DIFFERENCES between Socrates, Plato and Aristotle

Socrates, Plato and Aristotle: differences

We are going to travel to Ancient Greece to analyze the differences between Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, which, at present, are considered the parents of the western philosophySince many of his ideas have had a great influence on Western thought and have been the starting point of philosophical currents that have developed throughout history.

The first of all was Socrates (470 BC. C.), of which Plato (427 a. C.) would be the most advantageous student of him and, finally, we have Aristotle (384 a. C.), who in turn was a disciple of Plato. However, even though among them are disciplesIn some of its philosophical precepts we find some differences, such as: its concept of the world, ethics, politics or religion. If you want to know more about the differences between these three philosophers, keep reading because in a PROFESSOR we explain it to you.

You may also like: Differences between Plato and Aristotle

Index

Your cosmological view of the universe
His concept about politics
Ethics development
His way of seeing philosophy
His concept of religion
The concept about the individual

instagram story viewer

His cosmological view of the universe.

Despite the fact that these three philosophers are continuators of each other, the thought of him is not totally the same, that is to say, that they themselves are evolving, questioning and contributing their own ideas. Which, generates that philosophical thought does not remain in a monolithic state, but that it becomes richer and that differences between them arise. Among which stand out the cosmological view of the universe.

Socratesaffirms that intelligence is the creative force and the center of the universe. A single universe that is orderly, in which everything has a function or purpose and in which the human being is present.

Plato, unlike his teacher, does not see the universe as something unique, but rather speaks of a universe divided into two worlds /ontological dualism:

The intelligible world: It is the true world and where ideas are located, it is incorruptible, immutable, it is the world of essences and it has been created by the demiurge.
The sensible world: It is the physical world, a copy of the first, it is the world of opinions and appearances, subjected to change and corruption, characterized by multiplicity and accessed through senses.

On the part of him, Aristotle, also tells us of a dual universe, but unlike Plato he affirms that it is composed of matter, essence and substance. Thus, surpassing his predecessors (he leaves aside the ontological concept) and establishing that the universe is divided into two regions

The sublunar region: It is composed of four corruptible materials: air, fire, sea and air). And, in addition, it is a region in which everything changes and whose movement is linear.
The supralunar region: It is found on the moon, it exists forever, it cannot be destroyed, it is divine, eternal and incorruptible. Likewise, it is composed of ether (bright and light-emitting matter) and its movement is circular and local.

His concept about politics.

Politics is another of the differences between Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.

The political theory of Socrates establishes that the government must be held by a political expert: who knows how to run the polis, who has virtue, who knows how to recognize the good and who knows about justice. Likewise, he establishes that the ignorant cannot be allowed to come to power, as democracy has done, and that it must always prevail loyalty to the system and respect for the law by the citizen even if he is not in favor of the government system.

Plato, Like his teacher, he criticizes democracy and establishes that it is a government of demagogues, but Plato does not speak to us about the idea of loyalty and he performs a more detailed analysis of the forms of government, stating that there are five types:

Aristocracy or Sophocracy: It is the perfect system, the government of the wise and where the search for wisdom and the cult of a wise leader prevail. This system can degenerate into thymocracy.
Timocracy: It is the government where the warrior is worshiped, the government of honor and where the owners prevail. This system can degenerate into an oligarchy.
Oligarchy: It is the government of a few, where the rich are worshiped and where wealth is sought. This system can degenerate into tyranny.
Democracy: It is the government of many, where the search for freedom prevails, where laws are ignored and where the wise are despised.
Tyranny: The government of the tyrant, where politics is not developed and where slavery stands out.

Finally, Aristotle Unlike his predecessors, he defines that politics is a system aimed at maintaining orderly society through norms based on reason and whose main function is to provide the welfare to the community.

On the other hand, he also talks to us about six forms of government, but unlike Plato, his analysis is carried out based on two great premises: if said governments seek the common good or not (degradation of the former) and the number of rulers in each of them:

Monarchy: one-person government / Tyranny: degradation of one's monarchy / government.
Aristocracy: government of a few / Oligarchy: degradation of the aristocracy / government of a few.
Democracy: government of many / Demagogy: degradation of democracy / government of many.

Furthermore, for him the ideal system would not be the aristocracy, but the Politeia. A government that is the result of the combination of aristocracy and democracy, with a middle-class population.

Development of ethics.

The Socrates and Plato ethics fits within the same philosophical line, the moral intellectualism, which is characterized by being an ethic developed from reasoning: good is knowledge / virtue and evil is ignorance / vice. In this way, evil is absence of knowledge of good and the person who acts badly is not out of evil but out of ignorance, no one does evil consciously.

Nevertheless, AristotleHe disagrees with this concept and establishes that knowing what good is does not imply that we are going to do it, because knowing what it is we can do evil. In addition, it states that the purpose of life is happiness, differentiated between:

The ethics of happiness: An action is correct as long as it makes us happy and, therefore, we must seek our happiness. Similarly, this ethic is divided into two: teleological ethics (determines whether an action is right or wrong and is based on the goodness or badness of the actions based on the consequences) and the deontological ethics (It is a formal ethic, where what matters is the action itself and not the result).
The ethics of virtues: Virtue is found in the soul, it is what gives life and is divided into two types: moral virtue (acquired through habit, it is responsible for mastering the irrational part of the soul and is the middle point between two extremes) intellectual virtue (It is acquired through education and is the rational part of the soul).

His way of seeing philosophy.

We continue to know the differences between Socrates, Plato and Aristotle to attend to their way of conceiving philosophy.

For Socrates, The philosophy it must be practical (writing it wastes our time), it must teach us to live, to obtain the intrinsic knowledge in us and to differentiate between good and evil. In addition, it should be aimed at discussing, debating and reflecting on big questions: justice, good, politics, religion, virtue or democracy).

PlatoUnlike Socrates, he asserts that the object of philosophy is to teach us to live philosophically or lead a rational and balanced life: that nourishes and pays attention to body and soul: eat, sleep or love in a controlled way (without falling into vice).

Finally, Aristotle establishes that philosophy does not have to be reduced exclusively to the study of truth, but must be a compendium of various disciplines. Therefore, he establishes the following division:

The logic: As a preparatory discipline.
Theoretical philosophy: Composed of mathematics, metaphysics and physics.
Practical philosophy: Composed of politics and rhetoric.

His concept of religion.

The concept that he has Socrates on religion was very revolutionary for his time, for he was a personal and intimate religion versus a public religion. Thus, he proposes to move the public sanctuary to our interior (the sanctuary of consciousness) and tells us about daimon or his god: conscience or our inner self. In addition, he tries to reach a dialogue between religion and person.
Secondly, Plato, he proposes a totally different concept of divinity and speaks of a Supreme god / demiurge. An absolute, perfect, almighty and creative being, the one who puts order in all things (moral and physical order), the origin of everything (intelligible world) and supreme legislator. Likewise, he does not defend the idea of an intimate religion.
Finally, Aristotle, has a concept of religion that is on the way between Plato and Socrates. He proposes a deist conception or a personal god who is the maker of nature and not a creator, a natural god who moves the universe (the immobile motor: the beginning of all movement), eternal, immutable and who is the first cause.

The concept about the individual.

We finish this review of the differences between Socrates, Plato and Aristotle by talking about their conception of the individual.

According Socrates, the individual is composed of the natural union of body and soul. Being the soul (I understand soul as reason, the conscious self and knowledge = virtue) the most important of the individual and, therefore, it must be fed with goods.
For its part, Plato He also defends the body-soul duality, but unlike Socrates he claims that the soul belongs to the intelligible world and the body to the sensible world, that body-soul can live separately (for example after death) and that the soul is made up of three parts: rational, irascible and concupiscible.
Finally, for Aristotle the body is substance (with matter and form) and the soul is essence or the vital principle, therefore, body and soul cannot live separately, they live in the substance that is the human being. He distinguishes, in turn, three types of soul: the vegetative, the sensitive and the rational.