Also, take the time to examine the correct way of thinking philosophically and reading philosophy. No matter what your beliefs, understanding God and religion’s role in philosophy can take you far, as well as studying the meaning behind ethics and morality. Philosophy is the most powerful instrument that we have for evaluating the worth of our fundamental beliefs and for changing them for the better. Through philosophy we exert control over the trajectory of our lives, making major course corrections by reason and reflection. If these aspects of life are examine and understood, you will be much less limited and fulfilled.
Subsequently, for Socrates staying on a path of uncovering truth, and inquiry allows the mind room to appreciate the unseen differences in life, and provokes mental and spiritual growth, leading to a productive and more meaningful existence. As for Socrates leading the life of a philosopher the quest for knowledge and wisdom makes life worth living, thus, according to Socrates, having an unexamined life would be juxtaposed with a life, which had no purpose or inherent value at all. Socrates lived by the importance of the perpetual quest of wisdom through cooperation with others. Socrates concluded that focusing on fulfilling a wider scope of the world through knowledge of our souls was far more valuable than being limited to the study of the anatomical aspects of the universe. By gauging not only the palpable aspects of the world gives a greater understanding of which surrounds us.
Russell states that this is an important reason to understand as one studies philosophy and learns how to think on their own. This important reason lies much deeper than philosophy itself. Russell states that “the value of philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its very uncertainty” (Russel 156). This seems contradictive at its surface as Russell explains that philosophy itself is very important to study but, with deeper analysis, it make much more sense. He emphasizes throughout the essay that philosophy develops one’s mind and changes the way they think.
The essay continues with his criticisms of those who opposed philosophy and live their lives based on concrete, solid facts. He addresses these figures as the ‘practical men’. Almost as an opposition to the practical man is the idea of the instinctive man, whose interests are natural and private. The foundation of philosophy is stated in his essay by differentiating philosophy from science (science has absolute answer, philosophy doesn’t), and he defines the nature of learning philosophy. Overall, Russell’s position in this essay is that philosophy is worth studying and is beneficial for people through philosophical contemplation and questions.
Taking philosophy imparts skills that are used not only in any career but also in personal life. The study of philosophy enables to think carefully, critically, and with clarity, take a logical approach to addressing challenging questions and examining hard issues, reason well and evaluate reasoning of
Socrates finds it impossible to understand the concept of piety since Euthyphro is unable to demonstrate a universal thought or idea to the topic. The constant question of is something only pious because the gods love it or because it is independent from that is a continuously unanswered question for Socrates. Euthyphro’s lack of knowledge regarding any of his beliefs has caused him to become a not credible source. Finally, left with no other choice, Euthyphro is forced to leave the scene because he is unable to defend himself of his beliefs with credible
How is morality judged? Should the morality of an action be judged by the action’s motivation or the action’s consequence? Morality as a philosophical construct is very ambiguous and is debated by many philosophers. To understand good and evil conceptually, one must first fully understand morality (Gert 1-2). The following is an excerpt from Nietzsche’s “Beyond Good and Evil: Chapter V (The Natural History of Morals); “There are systems of morals which are meant to justify their author in the eyes of other people; other systems of morals are meant to tranquilize him, and make him self-satisfied; with other systems he wants to crucify and humble himself, with others he wishes to take revenge, with others to conceal himself, with others to glorify himself and gave superiority and distinction,--this system of morals helps its author to forget, that system makes him, or something of him, forgotten, many a moralist would like to exercise power and creative arbitrariness over mankind, many another, perhaps, Kant especially, gives us to understand by his morals that "what is estimable in me, is ... ... middle of paper ... ...ave their faith in the goodness of man challenged.
Furthermore, finding the nature of the good life is an intellectual task similar to discovering mathematical truths. Also, they must develop virtuous habits of behaviour. Plato believes that censorship is necessary to prevent certain sorts of experiences by young people if they are to discover the nature of the good life. If a person can discover what is right and knows what the good life is, he or she will not act immorally. When Plato’s virtue of wisdom, courage and temperance are in operation, a supreme virtue is evidence in justice.
Such knowledge was vital to both Plato and Socrates since they viewed wisdom as being gained through the desire to obtain knowledge and the acceptance of human limitation. Both philosophers seemingly fixated more on subtly pointing out the flaws in another’s proposed logic or answer through the use of questions rather than giving an outright opposing statement or resolution. Through the use of this method of questioning everything the philosophers helped individuals find their own flaws in their rationality, instead of merely arguing an opposing point. Ideally, when these individuals were “finding their own error” they would become more enticed to continue on the journey to find the correct answer, essentially instilling the individual with an inherent desire to learn and therefore a greater capacity for wisdom. Through this method of Socratic questioning, the philosophers were able to probe society to think beyond just cause and effect, and delve more
By re-examining the text I found that there is a good reason to accept both of these distinctions. He talks of moral beliefs that he accepts but he refuses to consider those beliefs as knowledge. Socratic polices, ethics and method is examined and opinionated through out this paper. Also true and false issues are brought up, and explained in details. This paper is mostly fixated on Socrates way of knowledge and if the method is the correct way of learning and teaching.