THE ETHICS OF SOCRATES AND PLATO, COMPARED:

When looking at virtue, both Plato and Aristotle start with the views of what
counted as virtues in Greek society. The virtues Aristotle lists in the
Nichomachean Ethics are derived from this, as are the virtues that Plato focuses on
in many of his dialogues (but most famously, the Republic). Foremost for both
were wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice, though Aristotle meant much
further in delimiting them.

For both Plato and Aristotle, and indeed for most Greeks, virtue was essential for
happiness (eudaimonia, which means "happiness" or "good character," more
broadly self-fulfillment or the good life).
A key difference arises when it comes to how we acquire those virtues. 1) Plato
seems to have held what we'd call a Socratic conception of virtue (acquired from
his teacher, Socrates) that knowledge is virtue. In other words, to know the good is
to do the good. 2) This means that all the virtues boil down to wisdom. If I'm
really wise, all the other virtues will follow. Plato, in other words, believed in the
unity of the virtues. Socrates was the best example of this for Plato, as his
dialogues illustrate. 3) Finally, Plato believed that virtue was sufficient for
happiness --- there is no such thing as moral luck.
Aristotle differed on each of these points. 1) Knowing the good wasn't enough for
Aristotle. Although Aristotle doesn't necessarily have a concept of a free will (this
is a later, largely Christian idea), he does believe that I need to practice virtue --that I need to habituate myself to virtue in order to truly be virtuous. 2) For this
reason, although wisdom is the highest form of virtue, it is by no means the key to
possessing all virtues. In other words, Aristotle denies the unity of the virtues. 3)
Finally, Aristotle thinks that although virtue is necessary to the good life, it isn't
sufficient. That is to say, I can be virtuous but still unhappy (think of Oedipus). In
particular, if I need good fellow citizens to truly achieve happiness.
Interestingly, Aristotle's views on all these points represented the more mainstream
views of Greek society, whereas Plato's were more radical.

At the most general difference, Aristotle and Plato placed different values on the
human being. Whereas Aristotle generally saw the positives in society, and
therefore prescribed freedom and equality, Plato saw the negatives and prescribed
various illiberal and discriminatory ideals.

1. If Jesus loves the poor, does it follow that Jesus hates the rich, why?
Jesus comes to seek and to save that which was lost. In an occasion, "Jesus entered
Jericho and was passing through. A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he
was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. He wanted to see who Jesus was, but
because he was short he could not see over the crowd. So he ran ahead and climbed
a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way. When Jesus
reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, Zacchaeus, come down
immediately. I must stay at your house today. So he came down at once and
welcomed him gladly. All the people saw this and began to mutter, He has gone
to be the guest of a sinner. But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, Look,
Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated
anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount. Jesus said to
him, Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of
Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.
In the bible, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Job, Solomon and Davidthey were all rich
men, and loved by God. They were called the man after Gods own heart.
Jesus loves people, rich or poor; but the poor people received the LOVE of Jesus
better than the rich. The rich do not feel their need of anything that is Gods. In
Revelation 3:17 the bible says, Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with
good, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and
miserable, and poor , and blind, and naked. It is not a matter as to the Jesus not
loving the rich it is a matter of the people not willing to accept Jesus love. John
3:16 states Whosoever , Jesus has already made His choice whosoever. It is
up to that individual to accept the love of Jesus.
What Jesus hates are the following, a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed
innocent blood, heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in

running to mischief, false witness that speaketh lies, and a person that soweth
discord among brethren. Jesus hates a sinful or self-righteous attitude in anyone.
A rich person who did good deed sin the sight of God and did not put wealth or
power ahead of faith and duty, would tend to find favor and not hatred. All people
are loved equally by God regardless of their social standing or bank balance. What
Jesus hates is sin, whether form a poor or wealthy individual. The bible makes the
point that a rich person can have a selfish and proud heart due to their reliance on
self and pre-occupation with material possessions. It does not, however mean that
they are not loved. Many wealthy person have had a relationship with Jesus
Christ. It is what is in their heart that matter to Jesus.

2. WHAT IS THE PLAC EOF ETHICS IN THE LIFE OF

CONTEMPORARY MAN.
Ethics is necessary to contemporary man in most walks of life. Any social activity
in which it is possible to harm another person in some way has rules of behavior
which have the purpose of limiting pain and suffering within the community. Each
profession has its own special set of rules detailing how such a professional should
behave as he carries on with his work. These rules and behaviors are grouped
together under the term ethics.
Ethics are in many cases dependent upon the particular people involved. For
example, what is ethical between a husband and wife, might not be ethical between
the wife and her doctor or between the husband and his son's school teacher.
There are innumerable degrees of ethical behavior. In some cases the behaviors are
deemed so important that the society has made them into laws, such as laws against
murder.
The more complicated a society, the more complicated are its laws and ethics.