Since it was necessary for the guardians of the just city to have natures opposite to the latter, Plato treated poetry and representations as dangerous inclusions in the education of "the craftsmen of the city's freedom" (Plato, Republic, 395b-c). One of the harder parts of the constitution of the kallipolis for modern readers to accept is the idea that people should learn one art or skill and no others. Plato's belief was that if one is to become best as possible at their chosen profession, they should practice and learn only that profession. Socrates asked Adeimantus to corroborate that a citizen of the good city should, "do a fine job of one occupation, not of many, and that if he tried the latter and dabbled in many things, he'd surely fail to achieve distinction in any of them"(Plato, Republic, 394d-e)? He also asked, "doesn't the same argument also hold for imitation-a single individual can't imitate many things as well as he can imitate one" (Plato, Republic, 394e-5)?
In conclusion, people should not condone the philosophy of moral relativism because it allows people to freely interpret the meaning of right and wrong, makes people lose self-control, and conditions our society to be subjective. Although being able to freely express yourself of your own morals is a good thing, we should learn to contain it more instead of subjecting it towards others and society. Losing self-control brings lives apart from others and not learning how to control it is a big risk. Society shouldn’t condition us to be subjected to be more subjected but for us to find the truth of moral
Socrates implies at the beginning of his speech that his fate is doomed because the people who judge him believe in the persuasive falsehoods and won’t be willing to listen to the truth. The death of Socrates also reveals the internal fallacy in Athenian democracy. The consequence of a recalcitrant philosophy stands against the whole city is written, because the gulf between the belief of the society and the philosophy is impassible. Socrates’s way of living seems to be unreasonable for most people, and as the same time is not suitable for the proper operation of society which doesn’t want civilians to question the essence of life. However, Socrates shifts the focus of philosophy from the heaven to the earth.
Female brains are good at verbal tasks and males’ brains are better adapted for mathematical and visual-spatial tasks. Men give preference to action whereas women prefer talking. To say that women and men fundamentally differ when it comes to communicating is nothing but a false belief. But still, such myths have taken their roots firmly in workplaces. A call center manager once told he prefers to hire females since he wanted someone who could interact with people in a better way.
Today, many feminists go around stating there isn’t a need for men, women can survive on their own, and that women are better than men. As Saira Khan states in her article on Spiked, “modern-day feminists engage in man-bashing rather than dignified demands for equality.” (Khan 1). It just shows how feminists would rather take their anger out on men rather than realize we a... ... middle of paper ... ...oncludes is his article, “That’s how we’ve come to this backwards point where the new feminist activism, for some, is about oppressing those with different views. So much for equality!” (Furey 1). They would rather demand dominance than equality, call for justice for issues that are not really there, claim gender discrimination in the work place, and argue against any who try to oppose them.
For Plato, it is difficult to conclude that his society of the three classes is an entirely equal one. This is because although each class is a necessity for the city to function properly, one class appears to have more power than the other two. Ultimately, the Guardian class is superior to both the Producers and Auxiliaries. It can also be argued that an individual should have an equal amount of freedom to move upward or demote themselves between the social castes. The suppression of individuality is also a hard concept to grasp for Plato assumes that the masses are easily willing to give up their freedom simple because he tells them to.
Plato had a similar idea, he thought that women should be equal with men and also share the positions of politics; this would create an equilibrium because men and woman have different qualities that would counterbalance society. One of the main points that Aristophanes and Plato had was the structure of state, family, and society. Aristophanes thought that politics should be ran as the family was. Therefore government and the citizens should come together and work as one, the same way that a family is controlled. At the time their were conflicts and regulations that were stopping this to become reality, for instance, the women being second class citizens when in actuality they ran the household when the men were off fighting in wars.
If people were so against the idea of not being to express themselves to others, they will surely react negatively to not being able to keep things even to themselves. This is a cruel twist of introverts being at a higher risk than extroverts. This is a moral problem as well now, a case of good versus bad. The idea of the government invading in their citizens’ personal lives is mor... ... middle of paper ... ... should be regarded as such. One can sympathize with the government’s prying methods as a way to avoid future consequences, but must consider the downfalls that are present with every success.
Therefore, if Socrates were to break the laws, it would be inappropriate and not a correct use of civil disobedience. The most important part to the definition of civil disobedience is that whatever is being done, is for the achievement of a better society. In King’s case, he was given a validated reason, being in an unfair societal contract, to break laws in order to show how unjust they are to the people who instil them. King never accepted his societal contract because he truly disagreed with it, and therefore he he broke those laws in which he believed were unjust. Socrates had an issue with the social code and not the societal contract.
According to Thomas Hobbes, the reason this is the case is because people are selfish and evil and that they protect their interests really well by using certain tactics to make sure other people devastate their needs and wants. Also, without a leader, these people would be very chaotic and attack one another of many things when there isn’t any government in charge. Thomas Hobbes also didn 't support the idea of democracy where the citizens’ were allowed to vote for their government leaders. Due to his idea that people are only trying to promote their self-interests, democracy wouldn’t be a great idea because he wrote that “All mankind is in a perpetual and restless desire for power which can only stop in death,” so giving power to the individual would be creating a dangerous situation which would start a “war of every man against every man, “and life will be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Despite all this, Thomas Hobbes still believed a diverse group of representatives that can present the problems of the common person to king, so prevent them from being cruel and unfair but the monarch has the final