چکیده:
Given the position of the grand concept of justice as one of the most important and fundamental aims and objectives of all political and legal systems, and considering the deep influence of Muslim political philosophers on Greek philosophers, this writing, using a descriptive-documentary analysis and comparative approach, poses its question regarding the broad meanings and theories of two famous Greek philosophers, namely Plato and Aristotle, and subjects them to criticism. The hypothesis of the present article is that in Plato's thought, justice is essentially a characteristic of the individual soul that is reflected in society, and everyone must be engaged in their own specific task and not deviate from it. Government, too, is worthy of the wise and sages; however, Aristotle considers justice to be giving each person their due and considers it a virtue by which everyone should be given what is their right and merit. The virtue of everything lies in the golden mean, and this mean is a natural limit; nature itself is perceived as unequal, and justice is a consequence of these inequalities. Instead of providing a general definition of justice like Plato, Aristotle attempts to enumerate its types with greater scientific precision, which stems from his empirical and inductive method and his avoidance of generalization.
خلاصه ماشینی:
A Comparative Approach to the Concept of Justice in the Political Philosophy of Plato and Aristotle Bahram Akhavan Kazemi Abstract Given the status of the grand concept of justice as one of the most important and fundamental aims and objectives of all political and legal systems, and considering the profound influence of Muslim political philosophers on Greek philosophers, this article, using a descriptive-documentary analytical method and a comparative approach, poses its question regarding the extensive meanings and theories of two famous Greek philosophers, namely Plato and Aristotle, and subjects them to critique.
With this observation, in explaining the most important reason and basis for the difference in the views of the two philosophers on this subject of justice, it can be admitted that in the thought considers justice not in equality, but in proportion, and says that the position, rights, and privileges of each person in society should be in proportion to their merit and wisdom.
In this book, Aristotle considers law to be the science of politics; but in Ethics, conversely, he has discussed the nature of justice more extensively, and although this discussion lacks the beauty and allure of Plato's words, it is evidence of his scientific precision.
This subject, meaning considering the effect of justice on the education of the human soul and its socialization as one, is the first and most fundamental principle in Plato's political philosophy (Faster, 1373: 8-57).
(
, 
, 
)
