Plato’s Theaetetus is one of the most read and interpreted texts under the subject of philosophy. Within the dialect, many topics and questions are analyzed and brought to light. Leon Pearl is the author of Is Theaetetus Dreaming?, which discusses the positions taken on the topic of ‘dreaming’ and ‘being awake’, which is conferred about within the Theaetetus. Pearl critiques the question: “How can you determine whether at this moment we are sleeping and all our thoughts are a dream; or whether we are awake and talking to one another in the waking state” asked by Socrates within Plato’s Theaetetus (Pearl, p.108). Pearl first analyzes the question from the skeptic’s point of view and then proceeds to falsify the skeptic’s argument by his own interpretation, stating that “if a man is awake and believe that he is awake, then this constitutes a sufficient condition for his knowing the he is awake” (Pearl, p.108). Within Pearl’s argument, the conclusion at the end of section II becomes questionable when considering that knowledge and true belief have no distinction in the ‘awake state’ of mind.
At the end of Pearl’s section I, the skeptic concludes that, “it is not possible for Theaetetus to know that he is awake”, which is exactly what Pearl is trying to refute through the concepts of ‘waking’ and ‘dreaming’ in section II (Pearl, p. 109). Pearl first begins by considering how an observer would justify whether Theaetetus does or does not know that Theaetetus himself, is awake. Through this example he forms multiple premises, which lead him to form his final conclusion that based on “the ground that there can be no meaningful distinction betweens a man’s possessing the true belief that he is awake from his knowing it to be a fact”, “a ...
... middle of paper ...
...ue belief have no distinction within the ‘awake state’ of mind, which I proved to be uncertain (Pearl, p. 110). By pointing out the skeptics view on the question, “How can you determine whether at this moment we are sleeping and all our thoughts are a dream; or whether we are awake and talking to one another in the waking state”, inquired by Socrates to Theaetetus in Plato’s Theaetetus, Pearl gained insight into the opposing position, which in turn gave him more information when refuting the skeptics argument. Plato’s Theaetetus have sparked many exuberant discussions over decades on simple topics many people would not think to bring to light, giving philosphers more insight into _______.
Works Cited
Pearl, Leon. "Is Theaetetus Dreaming?" Philosophy and Phenomenological Research31.1 (1970): 108-13. JSTOR. Web. 6 Mar. 2014. .
Premise 4: In order to know anything about the external world though your senses, you have to be certain that you are not dreaming.
Any truth that can exist in one can exist in the other. Because of this, there is no definite way to tell if an experience is dreamt or not. The arguments against this are purely speculative, based on personal experiences, and perhaps experiences of others, but that is not enough. Just because one person may not feel pain during a dream, signifying some sort of differentiation between the two states, does not mean another person doesn’t. Because all the evidence against this argument are purely speculative and circumstantial, it proves that we cannot prove consciousness at any given moment with Cartesian certainty. A waking state does exist, however, our ability to differentiate it from a sleeping state is impossible, leading to confusion about experiences. Having Cartesian certainty about whether or not we are dreaming at any given moment allows us to evaluate all the other aspects that might be skewed our findings. Because we may be asleep at any moment, who is to say our knowledge and experiences aren’t all dreamed? The brain, although a complex mechanism, is not complex to come up with the ideas that we have experienced within them. We may form new ideas based on our experiences, but the basis of it must have been experienced at one point or another. Our brain’s need reference for knowledge, and for us to know absolute truths, we need to understand that some truths may not be as
Socrates a classical Greek philosopher and character of Plato’s book Phaedo, defines a philosopher as one who has the greatest desire of acquiring knowledge and does not fear death or the separation of the body from the soul but should welcome it. Even in his last days Socrates was in pursuit of knowledge, he presents theories to strengthen his argument that the soul is immortal. His attempts to argue his point can’t necessarily be considered as convincing evidence to support the existence of an immortal soul.
Sleep—it's what divides the day and the night; the conscious and the subconscious; the aware and the unaware. It's image, then, is a powerful tool for polarizing such extremes. In his trilogy, The Oresteia, Aeschylus utilizes sleep imagery to divide between those who are aware and those who aren't. Though sleep's meaning changes throughout the plays, Clytaemestra is always able to use it to her aid. Her story accompanies a shift in a justice system that defines right and wrong. Throughout the trilogy, the meaning of sleep evolves from a clear division into a more indefinite one as the definition of right and wrong becomes increasingly ambiguous.
The 'doctrine of recollection' states that all true knowledge exists implicitly within us, and can be brought to consciousness - made explicit - by recollection. Using the Platonic concepts of 'Forms', 'particulars', 'knowledge' and 'true opinion', this essay explains what can or cannot be recollected, why all knowledge is based on recollection, and why the doctrine does not prove the soul to be immortal.
...y thinks, but is greatly influenced by the society’s conflicts and the mindsets of its people. In the case of Plato and Epictetus, the philosophies that they came up with were formed by the loss of faith in the system of government, life as a slave, and personal experiences in exile. These experiences helped these philosophers to create a set of guidelines that got them through their ordeals and live out the rest of their lives. In understanding these works, we are able to understand how historical events and ideas of the time helped to lead history down the path that it did. Following the change in thought and how different philosophies develop in different environments also allows use to gauge how conditions improve or decline over time. Being able to see the patterns in the past may very well help us predict whether life in the future will flourish or decline.
Plato and Aristotle were both very influential men of there time bringing vast knowledge to the world. I honestly believe that Democracy does a lot of good but it definitely has some common side effects. Out of all of Plato's significant ideas, his best was the idea of democracy opening political decisions to the majority who cannot think on behalf of the community. Aristotle on the other hand is very optimistic when it comes to democracy so it becomes a rather interesting compare and contrast between these to men.
He quickly releases that this is the foundation of most of his beliefs. He first acknowledges that sometime our senses can deceive us, but say that our senses is mostly sturdy. It is after this that Descartes realizes that there has been times where he has been sleeping and in his dream he was certain that he was awake and sensing real objects. Though his current senses may have be dream senses, he suggests that even dream senses are drawn from our experience of us awake. He then discovers that there are times in which he cannot distinguish whether he is in his waking state and his dream state.
...he was awake. I agree with the idea that the mind is a terrible thing to waste. If you do not challenge your mind to question the ideas that are so commonly accepted, you will be missing a large part of life. There is something lacking when you don't challenge the norm. You will never know what you may come across. Socrates view on philosophy was that it was a way of life. Philosophy was his life and that is what he died for. It wasn't pride or the laws, it was his mind. If someone tells me that I can't think freely, I may have the same thoughts. What would be the point of life being some government's drone? That is way Socrates was against so many forms of governments, because they all created drones. This view of philosophy, life, should be shared with more people. Then maybe people would understand the wrong things in the world and try to change them.
In response to the second objection, Socrates does make a large leap from saying that he believes in the spirits to saying that he believes in the gods, however, this does not necessarily mean that his statements are false. In the objection we say that these supernatural spirits could include ghosts or other dead souls, but at the same time the spirits can include other divinities and gods. We are not trying to prove that Socrates believes in a certain god, but that he is not an atheist, or one who denies or disbelieves the existence of god. Furthermore, Socrates is already charged of teaching the youth to believe in divinities and unlike supernatural powers, divinities are deities or gods and goddesses. The fact that Socrates believes in divinities refutes any objection that Socrates may be an atheist.
The "Oedipus the King." Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and Writing, Compact Edition, Interactive Edition. 5th ed.
In Book one of the Republic of Plato, several definitions of justice versus injustice are explored. Cephalus, Polemarchus, Glaucon and Thracymicus all share their opinions and ideas on what actions they believe to be just, while Socrates questions various aspects of the definitions. In book one, Socrates is challenged by Thracymicus, who believes that injustice is advantageous, but eventually convinces him that his definition is invalid. Cephalus speaks about honesty and issues of legality, Polemarchus explores ideas regarding giving to one what is owed, Glaucon views justice as actions committed for their consequences, and Socrates argues that justice does not involve harming anybody. Through the interrogations and arguments he has with four other men, and the similarity of his ideas of justice to the word God, Socrates proves that a just man commits acts for the benefits of others, and inflicts harm on nobody.
Blackmore, Susan, ed. "Lucid Dreaming: Awake in Your Sleep?." Dr. Susan Blackmore. Skeptical Inquirer . Web. 13 Apr 2014. .
In this Forum on Sleep and Dreams, we will see how the diversity of academic disciplines can help to answer important questions about sleep and dreaming—questions that may touch the basis of human intellect. The Forum is fortunate in...
...ertained by this ‘game’ but given a strong visual of what’s being discussed. There is a branching off, tree like really, from term to term. It’s like before they can go on to discuss everything that it is related to, will be classified to continue. It’s almost as if they are trying to out ‘wit’ each other in a modest way, Theateteus seemingly talking as if to agree with everything, yet at the same time comes off as a self proclaimed genius (Which really is apparent in Greek culture throughout other prideful tales like in some of Homer’s work which can display the painful entertaining of cunning). By reading through you are abandoning thought to relate to this discussion. Being taken into the thoughts of Plato, whether intending to or not, which is the devious indirect interaction. Rather then being taken in personally, all the thought happens separate to the text.