Who is really in charge of Platos Republic - Essay Example entitled â€˜The Philosopher Rulerâ€™: â€œ The society we have described can never grow into a reality or see the light of the day and there will be no end to the troubles of states,â€¦ of humanity itself, till philosophers become kings in this world, or till those we now call kings and rulers really and truly become philosophers â€¦â€¦â€ (Plato, p no. 263). Thus, Plato is convinced that the solution to the problems of the state is possible only when philosophers become rulers or rulers, philosophers. It is necessary to consider why Plato opts philosophers to be the right candidates to entrust Governmental affairs of the State. According to him, competence and good character should be the criteria for this selection. He believed that it is incorrect to select rulers either by their wealth or aristocracy; instead he emphasized on an aristocracy of talent. So he holds the view that philosophers who are of highest talent and are given the highest training should take up the responsibility of handling the affairs of the state. Thus, Plato sees all the qualities required of a good ruler in philosophers. One may wonder about the practicability of Platoâ€™s ideal Republic and his solution to the problem- of entrusting philosophers with the task of governmental affairs. But one can never negate the goodwill, discretion and motivation behind this
Review - Article Example
For instance, a drug called D-KLAKLAK-2, is known for destroying cancer cells. But it is also effective against Gram-negative a bacterium that fights against anti-biotic. Now scientists have devised a way to fuse this drug with naturally occurring toxins called AMPs. These are like the chemical weapons which bacteria themselves have developed overtime.
So here comes the art of war; this AMP is combined with D-KLAKLAK and given to the patient. Now bacteria gets â€˜confusedâ€™ and canâ€™t predict or see a pattern in the drug that is in the body to kill it. It delivers a knockout punch and dies. In my view this is a brilliant scheme.
It is wonderful to know that such innovation is possible in medicine. From research, it is proven that bacteria, over time, can develop highly immune system that can resist a drug that it is fighting. The more drug a patient takes, the more resistive bacteria becomes. To resolve this issue, scientists have developed a method to kill the bacteria by â€˜distractingâ€™ it. The drug is combined with naturally occurring toxins so the bacteria unable to â€˜readâ€™ the moves of the drug and gets effectively knocked out.
In my opinion such innovative methods are must in any field. It is very common to observe that when a patient goes to a doctor and complains about some bacterial infection, usually the bacteria gets stronger, as if it has a mind of its own and practices fighting the drug, and gets stronger in the process.
One thing that crossed my mind while reading the article was its effectiveness in proven tests and experiments. How successful has it been on humans/animals so far? This is the question I would like to be answered. The article doesnâ€™t mention anything on this issue. Having said that, I still think that this method is very innovative, it seems theoretically sound. If there is a survey in which civilian opinion is required regarding approval or disapproval of this drug, I
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.