THE ORIGIN, NATURE, SCOPE AND DEFINITION OF

PHILOSOPHY
Nature of philosophy
Aristotle tells us that this ‘wonder’ is the beginning of
philosophy. So also Plato tells us that philosophy begin from
‘wonder’, thus the first step in the philosophical activity is this
wonder that accompanies man’s experimental contract with
himself or the world around him. This ‘wonder’ in turn give a
lift-up to some questions which are fundamental and this is the
second step in philosophical activity. After this, man begins to
reflect on these fundamental activities. After this, man begins to
reflect on these fundamental questions in search of answers.
This is the stage which Professor J.I. Omoregbe refers to as the
third step in philosophy activity.
Philosophy at this level can be seen as a reflective activity, in
which human experience is the ultimate source of this activity.
Omoregbe identifies this human experience, which could be
man’s own experience of himself (subjectivity) or his experience
of the world around him (objectivity) (Omoregbe J.I. 1991).
Even Ortega Y. Gasset sees philosophy in these two ways, that
is, in both subjective and objective ways. He sees philosophy as
the totality of involvement of man and his world. That is, man is
inseparable with his world. So the subjective and objective view
of man boils down to his reflection over his experience in search
of answers to some fundamental questions. So if philosophy is
this, we can say that, philosophy is concerned with the critical
examination of the phenomena of human existence providing
comprehensive interpretation of fundamental issues and even
pertinent to them. Then it has the comprehensive aim of
providing a general outlook, it is elated in some degree to all
major branches of human life and action.
The controversies inherent in philosophy started from the
beginning of the world, when philosophy emanated from
‘wonder’ as claimed by Aristotle Plato and all other philosophers
who conceived the same notion. These controversies generated
to problems which are called fundamental philosophical
problems. “which philosophers try to solve. The problems are
often called perennial”. It is a fact that philosophy claim to have
solved many problems of the existence of nature and society
“from the point of view of Eternity” and lay down, once and for
all, the law of both. Philosophy reflects on everything about the
world. All these characterization of the nature of philosophy
shows its universality. That is to say philosophy is a universal
concept. The important task of philosophy universally is to find
rational ground and validity for man’s total experience. The
universality of the concept philosophy does not live
mythological belief of all man. It rather lies in the similarities in
believe system of all men, and the similarities in their culture.
The universality lies in the similarities in the process of thought
of all men, and how their environment influences them and
finally the similarities in their world view. So to this philosophy
is world-wide. If we look at philosophy from the angle of
culture, then it becomes the ... “ corpus of beliefs way of attitude
to life, language and common experience of a people. That
individual outlook is determined by his culture from which he
synthesizes and critizes others cultures and even his own, from
personal sentiments, convenience or value, rationalization and
knowledge of other culture in man. So, the basis of one’s world
view is culture. Prof. Okolo C., also says further that “every
philosophy appears inseparable from the people’s world and
their perception of it, the above characterization of the nature of
philosophy is enough to show that African philosophy exist.

Meaning of philosophy
An attempt to define philosophy will not only be
uncomfortable, but may be embarrassing to both the beginner
and his teacher. It is however not a disturbing fact. Philosophers
have found it easy to go into the business of philosophizing than
to first define the business into which they intend to venture.
Mostly due to a long historical span of existence which
philosophy has covered, the expense of its scope and subject
matter, and importantly, the nature of the business of philosophy
itself have created an intellectual environment that makes it
difficult to provide a univocal and comprehensively acceptable
definition of philosophy.
The term “philosophy” is taken from a Greek word “Pholein”
(to love) and “Sophia”(wisdom). Hence, philosophy may be said
to be the “love of wisdom” and a philosopher may be said to be
one who pursues wisdom just as a lover pursue his beloved
Philosophy’s perpetual quest is to examine man endeavors to
understand human existence and live as a whole, and therefore,
ultimately attempts to gasp the “why” of all things.
 However, philosophy has been defined in many ways. This is
because philosophy cannot be defined univocally. Few of the
numerous definitions are the following: D.J.O. Connor, defined
philosophy in four ways such as:-
(a). A mental attitude between science and religion.
(b). A way of simplifying complex ideas and statement about our
experience in life in order to make us understand them fully.
(c). A study which examines the nature of the world and the
reasons behind many things or event happening in it
(d). The sum total of what a person accepts as guiding principles
to act in a particular way at different time, places and
circumstances
Another professor of philosophy named G.Gatalian sees
philosophy as a theoretical definition of “a posterior kind” in the
following term. It is
(i). An enquiry into nature of wisdom
(ii). By means of all man’s power of apprehension (what they
be; the power of reason of intuition etc)
(iii). An enquiry which is
(a).Comprehensive in scope
(b). Systematic in structure
(c). Uncompromising critical in attitude
(d).broadly rational in attitude
(e). Absolute free in the sense that it is to be unconstrained by
any eternal authority, uncommitted to any predetermined dogma.
Postulate, or supposed revelation, governed only by the
philosopher’s guest for truth and his commitment to the welfare
of the human race
(iv). An enquiry whose ultimate practical purpose is the
determination of the conditions and which the good of man is
maximally realization, that is to say
(a). The individual conditions
(b). The social conditions
(c). The political conditions
(d). The economics
(e). The education and other institutional conditions
(f). Even the religion and ecclesiastical condition and finally,
(g). The cosmic or existential condition
The above definitions given by both O’Connor and G.Gatalian
shows that philosophical enquiries are generally about a
comprehensive explanation of “why” man occupies a particular
position in the world. It is also about an explanation of the
nature of knowledge and relevance to human life. It is equally a
study of the principle that guides social behavior, which we call
“good”, “bad”, “right” or “wrong”.
Going by all these definitions we can summarise philosophy as
 The search for the truth about reality and man
 The search for the truth, the purpose of everything
 The search for truth about the way men ought to live
 The use of special method of philosophizing or what is
otherwise called the philosophical method
  The capacity to face critical discussion without making a
biased assumption
Philosophy is worth studying as a subject because it examines
the questions, which affect human existence and the existence of
other objects in the world. This subject also examines the
existence of “God” and other forces. Philosophy examines and
clarifies important issue like happiness, time predestination and
immorality, among others.
Philosophy has many useful functions. Some are analytic,
speculative, inspirational, prescriptive and normative. Also
philosophy has a coordination function. The major branches of
philosophy are logic, metaphysics and ethics. Others are
aesthetics, and the philosophy of the infrastructure of disciples
such as philosophy of religion, science, finance, law, social and
political and so on. One important things to bear in mind is that
philosophy of the infrastructure of any discipline explains the
general character of such discipline. It also deals with the
fundamental questions presupposition of such a disciple.

Who is a philosopher?
Philosophers are commonly called “thinkers,” but really, that is
not an adequate definition of a philosopher. A philosopher looks
at the world in wonder. He seeks the underlying meaning of
things; he wants to understand it and codify it into a system of
thought
A philosopher is a person who “loves wisdom.” Philosophy is
the “Study of the, Love of wisdom” We can study it in various
ways. It does not mean you must have gone to university and
received a degree, although that may help. You look at life and
consider all aspects of it, and use your own wisdom to think
more about it, seeing it in a different ways than others
A philosopher is a person who live the life of reasoning, s/he has
a deep liking towards knowledge. A philosopher develop the
attitude towards knowledge, they are not satisfied by the
available knowledge, and they believe that more knowledge can
be known.
Philosophy involves critical thinking. We see things that others
don’t see. Philosophers don’t just accept information but want to
know the basis of such information
The philosopher does not only always preoccupy himself/herself
with fundamental questions of existence, but in grappling with
the issues, also apply the rigorous method of logical reasoning,
employing the principles of logic to his mode of thinking. This
distinguishes him from any man in any other field.
A philosopher sees when he looks, hears when he listens and
feels when he touches.
A philosopher is not just some one who thinks but reasons, bec
reasoning is the higher level of thinking. In fact everybody can
think but not everybody can reason.

Branches of philosophy
Philosophy has many branches among these are:
i. Metaphysics
Metaphysics simply put, is the science of being as being.
being qua tale. it is the branch of philosophy that studies
reality as such i.e. its most comprehensive scope and
fundamental principles. it is the science that tries to determine
the real nature of things. for plato, it is knowledge of the
supra-sensible, therefore real being existent in the ideal world
and therefore explanatory of the realities of this transient
world. For Descartes it is knowledge of things which lie
beyond sense experience, for Thomas Aquinas it is the
ultimate explanation of the mystery being visible and
invisible, in the ultimate being (casual and final) which is
God.
The word metaphysics is derived from the Greek word meta-
ta-physika which means after the physics, the word as
originally used by Andronicus of Rhodes (around 70 B.C.), a
commentator on Aristotle’s works. he used the term to
describe Aristotle’s works which came after the discussions on
the physical sciences. in other words, the Greek word ‘meta’,
‘after’ also means beyond. in this sense, metaphysics means
that which is beyond physics and therefore means that which
is beyond the ‘physical eye’. Metaphysics thus discusses such
problems as the problems of substance, apperarance and
reality, essence and existence, freewill and determinism,
human destiny, Being of beings, i.e. God, and asks such
questions as what is the source of the beings of all beings?
What is ground of beings? Why is there something rather than
nothings? Why does the universal exist? Why does anythings
exist? What is the essence of being? What is the nature of
man? etc.
ii. Epistemology
Epistemologically, Epistemology is derived from two Greek
words episteme which means knowledge and logos which
means science of, study of. Put together, epistemology is the
study or the science of know what knowledge means. is
knowledge different from belief and opinion? What constitutes
belief and what constitute knowledge? How does knowledge
differ from belief? What does it mean to know? What is the
source of knowledge? What do we know? What can we know?
How do we know we have gained knowledge i.e. how do we
know what we claim to know? Can we know anything for
certain? is there certainty in knowledge? However, recent
trends in epistemology did course have left these more
traditional problems of epistemology to the problem of
epistemological justification. How do we justify our claim to
knowledge? the skeptics deny our ability to know anything for
certain while the foundationlists believe on certain foundation
upon which the superstructure of knowledge can be built.
Ethics
WHAT IS ETHICS? DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF
ETHICS
Etymologically, ethics is derived from the Greek word
“ETHOS” which means custom. It is a customary or acceptable
ways of acting.
Ethics is a branch of philosophy, like philosophy itself, ethics
has no univocal definition. It can be and has been, defined in
different ways. Ethics does not have a fixed definition because
ethics differ from person to person. If there are ten people and
they are asked “What is ethics”, their answer would be differ as
well.
 It can be defined as a branches of philosophy which deals
with the morality of human actions or as the branch of
philosophy which study the norms of human behavior.

 It is the systematic study of the fundamental principle of

the moral law.

 Ethics, is the philosophical study of moral judgments-

value judgment about what is virtuous or base, just or
unjust, morally right or wrong, morally good or bad or evil,
morally proper or improper.

 Ethics is a philosophical study of the activities that secure

the good life for man. It concerns itself with judgment of
 approval or disapproved judgment about the rightness and
wrongness, goodness or badness. Virtue or vice,
desirability or wisdom of actions, dispositions, ends,
objects or state of affairs.
 Ethics is a systematic approach to understanding,
analyzing, and distinguishing matters of right and wrong,
good and bad, admirable and deplorable as they relate to
the well-being of and the relationships among sentient
beings.
 Ethics as the philosophy that tries to understand a familiar
type of evaluation: the moral evaluation of people’s
character traits, their conduct, and their institutions. It is
concerned with what bothers us about good and bad, the
morally right and the morally wrong thing to do, just or
unjust regimes or law, how things ought and ought not to
be, and how people should live
 Ethics as the study of the concept involved in practical
reasoning: good, right, right, duty, obligation, virtue,
freedom, rationality, choice. It is also the second order
study of the objectivity, subjectivity, relativism, or
skepticism that may attend claims made in these terms.
SCOPE OF ETHICS
There are three scopes of ethics, they are
1) Meta-ethics
2) Normative ethics
3) Applied ethics
1. Meta-Ethics: Meta-ethics comprises the area of situational
ethics and deals with logical questions like ‘What do we mean
by ‘freedom’ and ‘determinism’ etc. It delves into the nature of
ethical properties, attitudes and judgments. For example, a
media critic’s description of a TV series as ‘good drama’ does
not necessarily denote that the program is morally sound. It is
the function of meta-ethics to define such vague concepts in
ethical terms. Some of the theories of Meta-Ethics are
Naturalism, Non-Naturalism, Emotivism1 and Prescriptivism.

2. Normative Ethics: Normative ethics deals with standards or

norms by which we can judge human actions to be right or
wrong. It deals with the criteria of what is morally right or
wrong. For example, if someone murders a person, everyone
will agree that it is wrong. The question is: Why is it wrong to
murder someone? There are a lot of different answers we could
give, but if we want to specify a principle that stated why its
wrong, the answer might be: Murder is wrong because when we
kill someone, we violate their right to live. Another perspective
might be – To inflict unnecessary suffering on the person being
murdered or their family is wrong, that’s why to kill a person is
wrong.

There are three elements emphasized by normative ethics:

 The person who performs the act (the agent)
 The act
 The consequences of the act
3. Applied Ethics: Applied ethics is the problem-solving branch
of moral philosophy. It uses the insights derived from meta
ethics and the general principles and rules of normative ethics in
addressing specific ethical issues and cases in a professional,
disciplinary or practical field. Applied ethics is the vital link
between theory and practice, the real test of ethical decision-
making. Applied ethics often requires not only theoretical
analysis but also practical and feasible solutions.
Some of the key areas of applied ethics are:
 Decision Ethics
 Professional Ethics
 Clinical Ethics
 Business Ethics
 Organizational Ethics
 Social Ethics
Applied ethics takes into consideration issues such as abortion,
euthanasia, capital punishment, drug decriminalization, gay
marriage, etc
Logic
This is the branch of philosophy often referred to as the
science of correct reasoning. It is the science which directs the
mind in the attainment of truth. it is from the Greek word
logos which means, “Reasoned discourse”. Its fundamental
meaning is speech or “statement” in the sense that each speech
or statement consists of a coherent and rational arrangement of
words. it is a tool for valid reasoning and essential weapon for
philosophical reflection and for the separation of correct
reasoning from the incorrect reasoning. To this end, logic is an
 instrumental branch of philosophy. Philosophers are known to
make their arguments well stated and persuasive more than
other people do. Philosophers try to make their position clear,
well articulated and properly backed up, their pronouncements
rational, their reasoning precise, cogent and coherent. it is
logic that gives them this ability and facilitates the attainment
of these goals.
Besides this, we also have other branches of philosophy
which are often referred to as philosophy of the infrastructure
of Disciplines. Some of them are philosophy of education of
education, philosophy of law, philosophy of science,
philosophy of history, philosophy of technology and
philosophy of language. etc.
What is society?

A society is a group of individuals involved in persistent social

interaction, or a large social group sharing the same spatial or
social territory, typically subject to the same political authority
and dominant cultural expectations. Societies are characterized
by patterns of relationships (social relations) between
individuals who share a distinctive culture and institutions; a
given society may be described as the sum total of such
relationships among its constituent of members. In the social
sciences, a larger society often exhibits stratification or
dominance patterns in subgroups.
Societies construct patterns of behavior by deeming certain
actions or speech as acceptable or unacceptable. These patterns
of behavior within a given society are known as societal norms.
Societies, and their norms, undergo gradual and perpetual
changes.
Insofar as it is collaborative, a society can enable its members to
benefit in ways that would otherwise be difficult on an
individual basis; both individual and social (common) benefits
can thus be distinguished, or in many cases found to overlap. A
society can also consist of like-minded people governed by their
own norms and values within a dominant, larger society. This is
sometimes referred to as a subculture, a term used extensively
within criminology, and also applied to distinctive subsections
of a larger society.
 An organized group of persons associated together for
religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political,
patriotic, or other purposes.
 A body of individuals living as members of a community;
community.
 The body of human beings generally, associated or viewed
as members of a community: the evolution of human
society.
 A highly structured system of human organization for
large-scale community living that normally furnishes
protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for
its members: American society.
 Such a system characterized by its dominant economic
class or form: middle-class society; industrial society.

Relevance of philosophy to the society

The practice of philosophy is a process benefiting the whole of
society. It helps to build bridges between peoples and cultures
and heightens demand for quality education for all
 Philosophy encourages respect for cultural diversity,
exchanging opinions and sharing the benefits of science,
which are the conditions for genuine debate.
 While society is very different today from when the
founding figures of Western philosophy were making their
mark, the questions we face today are just as challenging.
Enter modern philosophy, which puts critical thinking and
problem-solving at the forefront in order to make sense of
these weighty problems.
 Philosophy is not obsolete. Philosophy brings the important
questions to the table and works towards an answer. It
encourages us to think critically about the world; it is the
foundation of all knowledge and when utilized properly,
can provide us with huge benefits
 We lean very heavily on science today. And with good
reason: Thanks to advancements in science and technology,
we live in a very different way to how we would without
them. From fridges for our food to airplanes for travel,
there’s no denying that scientific advancements are vital to
our survival as a species.
 But just because science is important, that does not negate
the value of philosophy. In fact, the two go hand in hand.
“Science, I am sorry to say, does not have all the answers.
Just like every other field, it has its limits. We cannot derive
everything from experience, and philosophy is not
dead….For example, science cannot determine human
values. Empiricism cannot determine why we ought to act
morally, nor why we ought to value human happiness over
 human misery. We cannot create an experiment that tests
the nature of Truth or the obtainability of knowledge
 At its core, philosophy is a striving towards figuring out
what is true and worthwhile, and what it means to live a
meaningful and worthwhile life. That’s something off-
limits for science, because science can tell us how things
are empirically, but it can’t prescribe how we should then
live. [...] In short: science helps us live longer, whereas
philosophy helps us live better
 While Plato and Aristotle are often credited with shaping
future civilizations, and their influence is still felt today,
purchase weekly insists, “The ancient Greek philosophers
Plato and Aristotle may seem like the quintessential Dead
White Males, but in fact they are very much alive. Twenty
four centuries ago they laid the foundations of Western
culture, and their ideas and insights still dictate essential
features of our world right now, from what we eat to what
we see on the internet.”
 And while you may think of Confucius purely in terms of
sound bites, his work was extremely significant -- and
remains so today. This is very useful to know, especially for
students in fields such as political science,
diplomacy and international politics, China’s modern
government has modeled much of its ethos on Confucius'
rhetoric, such as “obedience to the emperor, hierarchy, and
loyalty.” On the other hand, recent superhero movies Man
of Steel (about Superman) and The Dark Knight (Batman)
feature major moral dilemmas based on an age-old
philosophical issue known as the 'trolley problem'.
 So, while to some people philosophy may not be the sexiest
 of subjects on paper, it’s one with extraordinary staying
power and potential. It does not just stand to change the
world; it just might change your life. One student,
describing being strong-armed by his father into taking an
intro to philosophy college course altered his life’s
trajectory, wrote, “While I once scorned philosophy, I am
now majoring in it. I have come to realize that philosophy
provides the tools for us to become good thinkers, which is
perhaps the most important skill there is
THOMAS HOBBES AND THE SOCIETY
Thomas Hobbes was born in 1588. He studies philosophy
at Oxford. He was a contemporary of Descartes and he
criticized Descartes’s meditations. His main work is his
famous lavation. He died at 1679 at the age of ninety-one.
 Hobbes is known for his theory of the state of nature,
which is the state in which men lived prior to the setting up
of organized society. In this state, there were no law, no
authority, no morality, no sense of right or wrong, and no
sense of justice or injustice. Everybody simply pursued to
satisfaction of his self-interest. Whatever satisfied
everybody’s appetite was for his good and he would pursue
it. There was no other rule of action than self-interest and
its satisfaction, in this, it brings conflicts, quarrel and each
other fought with each other.
 According to Hobbes, the state of nature was a state of
war and in security among men. Life was insecure, men
were enemies to each other, for conflicts, struggle and war
pre-valued among them. Men lived in perpetual danger as
 fear of death. There was no permanent ownership of
anything by anybody. Whatever anybody could grab was
his own for as long as he was able to retain it. In such a
slate, Hobbes say; there was no progress, no development,
no agriculture, no navigation, and no industry.
 Feelings that they could no longer continue in the state of
nature, man decided to come together to form an organized
society. They came together and made a social contract,
formed a political society as empowered the sovereign to
decide what is right and what is wrong. According to
Hobbes, morality originated with the establishment of civil
society. According to Hobbes, the purpose of morality is to
ensure peace because peace is necessary condition for the
satisfaction of one’s desires. the moral virtue are means of
bringing about peace and the science of virtue as vice is
moral philosophy and therefore the true doctrine of the
laws of nature is the true moral philosophy.
 Hobbes is a convinced psychological egoist who believes
that man is by nature selfish as self-seeking and that all
human actions are directed to towards the satisfaction of
man is self-interest. The organization of civil society,
morality, laws, rules and regulation, the cultivators of
virtues etc. are all means to the same end, namely the
satisfaction of man’s appetites or desires. The desire for
peace itself is also a means to this end since it is a
necessary condition for its attainment, for it is only in the
atmosphere of peace that man can satisfy go about in search
of the satisfaction of his desires
 man is always seeking and pursuing his self-interests in
everything’s he does, under whatever cover he may be
doing the. The ethics of Hobbes is therefore basically self-
centered; it is an ethics dictated by self-interest and directed
towards its satisfaction.
 The state in Hobbes political theory is an authoritarian
state in which virtually unlimited power is vested on the
sovereign by the citizens. according to Hobbes theory,
when we become members of a political society we
surrender to the sovereign the right which we have by
nature to govern ourselves and submit ourselves completely
to his sovereign power and authority. This is part of the
covenant men make with each other when they form
themselves into a civil society.
 It is the citizens who make this covenant with each other
to hand over their right to the sovereign, the sovereign
himself does not enter any covenant with the citizens, and
he is not part of the covenant. Consequently, there can be
no breach of the covenant o the paper of the sovereign. The
sovereign is not accountable to the people in Hobbes
theory, he is above the law of the land. He can do whatever
he likes, he cannot be accused of injustice, he cannot be
punished nor can he ever be justifiably killed by any
citizen. what he dos id right because it is his prerogative to
decide good and evil in the state, it is he who decides what
is to be considered as morally wrong or as morally right in
the society. Nobody can therefore accuse him of acting
immorally or of breaking the law since he is above the law.
 The people have given him full authority to do whatever he
likes, even to kill them if he wants to, and they have
submitted themselves to his authority as subjects, ready to
do whatever he orders them to do. He is the ‘moral god’ to
whom they own absolute loyalty. The only exception that
Hobbes makes is if the sovereign commands a citizens to
kill himself. In that case the citizen can justifiably refuse to
obey the sovereign because he did not surrender to the
sovereign his right of self-preservation. According to
Hobbes, the citizen has authorized the sovereign to kill him
if he wants (this is part of the covenant), but he did not tell
the sovereign that he will kill himself
 It is one things to say, kill me or my fellow, if you please:
but another things to say, I will kill myself or my fellow.
 No other society or organization should dare to challenge
the authority in Hobbes state
 Hobbes himself tells us that the reason why the sovereign
is vested with such virtually unlimited power over the
citizens is to be able to ensure peace, avert chaos, anarchy
and civil war. What the citizens need is peace and
protection and to ensure this the sovereign needs such
power. Hence the citizens owe him allegiance for as long as
he is full control of the society and can provide them with
the peace and protection they need. But if he happens to
lose control over the society, if things go beyond his control
in the state and he is no longer in the position to provide the
citizens with the peace and protection they need, then their
loyalty to him ceases. They will no longer be under any
 obligation to obey him.
 Hobbes believes that men are by nature self-centered and
that they need ‘iron hand’ to discipline them and keep them
from anarchy. But few people today would admire his
authoritarianism

PLATO AND THE SOCIETY

Almost all the classical theories have dealt with one of
the difficult and perplexing questions in political in political
philosophy, which is “who is to rule?” for Plato, this is the
crucial question which every society must face, and his entire
political philosophy, is an attempt to answer it. Roughly, the
platonic answer is that a special group of intellectuals should
rule.
Plato himself called his view” aristocratic”! This was because
he believed that the intellectual were best fitted to rule; indeed
the Greek words “Ariston” and ‘kiato’ together mean the rule by
the best.
In order to see why the question who should rule? Is of
fundamental importance for Plato, it would be fruitful to refer to
the social condition which prevailed in Greece at that time.
Greece was composed of a small number of city-state, which
had autonomous government. These state engage in constant
warfare with each other and even with large, powerful nations as
Persia. Most of them also suffered from a great deal of deal
internal studies. Life for the average citizen was precarious.
Dissatisfied with the state of affairs, Plato attempted to
outline a society which would be free from such defects, in
which people could live peacefully with each other, and in
which everyone could develop to the fullest capacity. This led
Plato to ask; “what would ideal society be like? If it could be
brought into existence. The answer, he believed, dependent to a
great extent upon who ruled such a society, Plato was greatly
influenced by psychological and biological theories of the time.
He rephrased the question of what an ideal society should be as
‘what makes an ideal or perfect man? And his answer to the
query came in part from the then current theories of psychology
and biology.
The psychology of the day held that everyone is composed of
two different ingredients; Body and soul. Thus, what makes an
ideal person is a matter of both physical and psychological
perfection. A person is physically healthy if he/she is not
suffering from diseases. To determine the psychological
state/health of a person is complicated. Plato’s reply was that the
human soul was divided into three parts, which he called the
rational element, which is that part of a soul which enables one
to reason, to argue & deliberate.
The spirited element is what makes one to be courageous or to
be a coward and gives one strength of view.
The appetitive element consist of one’s desire and passion,
such as food, drink and sex. Plato argued that a person would be
psychologically healthy if the three parts of one soul function
harmoniously i.e. Each of it playing its role without dominating
the other or without being dominated. Therefore, an individual is
healthy if all the element of his/her function harmoniously with
each other.
Since the state is nothing but combination of individual, the
same analysis was applied to it by Plato, According to him
compose of three classes; the ruler to administer the state, the
warrior to defend it and all other citizen to provide all essentials
of life such as food, shelter etc. Each of these classes
corresponds to a division of the individual soul. The ruling class
is the rational element of the society; the soldiers are its spirited
elements and other citizens are appetitive elements
Like the ideal individual, the ideal society will be one in
which all these elements function harmoniously, with the
warriors assisting the rulers to keep the rest of the citizenry
under a benign but from control. It would have no conflicts
within it, and each class by doing what is best fitted to do, would
be happy& contented.
But the fundamental problem which the establishment of
such society raises is ‘who shall rule it’. Poor leadership will
lead to poor laws, a wrong decision in placing someone in a
given class will lead to unhappiness or worse, rebellion. It is
thus essential that proper rules be chosen if the society is to be
ideal. Plato gave careful directions for choosing ruler, and for
making sure, once chosen, they would not work for their own
advantage. He cited that all children, male or female, should be
raised communally i.e. by the state until they are eighteen. At
that time, they will be subjected to three years of test in order to
determine prospective rulers from those who will become
warriors & artisans. Those tests were to take two years. The
(students) would be part physical, in part intellectual and in part
physical, in part intellectual and in part moral.
The individuals who passed these tests would be carefully
isolated/differentiated for further trainings most of it intellectual.
The second part of their schooling would be practical, they
would be appointed to administration posts of lesser order and
constantly observed in performance of their duties. Anyone who
failed to achieve competence in any of the above training would
be dismissed as a potential ruler. After all the tests have been
passed, the rulers would take part in the active administration of
the society. But in order to avoid any chance of them placing
their private interests over the public welfare, they would not
allowed to have private families or to possess private properties
or wealth. Plato felt that family interest and the desire for riches/
wealth were the two great obstacles to unbiased and impartial
leadership. The guardian/guardians were to be given absolute
authority in running the society. Plato justified giving the rulers
absolute power on the ground that ruling is a skill, just as
medical training is a skill. In order to rule properly, one had to
be trained for it.
 CONFUCIUS AND THE SOCIETY
Confucius (Kong Dui) was born in 551BC in the Lu State
of China. His teachings embodied in the analects focused on
designing ethical models of family and public interaction and
setting high educational standard. Kong Dui died in 478BC.
During the sixth Century BC opposing Chinese states were at
loggerheads and defied the authority of the Chou empire which
had held supreme rule for many years. At this moment,
traditional Chinese norms started waning and this reinforced
Kong Qui moral stance and sparked him up to reinforce the
societal value of compassion and tradition.
It must be noted that Confucius social Philosophy is
predicated on the principle of ren or loving others while
exercising self discipline. In his analysis ‘ren’ could be
practically reinforced by the golden rule. This imperative posits
that “what you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others
(Lunyu, 12.2, 6.30). This is a facsimile of Immanuel kants
categorical imperative. Kant notes thus: “There is therefore but
one categorical imperative, namely this: Act only on that maxim
whereby thou can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law” (Kant, 1974:117). This means that there is a need
to act in such a way that you will that your action be universal.
If you are prepared that everyone performs your action, then it is
morally worthy” (Fadahunsi, 2001:47).
Confucius political beliefs are rooted in self-discipline. A
leader must exercise self-discipline and empathise with his
followers. He must treat them with compassion. Leaders should
motivate their subject to follow the law by teaching them value.
Politically, Confucius envisioned a society that returned to
its root, virtue, point of historical advantage, etc. “People
themselves should change. Change must be holistic, not just
those that govern them” (Awojobi, 2016:83). The daily rituals
which man should be involved in must be those that lead to
happiness of themselves and the society. Every man has a
responsibility to the society, not just themselves.
Government must be tailored towards the well-being and
sufficiency of the people. As amplified by James Parker.
As for government, the three regularities are
‘sufficiency of food, sufficiency of military
equipment and the confidence of the people
in their ruler. If one is to be forgone, the
master insists that it is the military
equipment of the two remaining, if another
is to be forgone, the master states that food
should be the next to go. The most important
is the people’s faith in their ruler. This is the
foundation of the state (Jason, 2011:1).
In a nutshell, the welfare of the people is the first indices of
power. While a Machiavellian leader will consider his own
interest first and foremost, a humane leader consider the people
first.
Basically, Confucius political Philosophy is predicated on
his belief that a ruler should learn self-discipline, should govern
his subjects by his own examples and should sympathise and
empathise with the people. The ruler must put into place a well
designed social order that enhances harmonious relationship.
Social harmony results in part from every individual knowing
his or her place in the natural order and playing his or her part
well (Marilyn, 2008:42). Thus, leadership is a form of proper
administration to bring about good governance. In the Analacts,
Confucius notes “there is government, when the prince of prince
and the minister is minister; when the father is father and the son
is son” (Analects, XII, 11, trans legge).
Sequel to the above, particular duties arise from one’s
particular situation in relation to others. Relationship is bonded
as seen in father to son, friend to friend, husband to wife, etc.
Specific duties are assigned to each of the components of the
ladder of relationship.

Politics in Nigeria is bedeviled with series of unfavorable

crises which tug the nation in different directions. However, a
thorough study and application of Confucius notion of political
leadership will go a long way to curb some of these problems.
The principle of ‘ren’ in Confucius thought draws an interaction
or inseparability between morality and politics. Unlike the legal
positivist claims that morality is separable from law, politics and
morality are inseparable. The idea of ‘ren’ suggests putting
others first while exercising self-discipline. The welfare of the
governed must be the first item in the scale of preference of the
leader.
Leaders must lead with empathy lifestyle. Thus, crass
materialism in the midst of a suffering masses is an aberration. A
leader must live a life predicated on moral principles and rooted
in virtue. He or she must motivate citizens to follow the law by
teaching them values. This goes to show that a leader must not
be involved in anything that can lead the followers astray. For
instance, if a leader ventures into the Machiavellian system o
winning at all cost, he would lack the moral gut to correct the
followers when they veer into the track of immorality.
Confucius advocated a system of change. Change must be
holistic. It must involve the governor and the governed. It must
not be a mere superimposition by a sovereign who like the
Hobbes’ leviathan stand outside the circumference of query. In
Confucian thought it is an aberration for leaders to be enjoying
social amenities while the led live in dilapidated structures.
There must be sufficiency of social amenities, food and security
so that the people will have confidence in their leaders.
Another important issue is the choice of personnel to
manage crucial posts in political administration. Everybody
must be trained to know what he/she can do best and obtained
maximum result. There must be no manipulative dislocation of
human resources based on descriptive capacity as commonly
done in Nigeria. One can easily get any juicy job in Nigeria by
being connected with a person in power, even when such person
lacks the mental power for acting in that capacity. This is one of
the core points that underpin underdevelopment in Nigeria.
Confucius puts up a moral pedagogy that elicits the best out of
human.
This Philosophy also goes a long way to reduce ethnic
unrest. Men live bonded life. Every relationship is seen in a
bonded form unlike the Plato’s caste ad hierarchy in his
Republic.
It is sad to note that the political class in Nigeria are not
willing to change their luxurious lifestyle in spite of the
excruciating economic recession the nation is passing through.
There is an urgent need to reduce the number of
parliamentarians at the state and federal level. This will in turn
reduce the cost of government. The idea of change as
exemplified in the APC’s logo is not just the change of mind-set
by the followers. The policy planners and political leaders must
generate policy that shows empathy and sympathy with the
people’s thought. A remarked by Obinto
The pain of the people must be the pain of
the leaders. There is a need for radical
orientation and change of mindset by
leaders to abandon crass materialism and
put the people’s plight first (Obinto,
2017:83).
This implies that government must be sensitive and
sensitive to the people’s plight. There must be practical
demonstration of love as seen in father-son biological
relationship. Nigeria need this to stem political crises, especially
in the Niger Delta where the people complain of marginalization
despite the huge deposit of crude oil in the region.
There is an urgent need for a Philosophy to wipe out crass
materialism, morbid tenacity for power, egocentric policy, etc.
One scholar whose idea is germane especially on the note of
empathy, sympathy and bond is Confucius. His Philosophy must
be ingrained into the scheme of strategic studies for leadership.