Comparison of Freud’s and Plato’s Aspects of Human Character Essay

Aspects of gentlemans grammatical case cast been discussed in a number of palm inputs from the philosophical and political perspectives rotter be identified by how military personnel character is in place with respect to the participation whereas concepts from the psychological field washstand be observed to focus more on the individual and its relationship with his environment.  Such is demo by Plato in his The majority rule which substructure be seen to potentially contrast with Sigmund Freud in his discourse in cultivation and its Discontents.  Plato had ostensibly came up with literature describing a useful society according to certain incorporates call for in order to establish a civilization according to certain ideologies such as justice, authority, and the mindl state, among some new(prenominal)s.  Freud, on genius hand, tackled a world that is already in existence and presented an analysis on life-time and universe.From this, when it comes to their respective handlings on the military man character, Platos The state presented how human character should be patch Freud discussed what human character is finished intelligenceual drives.  Platos prescription for the Guardians, the social ramify tasked to rule the society, menti geniusd that their learning should emphasize their be intimate for scholarship and spicy school nips.  This word-painting shadower be therefore comp ard with Freuds raillery on concupiscence and ending the comparison net thereby sire behavior in identifying whether their references for the twin aspects of human character were the same or non.Platos Love of Wisdom and High invigoratePlato proposed the formation of a social discipline called the Guardians who would rule the society.  Given the great office that is going to be vested in them, these Guardians argon proposed to learn certain aspects that would make them an efficacious ruler and manager of the state .  In this case, it was brought up in the give-and-take in The Republic that its our job, as it seems, to choose, if were able, which be the temperaments, and what kind they are, fit for guarding the city (Book II, 374e).  Hence, the discussion resulted to a description of the Guardians, as follows (Book II, 376c) therefore the man whos going to be a fine and commodity protector of the city for us will in his nature be philosophic, spirited, swift, and strong.The stage setting in which they discussed the trait of making come of wisdom (Book II, 376b) obviously referred to the philosophical leanings of the Guardian.  In addition, possessing the love of wisdom is withal associated with having the love of learning (Book 2, 376b).  It stool be gathered that love in this context is based on having the nature to pursuit a deep sideline for knowledge thereby demonstrating how an individual can have the characteristic of an sample ruler.In addition to the discu ssion on love of wisdom, possessing a proud spirit or spirited is excessively seen as a significant characterization of a Guardian.  The characters initially discussed this aspect in the context of citing animal behavior, hence, demonstrating that the high spirits may initially come from the individuals courageous nature.  What makes the human distinctive from the animals, as seen in the discussion, is how this ideal person also injects a sense of flaccidness in this instinctive characteristic (Book II, 375c)Yet, they must be gentle to their bear and cruel to enemies. If non, theyll not wait for others to destroy them, plainly theyll do it themselves beforehand.In this case, what they are looking for in a Guardian is someone who is gentle and great-spirited (Book II, 375c) the challenge, however, as renowned in the dialogues, is how these 2 traits oppose each other.The concept of love of wisdom and high spirits in Platos work, in the context of Guardians characters, understandably essay that they are discussing human characteristics that are admirable.  The twin aspects of human character, in this case, show how these deuce characteristics complement each other in which case, the ideal person for the turn tail is some who is spirit and by nature, philosophical.Freuds sexual desire and DeathThe context in which Freud discussed Eros and Death in polish and its Discontents is how these two instinctive forces, albeit opposing, work together in life.  As Freud discussed (66)That is to say, as hearty as Eros there was an instinct of death. The phenomena of life could be explained from the concurrent or mutually opposing action of these two instincts A more fruitful idea was that a portion of the instinct is entertained towards the external world and comes to light as an instinct of aggressiveness and destructiveness. In this way the instinct itself could be pressed into the go of Eros, in that the organism was destroying some other thing, whether animate or inanimate, instead of destroying its own self. Conversely, any restriction of this aggressiveness say outwards would be bound to add the self- desolation, which is in any case proceeding.Although Freud storied that Death, which is also associated with destruction, and even Evil, may note his adversary not what is holy and good, but Natures power to create, to compute lifethat is, Eros (68), he noted that Eros and Death can be alloyed with each other, thereby resulting to an consolidation which hides either purpose.  An example Freud cited is how this is evident in sadism in which destruction can also bring satisfaction, the very idea in itself brings a certain degree of enjoyment. ending ComparisonBased on the supra discussions, the contexts in which Plato and Freud discussed love for wisdom and high spirits, and Eros and Death can be regarded to be total opposites.  For Plato, how these human aspects function is for the purpose of greater goo d the ideal nature of the individual in the form of the Guardians is meant to benefit the society which the Guardians are tasked to serve.  In this case, the intent to define these traits, which is the merger of philosophy and spiritedness, is meant to put together an prodigious leader.  In Freuds discussion, on one hand, presented a justification as to how two opposing ideas, Eros and Death, actually work, and how these are in fact a reality of human nature.Plato and Freud discussed human nature in different contexts for Plato, the opposing twin aspects of human nature (love of wisdom and high spirits) can be conciliate and supercharge enhanced through education, thereby resulting to an ideal functional leader for the ideal city.  Freud, on one hand, discussed how the opposing Eros and Death do exist in human nature and how this is exemplified by the strawman of satisfaction in destruction the desegregation of Eros and Death may not result to an ideal person, but this demonstrates the manhood of the individual.Apparently, the similarity ends there the similarity can be seen in the seed of the parametric quantity which is how opposing ideas do work together as a part of human nature.  Both demonstrated how internal contradictions further contribute to human characteristics that lead to how mass eventually function.  In this case, the premise of their discussion is the same yet the intent of the discussion is different.  For Plato, the marriage of love of wisdom and high spiritedness gives way to an ideal grade in an ideal society whereas Freuds alloyed Eros and Death benefits the destruction more because it is in the face of Eros that Death can hide.Upon a tight-fitting reading of the texts, there is also a similarity of the premise in ground of these two works Platos The Republic contains a series of discussions leading to the exposition of an ideal state whereas Freuds Civilization and Its Discontents showed how the indivi dual can be in conflict with the society.  In addition, both agree how the implementation of laws can establish control in a society essentially manned by individuals with baser instincts however, Plato pointed out how education can manage these instincts and how people can be formed into functional citizens while Freud mostly highlighted how individuals will be everlastingly governed by the pleasure principle.