Aristotle and Plato are two of the earliest political philosophers with documented commentary. Both of these philosophers address the same arguments that the Polis of Athens faced and tackled at the time. Although existed both during different political atmospheres the same issues were raised. Plato wrote at a time where democracy ruled Athens and were the views of philosophers was mealy tolerated. During Aristotle’s time he tortured Alexander the Great a time at which the Greek empire began to emerge.
Aristotle was one of Plato’s best student so one would expect them to have correlating ideology, but in fact both agree on totally different points and in Fact have conflicting arguments at times, yet all arguments exist upon an almost identical skeleton with some differentiating features. Plato based his political theory on ‘the perfect society’ he called ‘ Utopia’ and therefore refers to it as a utopian society. His book ‘the republic’ is a commentary and documentation of fellow philosophers and thinkers of the time.
During these conversation answers where hardly ever answered but were elaborated upon with a death that rose further questions. One of the most major characters in the dialogues was Socrates, who also had his own theories. Within his Utopia several features were essential. Plato broke down the human soul in three parts; Desire spiritual and rational. Plato addresses the three features as being key to the establishment of the perfect society. If every person counterweights with the whole of society and these features than society can understand each other and progress and work towards the advancement of the society.
Aristotle takes the same concept but more clearly defines it and takes it to the next level that goes beyond the perfect state and allows its applications to influence the whole system rather that purely serve as its basis. Aristotle has a perfect society but is not as nearly exaggerated as that of a utopia. Aristotle takes a more lenient attitude in his philosophy in general, in which its application is easier to real life. Aristotle sees only two parts to the human soul; the philosophical/ theoretical and the rational.
Superficially one may derive from this that the human soul is far deeper than that of Plato’s partitions. In fact Aristotle regards human individual more than Plato does. Aristotle believes that each and every human has the philosophical/ theoretical dimension to him or her but the distinguishing feature is the ability to be rational. Plato uses the analogy of golden, silver and iron souls to distinguish the differences. The scales on which both philosophers regard the human soul on are consequently determinate to the whole political structure and system more so in Plato’s utopia.
To be able to recognize the difference of perspectives, looking at what qualifies one to become a ruler is essential. Plato claims that the pre-determined level of a soul is the definite feature of the ruler. The king must be of a golden soul who also happens to be a philosopher. Aristotle takes the latter part of this interpretation and applies it to the rational part of the human soul and defines it as being the determinate factor unique characteristic that qualifies to be the leader.