How Plato’s View of Leadership Would Apply to the Modern Society

Leadership is the ability of aspiring a group of individuals to act towards accomplishing a shared objective. The definition of leadership also captures the fundamentals of being able to inspire others and value others. Successful leadership depends on thoughts (regardless of whether unique or acquired), yet won't occur except if those thoughts can be imparted to others so that other people act according to the instructions of the leader. The leader is the administrator of action and inspiration.

Now the question is how Plato’s philosophy implies in today’s world? Plato in his book The Republic argued that every individual has a precise set of responsibilities to the community. While it implies to everyone in the society, for the leader it is more significant. Plato also argued that only Philosopher are suitable to rule. This philosopher according to Plato must be a man of culture and education, he must lead the society rather than rule it and administrates rather than accomplishes its matters. When a leader have a leadership philosophy he work for the people. We can approve that leaders, are obliged to be dedicated to wisdom since a Philosopher is the just one with the natural capability to acknowledge what is great, he is the one in particular that is fit to lead a state. A leader values consultation, contribution and deliberation. A leader is responsible for making decisions. A leadership philosophy clarifies the character of the leader, character plays a vital role while dealing or communicating with other people and also the decision making. Plato argue that a leader should be virtuous.

The democracy plays an important role in understanding the Plato’s argument that for philosophers are fit to rule. These days, many modern states are democratic, in these states people have the freedom to decide how a state run. In Plato’s time the people were confused about the concept of democracy. Democracy means the rule by the people so in politics to make a decisions it requires a person to have great skill and judgment. So Plato urges that this decision making should be left for the best among the people. Plato's argument may be effective in a way that the philosophers have the ability to grasp the undisputable and eternal, while a common man have no perfect knowledge. In any case, this contention isn't powerful or sensible in contemporary governmental issues and the modern state, for various reasons.

Today all modern states hassle democracy is defined as the government made by the choice of the people they will choose who they assume fit for legislation and rule by the power of vote. So a state is no longer defined as tool in the hands of first class, or governed by philosophers but a public field where interest groups of people come together to decide and discuss policies for themselves. Also no one have a complete knowledge of everything so it’s argued that a philosopher doesn’t necessarily knows about the interest of people. So according to theories it is the people whom rulers are aiming to represent. Plato is perceptibly not concerned with a demonstrative form of rule.

Why does Plato not reflect democracy as the finest form of government? Firstly Plato argued that democracy may lead to the overuse of freedom and secondly because of the equality that every people have the right to rule bring politics to the selfish and power seeking people and the people with personal gains. Plato thought that democracy leads to anarchy and tyranny. Plato also argued that people need rulers who are experts have good judgmental skills and haven’t merely selected by accident but prepared by extensive training. Then the question arises who should be the expert? Disregarding the vision with which he is generally related, Plato isn't politically credulous. He is totally negative about human beings. Most people for him are basically illogical, determined by their cravings, false beliefs and selfish desires. And if they decided to be fair and follow laws, it is because they don’t have the power or are frightened of punishment. However, by nature human beings are not malicious. Human being cannot live alone because they are social animal. Plato have faith that in a society morals are restored once the political society is correctly ordered. Good human nature can be produced by a good political order, upbringing and education. Plato also didn’t see the preeminent political and social order in democracy. Plato’s analysis of democracy in contrast to liberal democracy today is not applicable.

Today liberal democracies are instituted on considerations of equality and freedom but it also include different party system, rule of law, elections and civil service. Plato is for the most part seen as one of the best and most compelling savants in the Western custom. His political way of thinking is held in comparably high respect, and is the most punctual complete political view we have. Similarly as with other extraordinary figures, Plato's political hypothesis was a piece of his in general philosophical framework as well as significantly formed by his social and political conditions. According to Plato when a man is inadequate in ethicalness, this individual is unhappy, because he can't manage himself and consequently endure and if that person happens to be a leader he would fail in his responsibilities. A leader must have a strong will and has not been submitted to unrestrained freedom, greed and pleasures. Plato also argued that the most ideal approach to improve leadership is by surveillance, mentoring and administered leadership projects.

A leader create more steadiness in actions and behavior. A leader must do likewise always audit the functions and guidelines of his condition and, How might he improve them? Plato associates the state to an intricate and luxurious ship. For a ship to complete a safe and successful journey it needs an expert Captain in the same way he concluded that the ship of the state need expert rulers, where’s ignorant rulers bring destruction to the state. It leads to the idea of dictatorship. Even if we confesses that skilful knowledge is very important for the government to rule but what if the government fails to deliver. What if the captain of the ship don’t know how to navigate but still have the right and choice to determine where the ship goes. The ideal state according to Plato have a characteristics like prudence with the help of it stability is preserved in the state. According to him this rare trait called prudence only possessed by philosophers so they have the right to rule. But it is very problematic to join political power and prudence. To begin with, despite the fact that a philosopher r would be accessible, people are visually impaired and not prepared to utilize their abilities. Plato realizes that government officials win their capacity by common fights and by seeking the voters support.

Therefore a perfect leaders needs a flawless public to pick the true leader. Secondly many of the people only pretend to be philosophers but a true philosopher want to ascend in ranks so he was obligatory to accept the leadership against his will. Plato also made a distinction between rule by the law and rule by someone possessing skillful knowledge of rule. The rule by law according to him is not as perfect as the second one and he also states that laws are inevitably imperfect because even in different conditions they have the same description. We have seen that Plato has been one of the most significant and executive thinkers through the eternities.

Plato has put forward the theory of society as harmony seeking unit. But here the same question arises does Philosopher have the ability to become great leader always? Because of the human nature it was easily concluded that man can be easily tempted to corruption because of greed. Plato was also uncertain about the changes in the state so he setup an education system that prevent the society from change. In that way he never really cared about the individual’s or their role in the state. In his state the individuals are just like tools who were under the command of the ruler. Participation of the people in state affairs as well as opposition party in a government is very essential. But despite of these facts one cannot say that he is entirely wrong. A significant number of Plato's optimal standards keep on holding relatedness today.

First is the general conviction that leaders ought to be qualified through training, and that voters should be authorized to made knowledgeable assumptions. Most social orders works in a way called meritocracy, where the capacity to govern is estimated autonomously of riches, sex or different types of benefit.

At last, Plato's confidence in the significance of discussion and speech keeps on being maintained. The political ideas like rule of law, wisdom, and difference between good and strayed form of government, collective interests, good leadership, and virtue can be related with Plato. That continue to deeply influence successive radical thinkers.