Plato and Thomas Hobbes address man of the same subjects and set about to define many of the same basic concepts. That this should be so - despite the substantial differences in their philosophies and the innumerable differences between the two societies in which they lived - should not surprise us, for the two men were both interested in the ways in which human societies are constituted and in what form of rule should be instituted in those societies to promote welfare.
The overall similarity of their goals should not, however, in any way blind one to the substantial differences in their philosophies. Plato argued that the origins of political community arise from people's economic needs and from an ensuing interdependence on one another. Hobbes argued for a different form of social structure, although one that has some similarities to the model put forth by Plato: Under Hobbes's Social Contract all individuals in a group agree to give up certain rights (especially the right to attack others, or otherwise harm them) in exchange for their giving up their rights to harm us.
Plato believed that humans were, for the most part, limited by their fears - but he also believed that humans were capable of improving themselves through education. However, despite this fact, some people were born to be superior to others, and these should be the natural rulers of a society - and in that role help others to progress as far as they might toward the truth. Hobbes argued that humans are neither natural leaders nor followers and that justice arises when the various selfish interests of different groups and individuals is balanced.
Both Hobbes and Plato share a certain skepticism about people as a whole - the general population that makes up any society and that must be governed. Both men considered that the majority of people were too easily led and too inclined to let tyrants gain power - their assessment of people is that they are generally ...