Comparison Between Plato and Aristotles View on Women

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
Reference

Introduction

Even if no lady has ever been the president of the United States, the world has had a few years of involvement with female leaders. A lot of women are providing more visible leadership skills than ever before. As a result, their authentic records have put a lot of men in disgrace. The topic of gender inequality is very significant but it is a wrong way of judging women and their capabilities to lead. However, they are mostly judged since they have a track record of disrespecting and not believing in their fellow women. A lot of women are rising into the leadership challenge, even in some of the male-dominated fields. This has been enabled by the rising number of women who are attending colleges, those that are starting businesses, and also those that are in prominent workplaces. Many people, mostly philosophers, have had various discussions about women and their roles.

Discussion

Plato and Aristotle are two Greek philosophers who are considered the most influential in the advancement of civilization in Western Eurasia. Even if they had areas they concurred on together, they also had issues they used to disagree on. One of the areas that they could not reach an agreement on is the position of women and their roles in society. Aristotle was Platos student for many years and most of the arguments he had and made were based on Platos thinking (Gebremariam, 2019). Nevertheless, Aristotle was also controlled by other external factors, such as science which enlarged his views on a lot of issues. For instance, where Platos position seemed to be contradicted, Aristotles argument would drive toward the scientific position conflicting with Platos view on the issues.

Plato: when giving out roles to women, one of the considerations should include the nature of that person. Consequently, when also giving out roles to any person in society, their strengths and weaknesses should also be examined. The driving feature of peoples nature is influential in creating their weaknesses as well as strengths. The psychosomatic makeup of every person determines their possibilities of doing something and also for not doing anything. Therefore, an analysis is formed on womens roles if they become leaders to their people in society. Women and men have the same nature in respect to the guardianship of the state, save insofar as the one is weaker and the other is stronger (Gebremariam, 2019). Even if it is very difficult to tell the specific roles of women in society, the various ones that have been in leadership have proven that women can lead.

A distinguished share of considerable pioneers has been ladies in history. For instance, Queen Elizabeth I of England and Empress Lady Lu of China. Throughout history, the responsibility of ruling a kingdom fell in the hands of a male or a king. Nevertheless, there were times when the tradition was altered, and the role was given to a queen or a female pioneer. Two examples of the tradition being altered were Empress Lady Lu and Queen Elizabeth I. Even if both the leaders were from different places in the world, they were both faced with the same challenges of gender. At this point in history, these female pioneers handled their issues differently, but they both shared a similar goal of advancing and developing their kingdom. A man and a woman who have a physicians mind (psyche) have the same nature (Gebremariam, 2019). This has shown that women are capable of performing male duty if they are empowered in the right way and Moreso if they have the same nature whatsoever.

I have had various views on the equality of women in society about their leadership roles. There is a possibility that various women possess the ability to lead people in organizations or groups. Empress Lady Lu is one case that shows womens abilities in society. As a result, women should be accorded similar functions and responsibilities in the state as compared to those of men. By just advancing womens positions in leadership, we can see the capabilities that they possess. However, the principle of equality in governance is very limited to the upper classes or even to the echelons in the states. As a result, some consequences result from the separation of powers in the republic. It is that various groups of people are placed in different positions of power of influence in governance. Few women have been given leading roles in leadership even in the past. If women are expected to do the same work as men, we must teach them the same things.

(Gebremariam, 2019). This is the only way in which women should gain popularity in their roles of leadership. However, due to the revolution, a lot of women have gained a lot of knowledge and insight on how to become competent leaders in the republic.

Aristotle: My view on women is dependent on the prevailing circumstances that they have in their areas of focus. For instance, I have made various observations on different genders, how it empowers them, and how the issue of gender has limited their liabilities in society. Moreover, my views are also influenced by how women have access to various opportunities in their communities and how it has impacted the welfare of the Republic (Gebremariam, 2019). Just like in the case of Queen Elizabeth I, she has changed how both women and men view the role of ladies in leadership. She has shown that she was a strong, smart lady whose education, appearance, and the decisions she made led to the legacy she left behind. In the past, the major role of women was to get married and have children without any education. The male, unless constituted in some respect contrary to nature, is by nature more expert at leading than the female, and the elder and complete than the younger and incomplete(Gebremariam, 2019). Even if there have been female legends in leadership, men are still better experts at being good leaders than women.

Leadership in ladies has been credited with developing misogynist perceptions of them. I also support the traditional exclusion of female pioneers in politics as well as in public life. For example, I agree with the fact that there should be a lot of women leadership. However, women are known to depend on the permanent role of men, both in the public domain as well as in their families. Despite having similar opportunities as those of men, women can not achieve the same knowledge that men have in any field, leaving alone with leadership positions. The relation of male to female is by nature a relation of superior to inferior and ruler to ruled(Gebremariam, 2019). This is according to the rule of nature that every individual on this planet found. Most women are governed to submit to men and be ruled. Even if a small percentage can rule, most of them were made to submit.

Various reasons are available for establishing the role of men and women in leadership. For instance, women do not have the capabilities to produce semen since their bodies are too cold. Moreover, the menses that each one of them releases every end month is an indication that there was a manifestation of failed production of semen. Women should be considered as deformed males who are not capable of leading. Many people say this is a misogynists perspective but it is stating things as they are.

Conclusion

In conclusion, these two great Greek philosophers have separate views on women where one of them advocated for equality, and the other proposed that there should be ab alienation of women about the governance issue. However, both of them have acknowledged female pioneers such as Queen Elizabeth I and Empress Lady Lu, who have been influential leaders in their various regions. The progressive perception of gender equality has influenced Platos argument on the issue of female leadership. On the other hand, Aristotle uses the power of his position to echo misogyny as he compares womens lack of leadership quality to that of their inability to produce semen.