Paper about Thucydides versus Plato on the nature of the Good Life

1: Thucydides versus Plato on the nature of the Good Life. Some have claimed that Thucydides is making empirical claims, whereas Plato is making normative claims. Is that true? Support your answer in your paper. Plato and Thucydides together had strikingly dissimilar views on their tactic on the good life. Many have demanded that Plato is making normative rights, whereas Thucydides has made empirical claims. Let's first take a look at Plato. Plato's philosophy on the decent life was based on the confidence that all has an objective or use that is classically suited for asset, beauty, fairness, and excellence of the exact thing, and all will depend on the conclusion of that role. He reflects the decent life as being reached and finished by the flawless love and lack of wish. Plato states that the good life is the disorder a person exhibits regarding entire virtue. Virtue inclines to come after the nonappearance of desires, or prospects, so true contentment means being satisfied to the opinion one doesn’t have needs. He’s persuaded that everyone has the control to be virtuous. He too believed the gentleman and citizens are the formation of the City; they are it’s slaves and it’s broods, and the separate has no right to assert separate rights against the Urban. In his circumstance, justice is putative as a compromise, and appreciated, not as good in itself, nonetheless for lack of control to do wrong; no gentleman worthy of the designation, who had that control, would always enter into such a solid with anyone; he would be angry if he did. The over-all in the Athenian military and a Greek historian, Thucydides supposed the good life was independent; “the good gentleman” was the robust man that could grip himself well in all conditions, protect himself and his individual, be substantial with