A) Plato’s Symposium is a story about a party in which the guests were so sick from continuous parties that instead of drinking at this one party they decide to give stories about love. With the permission of Phaedrus, Socrates has an interesting discussion Agathon instead of a monologue-styled story. Socrates actually starts by giving Agathon a series of questions about love. Socrates goes on to ask Agathon if a father must be father to something in order to be called a father. Then Socrates asks Agathon whether the same principle applies to mothers and brothers; one must be a brother or mother to someone or something else. Agathon agrees with all of these examples, but then Socrates asks “Does Love love nothing or something?”, and Agathon replies “He loves something, of course.” With love established to love something or someone, Socrates then asks Agathon that “when you love something, do you desire it?” Agathon answers yes. Once again Socrates asks another question concerning that if you desire and love something then it is something you don’t necessarily have. Agathon answers back that it is highly probable. Socrates says “Never mind probability,”and believes that it would be a surprising for a person not lacking a quality, to desire that quality. From there both Agathon and Socrates agree that if someone was tall then that person would not desire to be tall. Then Socrates continues to state that people who are healthy still desire to be healthy in the future, and in c...
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-...
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.
Thrasymuchus was very hostile against Socrates in Book I. Every attempt that was made to prove Thrasymuchus wrong was badgered by bad comments of Socrates trying to manipulate him and the others. Socrates from the beginning on 336b was asking questions all the way to 347e building up his defense to Thrasymuchus statement that "justice is the interest of the stronger party" (Pg. 338 Para. C). Socrates disagrees with Thrasymuchus and he states, "Surely, then, no doctor, insofar as he is a doctor, seeks or orders what is advantageous to himself, but what is advantageous to his patient?" (Pg. 342 Para. D). Thrasymuchus and Socrates agreed to all these professions and what was considered a leader and what wasn't considered a leader. Socrates goes on with this, "… that a ship's captain or ruler won't seek and order to what is advantageous to himself, but what is advantageous to a sailor …" (Pg. 342 Para. E). Specifically there in those two statements Socrates has already shot down the idea of Thrasymuchus, but here is an example that Thrasymuchus gives to defend himself earlier in the reading:
Writing and speaking are two very different, yet extremely important activities to any educated person. Socrates, from Phaedrus and Letters VII and VIII, seems to think that spoken word holds great precedence over writing. His explanation of choosing speech over text is two fold. Through the breakdown of real knowledge and wisdom, Socrates proclaims that the only true teaching is done through speech. And through the way that he speaks with others, Socrates demonstrates how speech is the way to interact, teach, and learn from one another. Socrates is a firm believer of the notion that knowledge and wisdom can't be derived from written word. Memory is lost easily in his quote from the king Thamus, "those who acquire it [written word] will cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful"(Plato 96). He is using the story as an example of how the improper use of memory makes people scatterbrained. In this state people are therefore unable to interact with one another due to a lack of information. As for wisdom, "they [writers] will receive a quantity of information without proper instruction, and in consequence be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part very ignorant" (Plato, 96). Socrates is saying that words on paper cannot teach in a proper manner. Teaching is a method in which you act together with a person, using your mind and voice. If the teaching process is not properly carried out with speech, than there is no way that the learning by a student can take place. Through text both teaching and learning are incapacitated. Socrates lives the words that he speaks by trying to interact in a way that demonstrates his strong feelings for the uprising of spoken word. Issuing compliments on other known, intelligent philosophers by quoting is constant in his dialogue with Phaedrus. He uses descriptive words and the full scope of the language to get much out of people.
In Plato’s dialogue, Phaedo, Echecrades asks Phaedo the details of Socrates’ last day alive. Phaedo first describes his own countenance as well as the rest of Socrates’ companions as “an unaccustomed mixture of pleasure and pain” because they all know that Socrates’ death is imminent, however they see that Socrates appears happy and without fear (58, e). The conversation with Socrates turns to why a philosopher should not fear death. Socrates defines death as the separation of the soul from the body (64, c). He states that the body is a constant impediment to a philosopher in their search for the truth. Socrates says that the body “fills us with wants, desires, fears, all sorts of illusions and much nonsense, so that… no thought of any kind ever comes to us from the [it].” (66, c). He claims that philosophy itself is “training for dying” and philosophers purify their souls by detaching it from the body (67, e). Socrates concludes that it would be unreasonable for a philosopher to fear death because they will obtain the truth they sought in life upon the separation of their body and soul, or death (67, c). After successfully proves the soul’s immortality, Socrates goes on to tell his companions a myth. This myth tells o the judgment of the dead and their journey through the underworld (107, d). It explains the shape of the Earth and how it has different surfaces (108, c- 113, d). It also tells of the punishment for the maimed souls and the reward for the pure souls, those of philosophers (113, c – 114, d). After concluding this myth, Socrates seems to emphasize that the exact details of the story are not important and “no sensible man would insist that these things are as I have described them” but it is important to “risk the bel...
Plato and Aristotle Plato and Aristotle have two distinct views on wellness. However, each man’s opinion on wellness is directly tied in to his respective opinions on the idea of imitation as a form of knowledge. Their appreciation or lack thereof for tragedy is in fact directly correlated to their own perspective on wellness and emotion. Firstly, it is important to consider each man’s view of wellness—that is how does each man go about addressing emotional stability. One important consideration is the approach Plato takes in relation to Aristotle.
Socrate's First Accusers and Athenian Law Of all confrontations in political philosophy, the biggest is the conflict between philosophy and politics. The problem remains making philosophy friendly to politics. The questioning of authoritative opinions is not easily accomplished nor is that realm of philosophy - the pursuit of wisdom. Socrates was the instigator of the conflict. While the political element takes place within opinions about political life, Socrates asks the question "What is the best regime and how should I live?
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.
In Plato's account of the death of Socrates, The Apology, the Greek philosopher and gadfly explains to his disciples why and how it is that he is able to accept his death sentence without fear or regret. The main thrust of Socrates position is that he prefers death to abandoning his principles, by which he means the right to speak and act freely and according to his convictions. Socrates is not entirely idealistic or irrational in his preference for death; he admits that he is old, that he has no irreplaceable attachments or obligations, and that he has accomplished most of what he set out to do in life. But at the same time, he offers compelling reasons why he should follow his convictions rather than obey his instinct for self-preservation: 1) he would "never give way to anyone, contrary to right, for fear of death, but rather... be read to perish at once; 2) he does not think it right "to entreat the judge, or to be acquitted by entreating; one should instruct and persuade him" (Plato, 1956:441); and finally 3) death is only a "migration from this world into another place," and is mostly likely a good thing which should be received as a blessing. Against these arguments, Socrates sees only the vain hope of preserving his life amid the likes of his judges, or fleeing ignominiously to some other land, losing his only home, his friends and the respect of those who admire the strength of his principles. In this essay, I will examine Socrates' decision to accept death rather than abandon his principles, and show why it is better to live and die according to one's convictions, than to take the easy way out.
Plato’s character in “The Ring of Gyges” is trying to convey certain points about human nature and wisdom. In Glaucon’s fictional story, Gyges is a shepherd who stumbles upon a mysterious ring which allows him the power to become invisible. Gyges eventually gives up his lowly life as a shepherd and becomes an authoritative and crooked dictator due to the power of the ring. Glaucon’s main point in this story is that people are inherently immoral and will look out for themselves over the good of others. Due to his assumption about the nature of the human race Glaucon proclaims that in order to keep human’s from causing damage to others our social order should emphasize a government that will contain their constituents. Glaucon’s proposed social order became the building blocks of the social contract theory of government; “People in a society mutually agreeing not to harm one another and setting up sanctions when they do,” (Caste, 2014).
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.
In Plato’s The Republic, we, the readers, are presented with two characters that have opposing views on a simple, yet elusive question: what is justice? In this paper, I will explain Thrasymachus’ definition of justice, as well as Socrates’s rebuttals and differences in opinion. In addition, I will comment on the different arguments made by both Socrates and Thrasymachus, and offer critical commentary and examples to illustrate my agreement or disagreement with the particular argument at hand.
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.
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.
Socrates thought is that a rhapsode speaks not from knowledge but from inspiration, his thoughts being ‘breathed into’ him without the use of his own understanding at all. Using the analogy of a magnet, with the power to draw one rhapsode ring to itself, and through that another, and another, Socrates says that Homer himself had no knowledge of his own writing his poetry, but was divinely possessed. Every rhapsodes are also divinely possessed both when they recite poetry and when they speak. Their work, is the product of the gods working throught them, not of any human intelligence and skill.