Comparison between platos and arostotle estimation of the role of rhetoric in political activity and deliberation

Aristotle researched areas of philosophy as well as the field of science which Plato never considered seriously. As per the conventional view, the philosophy of Plato is utopian and abstract while that of Aristotle is practical, commonsensical and empirical. The relationship between Plato’s views concerning persuasion as evidenced in Phaedrus and Gorgias are in specific respects closer to Aristotle's rhetoric. Comparison between Plato’s and Aristotle Estimation of the Role of Rhetoric in Political Activity and Deliberation The general relationship between the views of Plato and Aristotle concerning rhetoric are well known. Plato discusses rhetoric mostly in the Gorgias and Phaedrus (Ballacci, 2018 p. This specific variation depicts clearly in association with the political theory of Plato in his precise discussion about rhetoric in the statesman.

Within this work, Plato shows enhanced interest in the real practice of the political affairs within the Greek cities. Stating the slight capability of scientific rulers who would be in a position to rule in absence of restraint of law, Plato turns his concentration to the political systems grounded on the rule of law. He offers a well-known classification of the poleis as per the number and quality of their rulers, rule by one, rule by few and rule by many relying on whether the rulers disobey or follow the law (Madsen, 2018 p. However, the scientific rulers’ ideal is not displaced from the thought of Plato. The theory of political justices was developed to advance ethical concepts which helped to draw a connection between the three major classes of a complete state that is the sovereigns, soldiers and the producers.

In the complete state as well as in the just individual the three components of a state have a responsibility to do their functions proper to them and in collaborations with the other parts of the state. More specifically the monarchs understood both the good about the state and the good about themselves. Rhetoric is evidenced in Plato’s visionary that the rulers would adopt a communal form of society with no private property and include women in the ruling system. Before children are trained into the training ruler ship they would be tested and those who portray most ability will be the ones to be adopted. Aristotle differed with Plato in viewing epistemic reasoning and applied thinking as different subjects.

According to Plato, the main concern is to find the truth or trying to be close to the truth while according to Aristotle the major concern is not the truth but is about the decisions in action. Another difference in Plato’s rhetoric and that of Aristotle is evidenced in the scientific political domain. Plato view is a destination difference am empirical knack which is a subject which could be used to describe the best about the world and on the other hand a real art which as the ability to discover certain domains through the understanding of the world around us in a better way. In Aristotle's view, an action experience appears to be less superior when compared to art and for this reason that why the man with experience can succeed more compared to those with no experience but with art.

Conclusion In the works of Plato and Aristotle, rhetoric played a big role in their political activity despite that the two philosophers had contrasting attitudes towards rhetoric. Some of the remarkable differences include the view about a true retort that has scientific intelligence. Plato’s reproach of rhetoric can be better understood through the evaluation of those who criticized him. On the other hand, Aristotle's views on deliberation can be well articulated in his political and rhetoric writing. Regardless of their major differences, Plato and Aristotle had the same view on recognition of the central role played by emotions in the subject of persuasion. and Nehamas, A. eds.  Aristotle's rhetoric: Philosophical essays. Princeton University Press , pp. Hauser, G. Princeton University Press, pp.