1] “Plato‘s philosophy is the most savage & most profound attack on liberal ideas which history can show“. (Crossman) discuss.
2] “Plato’s communism is a heroic remedy for a desperate evil the union of political power and economic temptation in the same hands” Explain
3] Critically analyze Plato’s theory of justice ?
4] Explain Plato’s communism and compare it with modern communism ?
5] Most Plato interpreters through the ages have been seduced by his greatness. They have taken his political philosophy as a benign idyll, without taking into account its dangerous tendencies toward totalitarian ideology. Comment.
6] Popper’s critique of Plato is based on the notion that the idea portrayed in the Republic makes him an enemy of the open society. Do you disagree?
7] Explain Aristotle’s critique of Plato’s Idealism. [2019/20m/250w/2a]
8] Everywhere inequality is a cause of revolution’ – Aristotle. Comment. [2017/15m/200w/2b]
9] “The more perfect the admixture of the political elements, the more lasting will be the constitution.“ Explain.
10] “Both the community of property and the community of families.-tend to make them truly guardians.” (PLATO)
11] Comment on the idea of good represented by Aristotle. How is this different from the Platonic notion of good espoused through the theory of forms?
12] The idea of Polis is central to Aristotle’s interpretation of man as a political animal. Comment.
13] Critically examine Machiavelli’s views on religion and politics. [2018/15m/200w/4c]
14] The divorce between the principles of Religion and those of Politics in the writings of Machiavelli is more apparent than real. Comment.
15] “Machiavelli’s political philosophy was narrowly local and narrowly dated.” (Sabine). Comment.
16] Explain how Machiavelli’s application of empirical method to human affairs marks an important stage in the evolution of political science.
17] “…and in the actions of men and especially of princes, from which there is co appeal the end justifies the means.” (MACHIAVELLI)
18] Machiavelli is perhaps the most universally reprobated figure in the history of political literature; the man whose percepts are universally disavowed in principle but regularly followed in practise. [Maxey] comment.