Moreno, Jared

Short Answer

E. When people think of the US political system, they believe that it is a form of democracy. The

US is setup so that the rule is by the majority. People also believe that in the constitution and

that it is a good government, so the US would be referred to as a polity in Aristotle's theory. But,

in the decision to go to war in Iraq or torture, it shows that US is really an Oligarchy. Aristotle

would note this government as the rule of the few for the interests of the few. In what way did

the majority of decide that US should go to war. The people elected the officials who made the

decision but this is a rigged game. For one thing, in order to even compete for a congress seat, on

average, a person must spend over a million dollars. The senate is even more. They need this so

they can pay for media time, like TV station ads or newspaper. This only leaves the rich to be

elected. The people cannot even decide who is President. This is done through the Electoral

College. So, only the rich can rule. But, the Politian's are supposed to read public opinion and

make their decisions based of this, right? That is false. They can get away with making their own

decisions by manipulating the people in their favor. People are easily swayed in time of crisis.

The 9/11 attacks brought fear into the people. People are manipulated through the media. TV

shows like 24 gives scenarios in which torture is used and works in situations such as the

“ticking time bomb.” If there is a bomb ready to blow up in the US and the suspect who may

know where the bomb is at is in custody, should torture be allowed to get the information out?

The media portrays these situations as real life scenarios to allow torture and put fear in the

people. So why would the US want to go to Iraq in the first place if not to kill terrorist or get rid

of evil regimes like Sudam Hussein? Terrorist were never in Iraq. And the reason why we got rid

of Hussein is because he did not bow to US wishes. The occupation of Iraq allows US to have
control of the regent. They can wage wars from their base in Iraq. US can control oil in Iraq as

well; these benefit corporations like Exxon. By destroying Iraq, corporations can get contracts to

rebuild Iraq. So, by deciding to go to war in Iraq and torture, only the interests of the few,

extremely rich corporations, and the US governments power are benefited. Not the interest of the

people as whole. If it did, the government would be considered an Aristocracy. But instead, this

makes the US government an Oligarchy.

A. The Ship of State analogy is that there should be one navigator of the ship. Not everyone

onboard should try to navigate the ship. They would all be fighting each other on how to

navigate it. But there should be one person who navigates that has been trained to navigate it. He

knows which direction to go that is best for the ship. The ship is a metaphor the state or

government. The best person to run the country should be the one to run it. Another expression

of this is the bell shape curve. At the one end of the curve, there are the worst people to be rulers.

In the middle is the average person. At the other end are the best people. So, from one end, as it

approaches the middle, the majority of people are in the middle. But at the end of the curve, the

one best person is there. Should the people in the middle rule who are only average in their

ability to rule, or should there be someone who is the best? Democracy says that everyone should

rule. That includes those people who do not know how to rule and make decisions. They do not

know how to steer the ship. This is rule of the majority. Instead, the person steering should be the

one person at the end of the curve that is the best. As immigration population grows and gets

closer to the majority, should they be the one to decide whether or not they become legalize? If

they decide that, it would be in their own interests. It is a decision of the majority without

considering what is best for the country as a whole. Or should there be someone who knows and

understand the issues involve with legalizing all immigrants to decide whether they should be

legalized? This person can look out for the interests of the country as a whole before deciding.
Essay 2

The US has failed to provide the resources and opportunities to reach self actualization.

Many people are left without the opportunity to reach self actualization or even survival. The

rich see self actualization as a necessity; the poor see it as a privilege. By poor, it is not referred

to those who are worst off in society but of the majority of people who cannot reach self

actualization which include the middle class. Many of the middle class do not have the security

or the benefits necessary to reach self actualization and are themselves on the edge of poverty.

They live from pay check to pay check with a fear that one day they may lose their job. The US

does not provide health insurance to all the people; therefore, people have to buy health

insurance from private corporations, which can be too much of a burden on some families. Other

options are that they can get a job that provides health insurance as a benefit or go without it. If

someone without health insurance were to get sick, than the medical costs can be too much. If

they can not afford health insurance, how are they expected to pay their medical bills? This is a

destructive problem in US. Because of the health insurance problems, many people can not reach

self actualization or even survival.

Aristotle’s Organic Theory links the health of individuals with the health of society. This

states that the government has to take care of all parts of society. Each person is part of the

organism called the state. They are parts or organs that keep the body running. If some part of the

organism, state, is not receiving what it needs to function or to fulfill itself, the state as a whole

cannot function properly. For example, if the mind does not take care of the liver, the liver will

get sick and then the liver can no longer process the harmful chemicals put into the body. The

entire body will then get sick because of the chemicals. Eventually the body can die. In the same

way, the head of society, whether it be the majority of people, a few, or one person, needs to take
care of the interests of the people so the whole society can function properly.

Aristotle refers to the state reaching self actualization as “nature.” Society needs to grow

and develop to its final product. For Aristotle, Nature is the final product whether it is the state,

individual, or tree, in its perfection. A fully grown tree is more perfect than the seed or the sprout.

But along the way, some trees go through imperfections. Something may damage the sprout as it

is growing causing imperfections. One way or another, the tree grows to be imperfect. Yet, as it

grows, it approaches perfection by getting closer to its end. The end product of the tree is the

closest it can become to perfection. This can also be applied to society. There are many

imperfections in society but with change many of the problems of society can be eliminated.

Only through change can society approach perfection.

Aristotle’s theories are similar to progressive perspectives, where it is realized that

everyone should have equal rights and opportunities for self fulfillment. The progressives

identify how a certain group of people does not have the equal rights, like gays, and then push

society forward so everyone can have the same rights. In this manner, society progresses so that

everyone can have individual opportunity for self actualization. People then support their

individual needs and desires.

The progressive times of US history has made US society diverse. Black people have

more rights and opportunities than they had before the 1960’s. There are more securities for

people and workers. Welfare can provide a safety net when people fall into poverty and it helps

them come out of it. There are greater number of minority groups and people within these groups

now then in the past. Gay people are having more power, rights and opportunities than they ever

had in the past. This kind of diversity allows more people to fulfill their individualistic desires.

With more diversity, more people have the opportunity to obtain self actualization. Now, they to
can better contribute to society.

In contrast to Aristotle view, Plato believes that people should work hard for the benefit

of the state. Without that person working for the function of the country, the whole falls apart.

Everyone must do their part and contribute to the function and good of the society. In a

biological sense, nearly every body organ has a purpose. If one of those organs were to fail or

stop working, the body as a whole can get sick, stop functioning properly, or even die. People

cannot rebel or stop working their hardest because if they were, the state can fall apart and no

longer function. It is for the good of everyone that each person were to work their hardest. In this

sense, no one can appose their position. They must seek their full potential in their position so the

overall state can prosper. The philosophers and rulers at the top should reach their potential in

ability to rule over society. The politician have to figure out how to best make the people happy

so the country can function better. Plato supported the idea of the greatest happiness for the

greatest number of people. Self actualization is for the good of society. If people are happy, they

can better provide for society. If workers become self actualized in their job or place in society,

those people can produce more for the benefit of society. If a politician becomes self actualized

in his or her job in ruling society, he or she is able to structure society and create laws for the best

benefit of society.

Workers should not stop production like going on strike. If they were to, the country will

not function properly and can possibly die. Everyone in that country will suffer. Therefore,

workers should continue working so the country can continue functioning. The philosopher,

guardian or ruler, will figure out how best to run the workforce and use their products for the

benefit of the country. If the workers do their part and the politicians do their part, then society

will continue to prosper.

 Plato’s ideas seem very similar to conservative ideologies. Conservatives believe that the

current status qou is the best society can ever be and to change will bring unhappiness . Change

will not bring any good. The people should not protest their conditions because change will

make things worst. Politicians are there to maintain rule. An example is the gay rights issue.

Under conservative ideology, Gays should not be allowed to get married because change can

only bring more problems and it goes against their status quo idea. They believe that people in

general were content before gays got some rights, so why should they be allowed some rights

now.

Problems can be created because of diversity. Plato put the idea that in a democratic

society, where the people rule without constitutional restriction and people decide everything,

individualism and diversity will increase. People will fulfill their most individualistic desires.

The problem is that people will in no way contribute to society. Therefore, people will not do

their part to make sure that society is maintained. Instead of doing the work that society needs

done, like waste management, people will get drunk and fat because that is what fills their

immediate desires. Diversity will run wild where people will only support their unique

personality. US society may not be so extreme. But there many different kinds of cultures and

subcultures. Diversity has grown so much that Plato may not be far from the truth in US society.

Why would an only Spanish speaking, working poor, raver from Los Angeles want to contribute

to support a mountain hiker, middle class manager from Connecticut? The diversity in US can

run even farther.