The Idealism And Realism Of Political Philosophy

Political life is one particular constituent of human being’s overall practice, which is a unity of dynamic character and passive nature. Dynamic character means that as a being with consciousness, human being can be able to distinguish between realities and possibilities. And these possibilities can guide people to change or improve current situation in political life to live a better life. Passive nature means that as a creature deriving from nature, human being has to secure his or her survival and development in the limitation of the surroundings or the world he or her lives in. As political philosophy is some kind of philosophical reflection on human being’s political life, it can accordingly show two different tendencies, idealism and realism. Idealism manifests itself in the pursuit of the highest values and moral guidance as its main or primary focus in political life, and realism usually means that people has to consider how to change the realities within the allowable range of actual conditions and factors. How to handle the relationship of the two different tendencies is a fundamental problem in human being’s life and hence form an essential problem in political philosophy. As the representative figures of classical political philosophy, Plato and Aristotle use their own ways to try to deal with the relationship between idealities and realities in political life.Relying on an abstract moral principle, Plato tries to construct an ideal polis, an ideal society and an ideal regime in line with this principle, using this ideal polis as a political standard of ideological basis and theoretical reference. And makes efforts to construct this kind of polis as a basic goal of political practice. In Plato’s opinion, if we want to be able to judge right and wrong properly in political life, we have to establish an idealized standard of right and wrong. And in his view, the idealized standard cannot be achieved from the actual world which is full of experience but can only achieved from rational thought itself. And this is the reason why we call Plato’s political philosophy an idealistic political philosophy. Aristotle tries to construct excellent polis that can be achieved in the actual world relying on the realistic experience and practical conditions and makes providing a reasonable strategy to resolve various contradictions and problems faced in political life as a basic task of political practice. Aristotle’s political philosophy is known as one kind of realism, which means that the standard using in political life for judging right and wrong cannot come from purely rational preset of morality but extracted from practical experience in political life. It also has sufficient moral values and contains the theoretical construction of ideal polis and ideal constitute.Focusing on idealism and realism in political life, this dissertation interprets the thoughts of Plato and Aristotle’s political philosophy with making full use of their major works in different periods and then on this basis compares the thoughts of Plato and Aristotle comprehensively and systematically. And this paper tries to expand the comparative study of Plato and Aristotle’s political philosophy from five different aspects which are arranged by logical order. These five aspects are polis theory, virtue theory, theory of justice, regime theory and nomocracy theory. Polis theory is about Plato and Aristotle’s political reflection and overall grasp of political life in polis. Except polis theory, the other four aspects exactly constitutes four indispensable dimensions which are integral parts for inspecting human being’s political life. And Plato and Aristotle’s political thoughts are also analyzed and compared from these four aspects which are used by basic structure and development mainline. Virtue is the ethical foundation of excellent political life which Plato and Aristotle construct. Plato places the Good on an absolute transcendent realm, which makes the Good as the metaphysical foundation and ontological basis of his virtue theory. Aristotle explores the Good of polis and citizens in the exact real life. He emphasizes not only to know what Good is, but also try to construct an excellent polis and become a good citizen in behavior. And he also distinguishes the virtue of good man and the virtue of good citizen. Justice is the highest category in Plato and Aristotle’s political philosophy. In Plato’s view, justice is deduced from the Good and his justice theory is some kind of moral theory of justice. And Aristotle prefer bringing out justice through practical activities to the pursuit of knowledge. The regime theory also shows the different tendencies in regime construction. Plato believed that the key point for the judgment and arrangement of different regimes lies in whether the regime can truly reflect the fundamental values of the Good. And Aristotle seeks to explore the good form of government that can be achieved in reality. On the problem of how to handle the power in the polis, Plato advocates that the polis should be ruled by the philosopher-king. And Aristotle believes that even the most excellent ruler can be affected by the emotions he has, so he strongly insists the polis should be ruled by law not man.We can clarify the value and importance of idealism and realism in political life through the comparative study of Plato and Aristotle’s political philosophy. At the same time we should also avoid some misunderstandings that the two different tendencies might arise. So it is really necessary to handle the relationship of ideality and reality in the framework of Marx’s practical ontology. The idealities and realities in political life can only be able to achieve specific, internal, historical and dialectical unity by relying on human being’s overall practice.