Plato and Thucydides in ancient Greek thought

Thucydides and Plato had conflicting methods in their attitudes toward the good life. Thucydides demonstrates empirical thinking in his readings of human nature and comportment throughout the Peloponnesian War and Plato demonstrates normative thinking in the writing within his books and discourses in particular Gorigia. Plato's interpretations of a good life revolve on principles that an individual has reached contentment. What contentment means to Plato is a person who has no desires because that person possesses all-encompassing love in his/her life.

Plato understood this to be equal for everyone and that displaying entire virtue is accessible by everyone. Virtue is accessed by everyone when one has all love and none of the desires. This is how Plato views access to virtue which is markedly different from Thucydides' perspective. Plato's understanding of love more so involves a mythological comprehension of the world.

The Greek Historian, Thucydides, however, demonstrated his imperialistic methodology when narrating the history of the Peloponnesian war between Sparta. And Athens. His perspective was that of a realist with stringent morals and need for evidence. His view on pleasure for instance, was based on divine law and judicial punishment. "Thucydides and the Gorgias is the emergence of pleasure as the good against the background of divine law and judicial punishment; the greatest difference is the mere juxtaposition of Pericles' funeral speech and the plague in Thucydides and their causal connection" (Benardete, 2009, p. 78).

Unlike Plato that saw the good life encompassing an understanding of the world and love, Thucydides saw the good life as someone who entirely devoted to rejection of satisfaction. "The good life, tem is the life devoted to the overcoming of satisfaction and self-satisfaction. It is a life of pain insofar as pain represents resistance" (Benardete, 2009, p. 78). One who embraces pain and resists satisfaction in Thucydides life, is living the good life. Although both Plato and Thucydides understand the value of virtue in relation to leading a good life, Thucydides attributes pain and suffering to leading a "good life."

Going more into his vision, his also so practicality as aspects of the good life especially as it pertained to politics but through a seemingly negative perspective. "Thucydides' contribution to practical life is that his vision of the nature of politics seems unremittingly bleak, diagnosing the inevitability of political disintegration and despairing of the possibility of remedy" (Mara, 2008, p. 242). Plato saw, especially in his writings, The Republic, the possibility of a just and good society and political entity. His views was not as bleak as Thucydides in that he believed advancement and progress was possible whereas Thucydides believes it will inevitably lead to ruin.

As examined in Mara (2008), nature and culture are both constructs existent that generate influence and presence in society. "Both Platonic nature and Thucydidean culture play the roles they do through ongoing involvement with the conditions they seemingly oppose…both nature and culture as constructions whose intelligibility and normative force depend on the continuous presence of their others" (Mara, 2008, p. 152). Plato took a seemingly optimistic approach lending to the belief in mythological whereas Thucydidean took on an empirical, realistic approach.

An example of this is the depiction of Athens. "Thucydides' Athens is radically different from Plato's (or Westfall's "Athens." They use "Athens" as a symbolic image to describe the ideal polis that is structure according to the political rationalism invented by Socrates and developed by Plato and Aristotle. This "Athens" stands for political philosophy" (Van & Westfall, 1993, p. 126). Athens represented political philosophy from varying perspectives. Plato viewed it as a symbolic image. Thucydides viewed it as a historic record.

Normative thinking in philosophy is discerning in expressions of principles, standards, and how things ought to be. Going back to The Republic, Plato uses normative viewpoints as he discusses a model society and the philosophies of justice. He centers principally on justice and that it is the utmost quality. If a gentleman is evenhanded therefore he is a happy person. No mention here of pain as is the case with Thucydides.

Justice is defined as each part of the soul undertaking its own part that is equilibrium. Justice then becomes a virtue or human distinction. Plato then connects human excellence or distinction to happiness. Excellence is also applied to one's function. Essentially a just person is happy because he is fulfilling his function.