Socrates’ Legacy Traverses into Twenty-First Century Learning It is the twenty-first century; technology has evolved, ideas have changed, and morals have progressed. Yet, students of this century are still using the age-old Socratic method to discover new ideas, increase knowledge, and clarify concepts, not because it is traditional, but because it is effective. The Socratic method, which is a type of pedagogy that utilizes a dialectical approach, is a tool that people use to nurture their critical thinking skills. To add, this technique was created by the classical Greek philosopher Socrates, with the intention of developing his students’ critical thinking abilities. The elenchus started with Socrates’ interlocutor stating a disprovable thesis, …show more content…
Contemporary learning and the Socratic method converge to the same principle that places emphasis on heuristic discussions. Although the implementation of the Socratic method is not yet easily seen in the midst of mundane professor lectures and stodgy textbook work, it is there, and it is growing. The idea of passively listening to the professor talk on and on for hours is diminishing, and it is being replaced by enlightening dialogues that allow both the professor and the students to develop more effectively, together. Classrooms are becoming more hands-on, active, and collaborative, and as a twenty-first century learner, I can vouch for that wholeheartedly. For example, in twelfth grade English, we had a culminating task, called a “book talk,” where a group of students would sit in a circle and discuss a particular novel for an hour. We had to do this three times throughout the semester. In my case, my group’s novel was Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner. The first book talk was grueling, as I could tell in the stiff discussions that every interlocutor was in a state of productive discomfort. We were afraid of the teacher interjecting and claiming that our symbolism explanations were wrong, or that we answered the novel questions
The article, “Critical Thinking? You Need Knowledge” by Diane Ravitch, discusses how in the past people have been deprived from the thinking process and abstract thinking skills. Students need to be given more retainable knowledge by their teachers to improve their critical thinking skills. (Ravitch).
In Walter Mosley’s Always Outnumbered, Always Outgunned, the reader is introduced to Socrates Fortlow, an ex-convict who served twenty-seven years for murder and rape. Fortlow is plagued by guilt and, seeing the chaos in his town, feels a need to improve not only his own standards of living, but also those of others in Watts. He attempts this by teaching the people in Watts the lessons he feels will resolve the many challenges the neighbourhood faces. The lessons Fortlow teaches and the methods by which he teaches them are very similar to those of the ancient Greek philosopher for whom Fortlow was named: “‘We was poor and country. My mother couldn’t afford school so she figured that if she named me after somebody smart then maybe I’d get smart’” (Mosley, 44). Though the ancient Greek was born to be a philosopher and Fortlow assumed the philosopher role as a response to the poor state of his life and Watts, both resulted in the same required instruction to their populations. The two Socrates’ both utilize a form of teaching that requires their pupil to become engaged in the lesson. They emphasize ethics, logic, and knowledge in their instruction, and place importance on epistemology and definitions because they feel a problem cannot be solved if one does not first know what it is. Socrates was essential in first introducing these concepts to the world and seemed to be born with them inherent to his being, Fortlow has learned the ideals through life experience and is a real-world application in an area that needs the teachings to get on track. While the two men bear many similarities, their differences they are attributed primarily as a result of their circumstances provide the basis of Fortlow’s importance in Watts and as a modern-...
Plato’s “Defense of Socrates” follows the trial of Socrates for charges of corruption of the youth. His accuser, Meletus, claims he is doing so by teaching the youth of Athens of a separate spirituality from that which was widely accepted.
In “Apology”, Plato insists about Socrates’ life and his qualities. Socrates appeared as talented as a simple man, friendly in communicate, quick-witted and sharp in repartee, love people Athens, and especially respect truthfulness and honestly. As Plato’s essay said, Socrates believed that the care of human soul is the biggest concern of the people, so he spent a lot of time to consider his personal life and the lives of people of Athens.
What would happen if the Socrates of old came back to life to debate the issue of abortion in the modern world? Peter Kreeft tries to give us an idea in his book The Unaborted Socrates. In this book Socrates debates three different aspects of the abortion issue with three different people, an abortion doctor, a philosopher and a psychologist. With the Doctor, Socrates debates when human life begins. With the Philosopher it is debated whether we should legislate morality. With the psychologist he debates whether abortion is a woman's right. Unfortunately, they do not come up with reasonable answers to any of these questions. Without the answer to the question, "is the fetus a human being?" it is impossible to find the answer to the other two questions. In the end, all questions lead back to the first. In answer to whether or not the fetus is a human being, it is concluded as the doctor said, "We simply do not know when the fetus becomes a human person. Anyone who claims to know is a fool because he claims to know what he does not." Nevertheless, even if the debate provides no final answers, it does serve to show the logical reasons for why abortion is horrible. It does present thought provoking questions in the minds of both those who are for and those who are against abortion.
Socrates was a revolutionary thinker. He brought new ideas and processes of thought to Athenian society and his work still has its place in the world today. However during his time, his ideas were not always thought of as a good thing. Many viewed him as a corrupting influence on other people and accused him of forcing his ideas upon others. Perhaps most frequently the center of controversy was his thoughts on theocracy and piety as seen in the Plato’s Euthyphro. Socrates also appears at the butt end of Aristophanes’ comedy Clouds, where he is satirically ridiculed and seemingly corrupting the youth of Athens in his school, the Thinkery. Although virtually completely seen as a positive influence now, in ancient times, Socrates may have done more harm than good for his society.
There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for themselves by looking to new divinities.
Socrates: A Gift To The Athenians As Socrates said in Apology by Plato, “...the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more…”(Philosophical Texts, 34) Throughout history, many leaders have been put to death for their knowledge. In Apology, Socrates- soon to be put to death- says he was placed in Athens by a god to render a service to the city and its citizens. Yet he will not venture out to come forward and advise the state and says this abstention is a condition on his usefulness to the city.
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
Born in 470 B.C. in Athens, Greece, Socrates is a Greek philosopher known for the dialogues of Plato and Xenophon and the plays of Aristophanes as well as being the father of western philosophy. He's also known for his theory that true knowledge comes from the mind and not from the senses and his beliefs in questioning, self-examination of values, and actions. His most famous student was Plato who went on to teach Aristotle, who then taught Alexander the Great. Through these people, Greek philosophy would be spread throughout the world during Alexander's conquests. It has been said that Socrates' greatest contribution to philosophy was to move intellectual thinkers away from the focus on 'physical science' and into the realm of morality.
Throughout the beginning weeks of class instruction this semester, I have found that the novels and texts that we have collectively read have made me contemplate both life and life’s actions in various ways that I had never thought of before. Of these, the main ideas that have endured with me and caused me to think broadly resulted from the pair of Greek philosophy texts that were read: The Trial and Death of Socrates and The Nicomachean Ethics. In regards to The Trial and Death of Socrates, I was heavily intrigued by Socrates’ distinct method of inquiry when trying to stimulate ideas and uncover underlying assumptions about a topic. Likewise, when reading The Nicomachean Ethics, I was drawn to Aristotle’s analysis of the desired middle between two virtuous extremes. After considering both authors’ ideologies, I felt that my views of each subject area were altered in a sense of being more aware of diverse perspectives.
The roots of modern logic go back to the syllogistic logic of Aristotle. If "All men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man", then you can correctly conclude that "Socrates is mortal". In this form of reasoning terms such as "mortal" are assumed to have an agreed upon definition and propositions such as "Socrates is mortal" are either true or false. In classical logic every proposition is either true or false; this is the principle of bivalence.
Socrates and Plato were some of the world’s most famous philosophers. Yet, they caused much trouble in the midst of their philosophizing. These philosophers, in the view of the political elites, were threatening the Athenian democracy with their philosophy. But why did they go against the status quo? What was their point in causing all of this turmoil? Plato and Socrates threatened the democracy as a wake-up call. They wanted the citizens to be active thinkers and improve society. This manifested itself in three main ways: Socrates’ life, his student Plato’s life, and their legacy in our modern age.
Each one of us has been accused of some kind of act at some point in our lives. Yet those accusations have been terribly mistaken and sometimes there is so little that a person can do to fix that. In this case we are talking about the wonderful philosophist Socrates, a person of many beliefs and ideas. He was a man who dearly believed in justice and doing justice to others. We will examine Socrates' way of thinking and his rationality towards a healthy and logical mind. After reading the Meno, Apology, and Crito I have come to a conclusion that Socrates made the right decision by rejecting Crito's offer of escape and the reasoning behind that will be explained by providing parts of the dialogues and the ideas behind them.
Socrates was an insightful philosopher who had an opinion on all the basic fundamental questions. He had very strong beliefs that he willed others into believing through questioning and proving ignorance in others beliefs. He has particular views on every fundamental question and particular views on how people should live their lives. He says God has spoken to him about philosophy and says that it is his destiny and it is his calling in life. Through philosophy he searches for answers to the fundamental questions and gains wisdom and knowledge. The fundamental question of condition is the question of what, if anything, has gone wrong with the world? The question of solution is what can fix the problem? Then there is Death which asks what happens