Costing Methods Paper Essay Example for Free

Costing Methods Paper Essay Variable and absorption costing methods are two different costing methods. Almost all successful companies in the world use both methods. Variable costing and absorption costing cannot be substituted for one another because both the systems have their own benefits and limitations (Accounting for management). This paper will complete and discuss exercise 19-17 in Wiley Plus: it will discuss the following questions: In this case, would it be better to use the variable or absorption costing method, and why? In this example Polk Company should use the absorption method, because the absorption only uses overhead that allocates to the 80,000 units sold. Whereas the variable method counts the fixed overhead as a period expense, the fixed overhead during this period is calculated on 95,000 units produced, when the absorption method is used. The variable method just calculates fixed overhead on 80,000 units sold. What are the benefits of the two methods? Both systems have their own benefits and limitations. The absorption method gives management information of product cost this is the main benefit of the absorption method. The benefit of the variable method is it gives an output the mimics the cash flow of the company. Which method would lead to the best decision when a competitor is submitting a lower bid for your product? The absorption method would be best although both methods are used, with variable costing expenses remains the same, and with the absorption method fixed production cost are period cost. Variable costing method helps with demand based pricing. References Accounting for management. (n.d.). Variable costing versus absorption costing. Retrieved from http://www.accountingformanagement.org/variable-vs-absorption-costing/

Love and Marriage in Geoffrey Chaucers Canterbury Tales

Love and Marriage in Geoffrey Chaucers Canterbury Tales Love and Marriage Insanities Making sense out of love and marriage ideals is not an easy task, especially as human actions in emotional circumstances do not follow any logic. It is a fact that has been proven consistently over time, across cultures and is also corroborated by many of the stories within Geoffrey Chaucers Canterbury Tales. In particular, The Knights Tale and The Millers Tale, that take place in two different social settings, make fun of conventional beliefs about love and marriage in the context of values such as bravery, street smartness, morality, and faithfulness. Through their plots, the narrators styles, and the contrast they set up between cherished and practiced values, the two tales highlight that human behavior in romantic situations is often unpredictable, crazy and colored by ones social class, confirming that there is no such thing as a model love or marriage. Although The Knights Tale plot is set in the halo of honor, chivalry and courtesy, the storys events and the characters actions show the silliness in how they treat love. As an example, the two cousins, Arcite and Palamon, are ready to kill each other for a woman neither of them has talked to. After escaping from the prison, Palamon discovers Arcites love for Emily and angrily challenges Arcite to a fight. Arcite responds, And I denounce all covenants that stand / Or are alleged, between you and me / remember love is free / And I will love her! I defy your might. (Chaucer 46) It is ironic that Arcite, who as a knight should keep his word and follow principles, is willing to break his earlier oath not to come in the way of his cousins love pursuit. Arcite justifies breaking his vow because as a free person he is not constrained whom he loves. He is willing to do whatever it takes to get Emily and doesnt care how strong Palamon is. Even though people can behave irrationally in matters involving love, both Palamon and Arcite are being stupid in this instance. Neither of them knows what Emily thinks. Isnt it exemplary love a two-way relationship? Whom are they courting and quarreling about? Are they willing to go to the extremes of killing each other for a woman who at this moment doesnt represent anything other than an image, symbol or trophy that theyve seen from a distance? What makes this even more bizarre is that Emily doesnt even want to get married. She prays to Goddess Diana, That I would be virgin all my life, / And would be neither mistress, no, nor wife. / of thy company, / A huntress walk the woodlands wild. (Chaucer 65) Emily doesnt like a mans company, prefers hunting and doesnt want to marry or bear children. This exposes the foolishness of what Arcite and Palamon were up to, even though they supposedly follow all the ideals of aristocratic class such as bravery, honor, bond and courtly love. The Knights Tale depiction of love is strongly influenced by its narrator, a knight, and his worldview. In the Prologue, the narrator is introduced as someone who followed chivalry, Truth, honour, generousness and courtesy. (Chaucer 4) Since in a knights world, bravery and physical fights resolve disputes, it is no wonder that in his story, a tournament clash is the best way to settle the rivalry between Emilys two suitors. She is no better than a trophy to be won in a contest. The King Theseus treats Emily, in the traditions of the aristocratic class, as a gift to win peace and harmony. Even though she apparently doesnt have any say, her suitors try to woo her with flowery language as per their traditions, customs and code of conduct. As an example, Arcite, while in prison, describes his feelings towards Emily to Palamon, And with a deep and piteous sigh he said: / The freshness of her beauty strikes me dead / Unless I at least see her day by day, / I am but dead (Chaucer 33) Arcit e is using fancy language to say that hell die if he doesnt the object of his love every day. Although the story represents love in flowery terms and as a bravery contest, reflecting the narrators perspective, the plot and characters actions speak of the irrational twists and turns in romantic pursuits. In contrast to the polished language and high-minded principles of the knights world, The Millers Tale depicts romantic situations in vulgar and comical tones, and in the process, makes fun of conventional dos and donts about love and marriage. As an example, the way Alison handles her two suitors, Nicholas and Absalon, is not only hilarious but also a not so subtle middle-class snub of the upper-class imposed view about love. When Alisons husband leaves for work, Nicholas tries to woo her with aggressive sexual advances. In response, she reacts, Swearing shed love him, with a solemn promise / To be at his disposal / When she could spy an opportunity. (Chaucer 91) She is so attracted to the street-smart Nicholas that she has no problems in being at his disposal. She just wants to wait for the right opportunity when it is safe for her to cheat on her husband. In stark contrast to falling for the physical advances of Nicholas, Alison refuses the dignified courtship of the parish clerk Absalon. Not only does she spurn his affection, she does so by tricking him to kiss her genitals. After this trickery, Teehee! she laughed, and clapped the, window to; / Off went poor Absalon sadly through the dark. (Chaucer 103) Alisons contrasting responses, towards her suitors, highlight the qualities, a middle-class girl like her, admires the most: street smartness, boldness and physical attraction represented by Nicholas. On the other hand, she humiliates Absalon, making a mockery of his gentlemanly approaches and sweet words. Further, by being part of an extra-marital affair, she is being unfaithful to her husband. She also participates in Nicholass scheme to deceive her naive husband, that ends up making him a laughing-stock of the town. When John fell from the boat and no one listened to him, Alison and Nicholas told the town people, That he was mad, Some sort of nonsense about Nowels Flood All started laughing at this lunacy. (Chaucer 105) This episode, in addition to her i nfidelity, was Alisons payback for her marriage with the much older carpenter and his extraordinary protective nature. Maybe, she was married to him because he was rich, a practice that was common in arranged marriages in the medieval middle class. The Millers Tale narrators drunkenness and middle-class perspective shapes his story in direct, crude, and vulgar terms. In the Prologue, he proudly states that One shouldnt be too inquisitive in life / Either about Gods secrets or ones wife. /Gods plenty all you could desire / better not enquire. (Chaucer 88) Through these words, the narrator expresses his view that men shouldnt care about their wives or Gods private affairs. There are lots of women in this world to choose from and men shouldnt ask about the rest. Maybe the narrator has loose morals. Or, his middle-class outlook conditions him to talk frankly about subjects like physical sex and infidelity. In the narrators real world, instant gratification is more practical than high-minded principles or morals. Its also an environment that rewards street smartness and land grab mindset of Nicholas and looks down upon the poetic verbiage of Absalon. In any case, the narrators choice of words and the substance of his tale sets up a significant contrast with the polished language and plot of the Knights Tale. Although the two tales, set in different social contexts, are influenced by their narrators style and language, both stories spotlight that there is no universal standard one can use to judge human actions in love and marriage. The Knights Tale, despite its depictions of idolized values such as honor, bravery, and courteousness, boils love down to essentially a competition instead of a two-way relationship. The Millers Tale, despite its vulgarity and crudeness, presents the day-to-day happenings in love and marriage in ordinary folks lives, in stark contrast to the ivory tower world of the aristocratic class. Both stories, however, confirm that human behavior in love and marriage circumstances is often moody, irrational and erratic. It is, therefore, foolish to make predictions about human behavior in such matters where ones heart rules the brain.

Cold War Manderin Essay -- Comparative, Ngo Dinh Diem, Seth Jacobs

The book, Cold War Mandarin Ngo Dinh Diem and the Origins of America’s War in Vietnam 1950-1963, by Seth Jacobs is a comprehensive retelling of the rise and fall of Ngo Dinh Diem’s government in South Vietnam. In that retelling Jacob focuses on the major events that took place in Vietnam as well as showed how America backed a leader that did nothing to booster his nation and led America into one of the worst wars in its history. The Diem regime was a corrupt and tyrannical government that used the United States’ fears of communism to push its own goals that ultimately led to its own demise. Jacob viewed the escalation of America’s involvement in Vietnam as the following, â€Å"The nine-year â€Å"experiment† that ended when Diem died was America’s crossover point from advice and support to active cobelligerency in a Vietnamese civil war† (8). Jacob in his book is very critical of the actions that both the Americans and Diem took in the establishment of South Vietnam. As the title of the book suggests, the author claims that Diem and his actions resulted in America becoming stuck in a war that would last over a decade. Diem, who was not very well known in either the United States as well as his own nation at the time the book starts in the early 1950s, was able to perpetuate himself into a position of power through use of both his faith as well as perpetuating generalized American fears. In the first chapter of his book, Jacobs looks at Diem’s early rise to power. Diem first worked under the French where he stood as a Minister of the Interior in the Bao Dai puppet government. Where Diem hated that the French who had control over Vietnam both economically as well as politically, one thing he hated more where the Viet Minh. The Vi... ... Ngo Dinh Diem and his regime. In Diems attempts to maintain a sense of national independence and ignoring American advisors in regards to how to manage his nation placed both himself and America in a very bad situation. Jacob broke down the reasons why Diem’s policies and decisions as head of state in Vietnam ultimately led to its demise, from his totalitarian policies and misuses of American funding/support. Jacobs does not put all blame on Diem but also points out that despite information gathered from American officials in Vietnam the American government supported a government that was unpopular and full of corruption. In the end Jacob reinforces his claim that the United States and their â€Å"Diem experiment† pushed America into a shifting relationship with Vietnam that would ultimately lock the nation into a state involvement that it could not back out of.

MTV Affecting The Youth :: essays research papers

The Pop Culture Assault Music TV channels, broadcasting variety of programs ranging from ordinary music videos through charts, various shows to cartoons are the symptom of our times. No matter if it's MTV or VIVA, they sell very similar stuff, often cheap and shallow. The pop culture and consumption grasped the most powerful device that is television. It is used as a tool for spreading out information, ideas and appeals. Oftentimes they are silly and ridiculous; nevertheless they have enormous influence on people who watch it. Image has become the most widespread form of expressing ideas and for communication. Colorful and quickly changing pictures surely affect human personality; it influences the way we behave, dress and exist. Young people tend do be and look like their VJ's from the TV screen. They wear in certain way; they cut their hair, pierce or tattoo their bodies, just because of their TV idols doing that. TV hosts become the role models to follow; they are gurus and authorities on almost every field of human life from fashion to ethics and morality. They sell some patterns of behavior that other people can consider weird or outrageous. Their ideas can be good and honorable as well as freak and dumb. TV creates an ideal of a 'perfect' woman and man with all the paraphernalia and pressure connected with it. Many young women (as they appear to be more susceptible to that tension) put themselves on diet; wear strange clothes etc. just to fit in the 'official' picture. People buy 'proper' brands of outfit, cosmetics and even food, they become the slaves of fashion, fashion that often is nothing but garbage glittering and shining on the surface but empty and dull inside. Tracks from the top of the charts, however stupid or unmusical-like they are, can be safe to be sold in millions of copies all over the world. Here comes another phenomena, music that used to be of an artistic and cultural value, tends to be no longer so.

The Roswell Incident :: essays papers

The Roswell Incident The Roswell Incident, which enlightened our minds to the capacity of excepting all, has remained one of the most controversial issues today. In Roswell, New Mexico, 1947, a strange occurrence arises. An alien craft from outer space crashed in an open field. The issue lay still for almost thirty years, until the thought of a government cover-up arose. SocietyÆs opinions have changed over the years. Previous to the 1990Æs, people have despised the thought of sharing the universe with other intelligent life forms. Now people are interested in this mysterious phenomenon. People think it is the blame of the movies and television. By watching this, people are at a level at which they understand. Not only do these movies entertain, they inform people about the little information we obtained from the government. The thought of government cover-ups have been long discussed. The government has always, in the past, tried to keep any sign of aliens, whether it be pictures from space, to crashes on earth, to a low or nonexistent level. Just recently has the government been harassed to the point where they actually gave us clues to alien existence. It has in some ways been believed that the government has worked in partnership with popular movie directors, to produce alien movies to ease the thought that we may not be alone. Such movies as à ´The Arrivalà ¶ and the ever popular à ´Independence Dayà ¶ are very good examples of well convincing alien movies. If this is true, they did a good job, because statistics state that 75% of people today believe that there is some kind of intelligent life forms besides ourselves in the universe. That is very convincing compared to the 20% whom believed 25 years ago. à ´ New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but b ecause they are not already common.à ¶ (MacGowan 261) A local New Mexico rancher, MacBrazel, while riding out in the morning to check his sheep after a long night of thunderstorms, discovered a considerable amount of debris. It created a gouge several hundred feet long and was scattered over a large area. Some of the debris had strange physical properties. He took some debris to show his neighbors then his son. Soon after that he notified the sheriff. The sheriff then contacted the authorities at Roswell Army Air Field Base. The are was closed off and the debris was eventually flown by B-29 and C-54 aircraft to Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio.

Nutrition Essay

Holozoic nutrition (Gr. holo means-whole ; zoikos means-of animals) is a method of nutrition that involves the ingestion of liquid or solid organic material, digestion, absorption and assimilation of it to utilize it. It includes taking in the complex substances and converting them into simpler forms. Example, proteins can be broken into amino acids. This method suggests phagocytosis where the cell membrane completely surrounds a food particle[pic] Parasitic Nutrition is a mode of heterotrophic nutrition where an organism (known as a parasite) lives on the body surface or inside the body of another type of organism (known as a host). The parasite obtains nutrition directly from the body of the host. Since these parasites derive their nourishment from their host, this symbiotic interaction is often described as harmful to the host. Parasites are dependent on their host for survival, since the host provides nutrition and protection. As a result of this dependence, parasites have considerable modifications to optimise parasitic nutrition and therefore their survival. Saprotrophic nutrition (pron.: /sà ¦prÉ µÃ‹Ë†trÉ’fÉ ªk/) is a process of chemoheterotrophic extracellular digestion involved in the processing of dead or decayed organic matter. It occurs in saprotrophs or heterotrophs, and is most often associated with fungi, for example Mucor and Rhizopus. The process is most often facilitated through the active transport of such materials through endocytosis within the internal mycelium and its constituent hyphae.[1] Autotrophic Nutrition The term autotroph has been derived from two Greek wards-auto means self and troph means nutrition. In this mode of nutrition, the organisms prepare their own food from simple raw materials like water, carbon dioxide and mineral salts in the presence of sunlight. Chlorophylls present in the chloroplast or green plants are the site of food production. Accordingly all green plants are the examples of this category. The process by which they synthesize food is known as photosynthesis. Some nongreen becteria like sulphur bacteria can use energy which they derive from some chemical reactions occurring in them. With this energy they manufacture their food. This process is called chemosynthesis. Thus the autotrophs include both the photosynthetic and che4mosynthetic organisms. Heterotrophic Nutrition The word heterotrophy has been derived from two Greek words-hetero means different and troph refers to nutrition of food. The organisms which derive their food from others are known as heterotrophic organisms. They depend for their food on other organisms, hence they are called consumers. All animals, human beings and non-green plans like fungi come under this category. They consume complex organic food prepared by autotrophs or producers and break it into simple from to derive nourishment. Thus the difference between heterotrophy and autotrophs is basically in the mode of production of food. Due to lack of chlorophyll, heterotrophs cannot synthesize their food while autotrophs can perform photosynthesis.

Political Justice: Plato and Aristotle Essay

Plato and Aristotle had different ideas of politics and political justice. In The Republic, Plato creates the ideal city, which is needed to guarantee justice. He aims to create a peaceful united city that will lead to the greater good of the community and individuals. Unlike Plato who imagines the ideal city, Aristotle looks at actual cities in The Politics. He doesn’t want to create the ideal city; he aims to improve the existing city. While their ideas about politics and justice were different, they both strived to find a better way of life for society and hoped to achieve political justice. In order to define justice, Socrates attempts to create an ideal city, one that is healthy and just. Socrates begins by â€Å"investigating what justice looks like in the cities† in order to â€Å"go on to consider it in individuals† (Plato, 45). He believes that it is through speech that one will see the way in which both justice and injustice come into being. Socrates argues that people come together as partners and form cities based on mutual needs because â€Å"each [person] isn’t self-sufficient but is in need of much†: food, shelter, clothing, and other necessities (Plato, 46). It is in the need that the men have of one another in a healthy city that justice can be found (Plato, 49). In the Republic, Plato argues that justice is social, structural, and peaceful. He also believes that people function best doing one thing well. According to Socrates, people naturally differ in nature; â€Å"different men are apt for the accomplishment of different jobs† (Plato, 46). Socrates argues for specialization by saying, â€Å"one man, one art† (Plato, 47). He argues that this concept of specialization is the only way to make certain that each job is done well. Socrates goes on to divide the city into three distinct classes: producers, warriors, and rulers. Socrates believes a just city requires a division of labor in order to guarantee the stability of the city and provide the common good for the citizens. He states that, â€Å"each thing becomes more plentiful, finer, and easier, when one man, exempt from other tasks, does one thing according to nature† (Plato, 47). A strict division of labor is the only way to construct a just city, in which few laws are required. Socrates uses the analogy of the healthy city to describe how â€Å"justice and injustice naturally grow in cities† (Plato, 49). A healthy city becomes an unhealthy, â€Å"feverish† city when people become driven by desire and want more than the mere necessities of a healthy city. Some people will not be satisfied with the mere necessities; thus, relishes will be added. When people desire more and more luxuries, the city must be made bigger again and again because the healthy one is no longer adequate (Plato, 50). As the city grows, more land is required in order to be sufficient. At some point, one must â€Å"cut off a piece of [their] neighbors’ land† (Plato, 50). Socrates argues that encroachment will ultimately lead to war. He goes on to state that because of thisß inevitable war, the city will require Guardians. According to Socrates, the Guardians of the state must have a very spirited soul be very well trained (Plato, 52). He goes on to argue that a good Guardian must be â€Å"a philosopher in nature, spirited, swift, and strong† (Plato, 53). They must never turn against the city and must know whom to do violence to. Therefore, â€Å"[the Guardians] must be gentle to their own and cruel to enemies† (Plato, 52). To ensure that they will never turn against the city, Socrates believes that they must be educated morally â€Å"in speech† through the stories of the Gods and heroes (Plato, 54). Socrates argues that the tales should be supervised and modified if need be, in order to instill the idea that Gods can do no wrong. Only the stories that display bravery and dispel the fear of death should be taught to the Guardians. As a citizen, a Guardian must defend their city, make war together against any enemy of the city, and fight vigilantly for one another. While Plato believed that cities and state came into being because of mutual needs and social contracts, Aristotle thought otherwise. Aristotle views the polis, or city, as a political association or partnership. Aristotle opens The Politics by saying, â€Å"every city is some sort of partnership†, which â€Å"is constituted for the sake of some good.† According to Aristotle, the city must seek to achieve â€Å"the most authoritative good of all† (Aristotle, 35). He defines villages as collections of families. These different villages come together to create a good combination of both public and private life. This is a sharp criticism of the argument Plato makes in The Republic.  Aristotle goes on to argue that a city naturally â€Å"arises from [the union of] several villages† (Aristotle, 36). In saying this, he argues that a city exists by nature (Aristotle, 37). A city forms for the purpose of living well and directs itself toward the common good. One of Aristotle’s defining arguments is that â€Å"man is by nature a political animal† (Aristotle, 37). What Aristotle is arguing is that apart from the city there is no possible way for man to achieve the good life. Aristotle claims that what makes man different from other animals are that â€Å"man alone has speech† (Aristotle, 37). It is speech that makes possible the deliberation of politics and allows man to come up with the highest authoritative good. According to Aristotle, â€Å"speech serves to reveal the advantageous and the harmful, and hence also the just and the unjust† (Aristotle, 37). In Aristotle’s city, it is speech and deliberation that justice can be found. Aristotle believes that the law developed through deliberation is â€Å"a guarantor of just things† (Aristotle, 98). In order to define what he believes to be a citizen, Aristotle first argues things that do not imply citizenship: honorary citizenship, inhabiting a place, sharing in matters of justice, children, and the elderly (Aristotle, 86). He defines citizenship as â€Å"sharing in decision and in office† (Aristotle, 87). According to Aristotle, a citizen is one who takes part in the decisions that are being made. In Aristotle’s city, the citizen is â€Å"whoever is entitled to participate† (Aristotle, 87). To him, the most important aspect of citizenship is that they are the foundation upon which the city is built. He believes that citizens have a share in the regime and should take part in administrating justice. In general, â€Å"a citizen is defined as a person from parents who are both citizens† (Aristotle, 88). Aristotle believes that as constitutions change, citizenship changes as well. Thus, there is different criterion for being a good citizen and being a good man. According to Aristotle, a good citizen upholds and respects the constitution. He claims, â€Å"a good citizen should know and have the capacity both to be ruled and to rule† (Aristotle, 92). In the Republic, Socrates gives three waves that he believes are necessary to  achieve justice in an unhealthy city. The first wave states that there should be equality among men and women of the Guardian class. He writes that men and women of the Guardian class are to share â€Å"everything in common† (Plato, 130). This wave not only deals with equality, it also deals with merit. Despite the fact that men are typically stronger than women, women should be nurtured in the same way as men and educated in the same things. Even though it may seem â€Å"shameful and ridiculous†, women are to be trained in gymnastics together with men (Plato, 130). After establishing the need for equality among men and women, Socrates moves on to the second wave. The second wave, Socrates argues, is that women and children need to be held in common. He believes that â€Å"women are to belong to men in common† and that â€Å"no woman can live privately with any man† (Plato, 136). Socrates is trying to rid the unhealthy city of private life because he believes that justice is social. The Guardians must live as one single family in order to reduce factional conflict. In order for the Guardians to live as one single family, Socrates argues that not only are men and women to be held in common, their children are to be held in common as well. â€Å"A parent will neither know his own offspring, nor a child his parent† (Plato, 136). The goal of this is to, again, rid them of the jealousies and rivalries that accompany private families. Socrates believes that this will make certain greater social equality and increase the unity among the Guardian class. Because the Guardians share everything in common, there will no longer be any concept of private ownership. Thus, there will be harmony and unity within the city. The third, and final, wave Socrates discuses details who it is that he believes should rule in a just city. The third and final wave that Socrates believes is necessary for justice is that philosophers must be the rulers. After making this argument, Glaucon demands that Socrates defines what he means as a philosopher. Socrates believes that â€Å"the philosopher is a desirer of wisdom, not of one part and not another, but of all of it† (Plato, 155). The philosopher is a lover of wisdom and total knowledge. Because of this, Socrates argues that philosophers are the only people capable of having knowledge of everything all together; they are open-minded and constantly curious. To further his  argument about the philosopher, Socrates states that the philosopher is a lover of the truth; he has knowledge of what is real instead of simply believing in appearances. The first proposal that Socrates makes in The Republic makes sense to me. There should be equality among men and women, but they do not need to share everything is common. There needs to be a balance of both public and private life. It would not make sense to rid society of private life entirely. The second proposal that Socrates makes does not make much sense at all; it would not work if we wanted to enact a similar system in today’s society. It is not logical to think that children would be better people and that society would be a better place if children were taken from their mothers at birth and raised by wet nurses. People need the bond of a private family, it is from family that children learn to love and be loved. The philosophers-as-rulers proposal that Socrates discusses makes sense but it seems extremely unrealistic. A philosopher is the last person that would want to rule a city. Overall, these proposals would every facet of a city. The proposals that he makes are intended to be extreme and ironic. Plato is trying to push his readers in absurd directions in order to establish that justice will never be found. The healthy city in Plato’s The Republic gives the best definition of justice. The whole intention of creating this ideal city is to define what justice is. Essentially, in his ideal city, there is no injustice. Because Plato uses his ideal state to show how justice and injustice naturally arise in cities, it is much easier to grasp what justice is and how it comes into being. Because Plato creates the perfect government, he is able to give a clear definition of what justice is. Aristotle’s definition of distributive justice: giving equal things to equal people and unequal things to unequal people can be confusing. While the healthy city may give the best definition of justice, it does not provide the best model for politics. Though it may not be ideal, Aristotle’s ideal city provides the best model for politics. In Aristotle’s view politics is only a means to an end; that end being the maximum happiness of its citizens. Unlike Plato, who places the burden of  ruling solely in the Guardian class, Aristotle believes that everyone should take turn ruling and being ruled (Aristotle, 219). Aristotle argues that the purpose of politics and that city is to promote the good life for its people. He believes that the citizens of a state should agree about what is right and wrong, just and unjust. Plato believes that philosophers are the only people capable of knowing the truth. Aristotle gives a better argument that everyone is capable of knowing the truth. He believes that politics is responsible for educating men in what is right and wrong. Just as Aristotle argues, written law should have greater authority than the rulers. Thus, leading to justice. Both Plato and Aristotle make good arguments about political justice even though the two do not completely agree. By creating an ideal city, Plato clearly defines what justice is. On the other hand, by looking at existing cities, Aristotle gives a good model for politics. While their ideas about politics and justice were different, they both strived to find a better way of life for society and hoped to achieve political justice. Bibliography Aristotle, The Politics. Translated with an introduction by Carnes Lord. (Chicago, 1984). Plato (380 B.C.). Republic, translated by G. M. A. Grube, 2 nd ed., revised by C. D. C. Reeve, Indianapolis: Hackett (1992).