FINAL EXAM REVIEW Q&A
5 pages182 viewsWinter 2011
This preview shows page 1. to view the full 5 pages of the document.
1. "The philosophers have only interpreted the world ...; the point,
however, is to change it." (Marx, Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach). How
adequate is Marx's characterization of "the philosophers" to Plato? To
Machiavelli, Hobbes, or Locke? (Discuss Plato and any ONE of these three
Marx is a man with a much more concrete and one track vision of how
society should work, right down to who’s role is what in society, and how it
should function. Marx sees the philosophers as idealists who all their own
vision of utopia without doing anything to implement it. In this essay, we will
look at two such philosophers, Plato and Machiavelli and determine if Marx’s
thesis to be accurate.
Plato is the one of the earliest philosophers, but arguably one of the, if not
the most influential philosopher in history. Plato was a man who believed in
the greater good, much like Marx. Plato was believed in close community
cooperation for the greater good of society. Everyone had a part in society
and everyone contributed to in order for it to function just like Marx. Plato is
different from Marx simply because believes there could be cooperation
between the upper and lower classes of society, compared to Marx who
believes in revolution from the lower classes to overtake all the
infrastructure and goods in society. In essence, Marx believes Plato is a man
of talk and not action.
Justice is a strong point with Marx and Plato. Plato believes that justice is a
necessary evil thast benefits those who are in for the greater good of society,
not those who wish to harm it. It grew out of in justice which was simply
man do what was best for ones self. Marx believes justice is little more than
Bourgeois window dressing in order for the top class to expose and abuse
the poor. What most workers produce they will never own and the rich can
always manipulate the system, therefore justice is for the benefit of the
Machiavelli also has his similarities and differences with Marx, as well is
similarities. In fact Marx is wrong to say all philosophers were simply talkers,
as Machiavelli as shown in his book was clearly a man of action. Machiavelli
believe in three ways to take power: Virtue , Crime and fortune. Those that
take by virtue hold on easily while those that take by fortune struggle to
maintain their power. Unlike Marx, this is applicable to anyone rather than
just the lower classes.
You're Reading a Preview
Unlock to view full version
Only half of the first page are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.
However, Marx and Machiavelli differ on how to treat the people of the said
Country. Machiavelli believed in total and absolute power at any cost. Marx
was more of a man who favored working together in order to achieve goals.
Machieavelli belived power must maintained by the ruler at any cost. It is
better to be feared and loved than be just loved. Marx was more about how
the leader or government should work for the people. Maintaining power to
him is focused on simply keeping the working class happy.
2. Compare and contrast Machiavelli=s critique of the Christian god
in the name of virtù with Socrates= critique of the Homeric gods in the
name of justice.
God is a very powerful symbol in modern society past and present. To many
of the earth’s pop he presents the good of society. Virtue and Justice is one
of the things we also value in society, in order to function competently.
Machiavelli and Socrates have two completely different approaches to their
critique of the God as we know it. Socrates bases his on the value of justice,
while Nicolo bases his on virtute
Machiavelli, is man who believes in power by any means possible. In this
case, Machiavelli believes God does govern over everything, but ultimately it
is up the humans to change their status. According to Nicolo, men are in
control of their own destiny, and should use any means possible in order to
achive their goals. If you control your fortune, you will achieve the goal.
Socrates, feels that God is human, that he represents humanity. With Homer,
he shows that unlike what Machiavelli preaches, he does not have to repress
his humanity in order to be courageous, in order to be brave. Politics is not
necessarily about virtue than it is about managing Human emotions.
3. Both Socrates, in Book 4 of the Republic, and Hobbes, in the
Preface to Leviathan, establish parallels between the structure of the best
or legitimate society and that of the individuals who compose it. Yet these
parallels are very different, as are the roles they play in the arguments of
the respective thinkers. Discuss.
Society is the core of humanity. Society brings us together and sets the rules
to live by. How we do that is debated for many, many year. Among the
philosophers, many different ideas have stood out over the test of time. Both
Socrates and Hobbes have made arguments on how society should function. And in
this case, both arguments are vastly different from one another
Socrates and Plato were more conformist that most of the philosophers. They
were of the belief that society needed to work together to function. In order to do
You're Reading a Preview
Unlock to view full version
Loved by over 2.2 million students
Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.