, and which ultimately leads to democratization. Thus, this article seeks an analysis Platochr('39')s view of democracy and the theory of the "Philosopher King" in the context of the Republic. And explain Platochr('39')s strategy in governing the affairs of society, which he believed only the  philosopher kingchr('39')s could be the true ruler of a society. Finally, it examines the critiques of Renaissance, modern, and contemporary thinkers on the theory of his philosopher king.

The main question of this research is: “What are the similarities and dissimilarities of Allamah Tabatabaii and Kant’s points of view on the tie between democracy and peace?” The method adopted for the study of their political thought is rational-analytic. The research deals with the idea that both thinkers do not believe in the necessary tie between democracy and perpetual peace. According to the findings, their views on the issue are similar: their use of rational-analytic method, their systematic and comprehensive attitude to the issue, that man’s course of life is evolutionary and aims to promote peace, that the system of world is regulated, and the analysis of man’s behavior as per employment. Their dissimilar views are: that Kant is idealist but Allamah is realist, that Kant sides with opposition but Allamah with compatibility, that Kant is humanist but Allamah is theocentric, that Kant deals with positive laws but Allamah with divine laws, and that peace for Kant is the final aim but for Allamah is an intermediate aim.

Ancient Greek plays, especially tragedies, and Plato's dialogues are two main sources of investigating the ethical perspective of the ancient Greeks about morality and moral choices. These two sources are opponent with each other and show different approaches to morality and the role of emotions in moral choices. That is the reason for the animosity of philosophers and poets according to Plato. In this paper, I will focus on the three famous plays of ancient Greek tragedians, i.e. Agamemnon by Aeschylus, Medea by Euripides and Antigone by Sophocles; in comparison with the Plato's Republic, to examine two different views on ethics and priority of moral choices in the public and private spheres. At the same time, I examine the role and moral agency of women in these works. Again, I examine the significance of emotions and moral values associated with femininity in both points of view. In the end, I conclude that the tragedies standpoint pays more attention to the emotions in ethical life and recognize the feminine approach to ethics; meanwhile, tragedies show concrete and contextual understanding of human problems in ethical life and all these facts provide sufficient reason for re-reading and re-examining them from a modern point of view.

This article attempt to say that the fundamental question about justice, according to Plato’s philosophy, is always the question: which government is better and which order is fairer and who has the authority of government over people? In Plato's view, justice must be realized within the individual and in the community. Justice in the city is found in the natural hierarchy and division of labor. In other words, Plato’s view of division of labor is divided into three types of peoples’ task in life which are workers as farmers, military type and guardians. Plato conceived of the state as an art in which the ruler should consider the interests of those who are under the rule and by keeping in mind the moderation and harmony of extremes, if one insists on following the selfish tendencies it gives rise to turmoil and chaos. Therefore, Plato conceives of the state as a human body with three parts, in which there are rulers and guards who are in good shape instead of the head and chest and abdomen. As a healthy and balanced person balances and appropriateness, the sign of a state of virtue is that anyone knows his place. This article seeks to explain the principles of the theory of justice based on the thesis of the Republic and its objections and also it seeks to provide an appropriate answer to the question: is justice, as Plato says, identical with the concept of virtue?

Phronesis is a fundamental term in Ancient Greek Philosophical tradition. This term is based on »wise- ruler« in Plato and »legislator- philosopher« thought in Plato. Most of Philosophers and commentators of Aristotle work relate methodical use of this term to Aristotle. This affair is the result of the manner of these two philosopher’s expression. But their ambiguity shows phronesis less importance in Plato’s intellectual tradition.Phronesis in Plato is brightness that results from good perception. But in his last work, means Plato, phronesis hasn’t only divine origin, but in the meaning of Grief and Political Knowledge, is the supplement of sophia that is the highest coordination between reason and desire in spirit. Phronesis in Plato is responsible for creating governmental- philosophical rules and practical judgment through experience and council. By this, phronesis owners can merge wisdom and politics and see better than others. So, sophia and phronesis aren't synonyms in Plato, but their conceptual application are related to each other: as phronesis owner has practical wisdom- sophia in Aristotle thought.

Before Plato, the thinkers dealing with the problem of language viewed it as a dual phenomenon. In Aristotle’s eyes, language is a mysterious entity which functions not only as a link connecting the gods and human beings but also as a body of laws for revealing the truth. For Heraclitus, language enjoys a code-like aspect similar to logos, which is mainly a phenomenon referring to the truth rather than a tool for explaining and analyzing it. On the other hand, for Parmenides, language is a deceptive phenomenon which is the product of a kind of social contract as well as a problem in the sensible world which, by itself, is not of much value. Sophists also consider language to be an arbitrary and relative phenomenon which merely functions as a medium of speech and entails no absolute truth by itself. Given this historical background, Plato set out to explore the problem of language. He developed a view in Cratylus which completed the mentioned historical background. For him, language is a deceptive and imperfect phenomenon; a phenomenon which he investigated in Cratylus based on its essence and its relationship with reality. He maintains that, since language is an artificial entity, it is essentially imperfect and, hence, incapable of providing any knowledge regarding reality. He believes that language can only be used to reflect the reality as accurately as possible, is ontologically posterior to reality, and is only temporally prior to it in terms of its instructional feature. In other words, according to Plato, one cannot attain knowledge through language because it is an artificial phenomenon which, at its best, can manifest the reality in an imperfect form.

One of the greatest problems in Plato that appears in different forms in his works is the relation of nomos and phusis. This thesis has been in fifth century B.C as the contradiction of phusis and nomos among big thinkers. In this essay, we tried to investigate the relation of phusis and nomos in Plato’s thoughts according to current theories of the contradiction of these in dialogues Gorgias, Republic and Protagoras. Plato tries to minimize consequences of belief to contradiction of phusis and nomos in social and political life by assertion large scale relation between phusis and nomos. Plato depicts the ultimate solution of this problem in Law. There he accounts nomos as raised from phusis that is sub sovereignty of divine. Indeed union of phusis and gods in Plato’s thought is sanction for the identity of phusis and nomos.

One of the central topics in Plato's republic is Justice. In order to define justice, Plato portrays a Utopia which is ruled by a Philosopher-King. He holds that justice must be settled within the individual as well as in the society. Justice in the city would be found in the natural hierarchy and division of labor. Therefore, every individual works at that which he is naturally best suited. Correspondingly, justice in the soul means that each part of the soul does its own duty; thereby, coordination will be created inside the soul. So justice is the health of the soul and the vices are its malady. Platonic justice is of two levels, one that belongs only to philosophers and the other which is common among individuals. The philosopher takes advantage of both levels, i.e. he not only possesses the internal coordination, but also observes the forms of justice. Other people, though able to establish inner coordination through justice, are far away from true justice. But they are prone to come to observe the forms of justice through being nurtured by the guidance of the philosopher-king. Plato's definition of justice is far beyond all conventional and legal affairs and refers to the origin of justice in the human soul: What the philosopher calls justice is rooted in the most profound nature of human being. The present paper deals with the above mentioned issues according to the Republic, and examines both the relation between politics and ethics for Plato and the elements involved in his ethical and political theories. For according to Plato, politics and ethics are inseparable and any kind of nurturing, is the task and function of the society.

The basic principles of western political philosophy has been laid down by Socrates and his most prominent disciple Plato. This question has always been important for Plato: which state is better and which is more just and who has the appropriate qualification to govern the people? Today this question is urgent for the states.Plato wrote many treatises which the most important of them is “Republic”. His political philosophy has been expounded in this book. “Republic” is one of the most detailed and most exciting philosophical text that has ever been written. In his most treatises Socrates is the main spokesman. The subject of the dialogues in the book is the nature of justice. Justice in this context means goodness or moral virtues and ideal perfection of man. Plato regards the government a kind of art or technique in which like the other techniques or arts the benefit should be the main concern. Moderation and harmony are the most important thing and excess and negligence should be avoided. If someone insists on his egoistic inclinations, this brings about disorder and chaos. Plato has in mind a state which like the human body has three parts. He imagines that in this state in place of head, chest and abdomen we have governers, guardians and labourers. Just as the healthy man reacts with harmony and proportion, so the sign of a virtuous state is that every person knows his place in it.