Perfect Societies of Professor Cariat and Aristotle Essay Example

1). Upon meeting Professor Cariat and Aristotle I would advise them to stop concerning themselves with producing a blueprint to perfect the society in Nowhereland. Instead, I would suggest them to focus on improving Nowhereland’s existing society so that the society itself attempts to reach the best possible system that can be achieved. To improve Nowhereland’s existing society, a high value would have to be put on moderation. Moderation would be favored by the Nowherelandians because it partly based on liberal ideals and partly on conservative ideals. This way, Nowherelandians would be free to choose from any type of lifestyle worth living in this improve society. I would not give the Nowherelandians a detailed structure of the best possible society; rather I would confine myself to highlighting the best favorable conditions for such a state. The stability of Nowhereland can be promoted by the following five external conditions:-
Population: To improve Nowhereland’s society to perfection, I would advise them to establish a city-state where the citizens know each other so that they can elect the right people to different offices.
2. Size: The size of Nowhereland’s society would have to be neither large nor small, so that a leisured life could be ensured but not too luxurious.
3. Character of the Nowherelandians: The population in Nowhereland would have to strive to become as intelligent as the Orientals, as able as the Greeks, and as courageous as the northern races. Professor Cariat and Aristotle
4. Classes in Nowhereland: For the best possible society in Nowhereland, the population should essentially include the classes of administrators, affluent people, agriculturists, artisans, priests, and warriors. Nowhereland would not have a single ruling class in control of the political power and decisions that would affect the whole society. Nowherelandians would be sovereign.
5. Education: Education that instills intellectual, moral, and physical excellence in Nowherelandians would also be necessary.
I believe both Professor Cariat and Aristotle would find my advice interesting because if such a society was achieved in Nowhereland, basic resources would be accessible to everyone, and even the least advantaged would be in fortunate financial circumstances.
2). Communitaria refers to a multicultural state. Aristotle would suggest that the cultural prerequisites of popular government would be destroyed by multiculturalism. Following Aristotle’s suggestions, I could argue that Communitaria would not promote ethnic, national, and religious uniformity. In Communitaria, most people would not achieve the common as members of a state or society but would so as members of various ethnic communities. People living in Communitaria would not able to completely absorb the values and virtues of the state, while shared values of the citizens would be diluted. In Communitaria, the population would be most likely to increase beyond a point where orderly government would not be possible. Moreover, most citizens would not know each other, they would not trust each other, and therefore, deliberating towards the common good would be difficult. Keeping in mind everything Aristotle would tell me, it would lead me to believe that Communitaria would not be a self-sufficient state, and the society would have the least authority. In Communitaria similar values would not be shared by the citizens, and so genuine politics would not be possible in Communitaria. Machiavelli would offer an important concluding suggestion that in Communitaria, the citizens would be under risk of being divided and conquered because they would not be united together through common values, conversation, and friendship. While examining Communitaria based on what Aristotle and Machiavelli would suggest, I would also inform them that the rise in population in other types of states could lead them to become a ‘Communitaria’ as well (such as the modern-nation states of today).
3). In his quest for understanding to understand a legitimate government, the standards that Professor Cariat uses would include the acts of citizens to willingly renounce their natural authority to the government over their own conduct. Thus, the very first standard would be whether or not the governed have consentingly granted government legitimate power. Another standard would be the extent to which an existing government would be responsible to serve the interests of the citizens. Another standard would be the submission of natural freedoms by the citizens to common laws, in return for the government’s protection. Another standard would be whether or not the people would be able to replace a government with another if an existing government began abusing its power.
As Professor Cariat travels through Utilitaria, he learns that the motto of the state is to maximize the happiness of as many people as possible within the society. Although Professor Cariat does not find Utilitaria perfect because there would be no means of living a full life, society’s happiness would have to constantly calculated, and efforts would have to be made to maximize it. Despite being an impersonal society, Professor Cariat praises Utilitaria’s progressive safety net where almost every individual would be satisfied. As Professor Cariat passes through Proletaria, he learns to value the fact that excessive freedom and power can corrupt people, and even though Proletaria was a initially a problem-free society, in a state where occupations or resources have to be allocated to others, such a society would not be possible.