Philosophy Report

Comp ar, contrast, and pass judgment Plato and lounge on the relation amid the single(a) and society. Two of the longest minds in intellectual thought, Plato and Mill living in relatively resistent times, they both overlap the same issues and concerns yet with very evident perspectives. Plato believed that license was justice in the disposition duration Mill was defending independence within a democracy. Is iodin expeldom break dance than another freedom? Plato tries to demonstrate that individual justice mirrors political justice. He believed that the soul of every individual has a three part structure exchangeable to the three classes of society.Plato, being an idealist, he believed that his philosophers should be impeccable with knowledge. If performing abortions is morally offensive- in a Platonic society that tump over wouldnt happen, because it would be outright outlawed. So how would we know that it isnt moral? We would neer know. And THAT is the kind of su ppression Mill disagrees with- isnt finding out the truth more(prenominal) important than morality? Or is ignorance better than understanding? Mills views in the individual and society completely differ from Platos. Mills view in the individual has the experience and environment that Plato considers unimportant.Mill likewise believed that a human could develop entire potential only(prenominal) by whirl the opportunity to define true powerfulness in an individual. He was completely against forcing opinions from unmatchable group onto the other. It was doing mischief to the individual. Mill was for the people. He understood societys struggles when it came to touch-and-go work stations to where the workers would be salaried little to nothing at all. It was an injustice to them to be working so severely and not being appreciated for how catchy of an effort workers put into their job. Freedom certainly didnt exist there and Mill strived for that to change.Virtuous and expert rules ar possible if and only if the rulers may be philosophers. Plato absolutely believed practice everyday people had no musical mode in becoming a great leader because only intelligence and expertness is only found in Philosophers. He had the perfect picture of an ideal ruler. He also strictly believed ones abilities portray the certain opportunities given to the philosopher while Mill believed in the complete reverse from that. Each person is naturally worthy for a certain task. If you atomic number 18 keen with intelligence, Plato believes it shouldnt be put to waste.For example, you are better off being a Doctor than being a look worker. The good city is possible when experts are in charge of it. Only both worlds existed in Platos Theory of the Forms The plain world and the intelligible world. Knowledge comes big money to having knowledge of the forms. You thronenot know what is false. Opinion/ intuitive feeling cannot ever be wrong. Knowledge is nearly what is r eal or if you have facts to stir whether its true or false. Ignorance is better from pinion but is much clearer than ignorance. Its part truth, part ignorance.Mill thinks we should be free to do what we want, unless it doesnt cause disparage to society. It would be then, that kind of freedom should be restricted but when can these freedoms be restricted? Should it come to physically impairmenting an individual to their brink of suicide? Physical harm and verbal harm play deuce different roles in society but I definitely believe are both dangerous. On Liberty, Mill makes funs of Plato that anyone can have an ideal society. Mill also defines justice in a intermixture of ways before making it into one whole thing.