Comparing Plato 's Theaetetus, The Dialog Between Socrates And His Student

Plato’s Theaetetus starts off with Euclid of Megara by speaking with his friend Terpsion about a dialogue he has between Socrates and Theaetetus. He says, that the dialogue was from when Theaetetus was young. Euclid of Megara’s conversation with Terpsion acts as the structure for the dialogue itself. The other participants of the dialogue are Socrates, Theodorus, and Theaetetus. The question that the participants are asking is “what is knowledge?” Theaetetus gives four definitions to the question “what is knowledge?” The first being that knowledge is arts and sciences, the second being knowledge is sense-perception, the third that knowledge is true judgment, and the fourth being knowledge is true judgment with an account. But Socrates was

Socrates helps Euthyphro to give meaning to the word ‘piety ', and this serves to bring a new meaning to the respect to the divine beings and help in the explanation of the whole context of the divinity in the society. In this manner, there is the need to create a clear definition and help Euthyphro in getting ideas that he can use to teach Socrates to answer the resulting question about the piety. This is to enable Socrates to have a string defense against the charge of impiety and help in tackling the challenges that he faces in the society. The story and the relationship between Socrates and Euthyphro arise when Socrates is called to court to answer to the charges of impiety by Meletus, (Plato et al, 1927). In the courts, Socrates meets Euthyphro, who comes to the courts to prosecute his father who is a murderer.

The topic of knowledge and belief has been a subject of investigation and a primary field in philosophical research for centuries. Whether it was Aristotle or Descartes, multiple ideas on knowledge and belief arise, such as the epistemological theories of foundationalism or coherentism, which provide philosophical explanations to this debate. For the sake of this essay, and in my own opinion, knowledge should be distinguished from belief. Everyone is subject to different types of beliefs based on upbringing, however knowledge of basic items is universal, therefore it immediately becomes apparent that there is a clear distinction between the two concepts.

Edmund Gettier’s argument that justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge is correct. There are many scenarios in which the conditions for justified true belief are met but cannot be said to qualify as knowledge; therefore justified true belief is not a sufficient definition for knowledge.

* Real life application: Often times, in biology class, I find myself letting go of my bigger questions- the why, or the how, in order to grasp the watered down concepts that are still so hard to understand. I do because I accept the theories of scientists and mathematicians like Newton as sufficient knowledge to form a building block from which I can grow my understanding of the topic.

Plato introduces the Theory of Knowledge, which asserts the existence of a two level reality, the first constantly changing particulars available to our senses, the other existing of unchanging eternal truths understood by way of the intellect. According to Bettrand Russel, “when we have asked ourselves seriously whether we really know anything at all, we are naturally led into an

Every legal system composes laws that we as people must abide.The question that is constantly raised is “why do we follow it?”, we mainly believe that if we follow the law then, all good will come. Even Though, it is not obligated to follow the laws , everyone living in the legal system will abide them because, it sets a controlling factor in social classes on what is wrong or right. In addition, legal subjects tend to depend on the state for a legal order,and by controlling what is good or bad the result depends on how the laws are followed. To their understanding both Socrates and Thrasymachus argue on what justice is and how it is important in life.

     “The Unexamined Life is not Worth Living.” This is the famous quote proclaimed by Socrates, a controversial philosopher of ancient Athens. He believed that anyone could lead a significant and meaningful existence by examining his or her own life and ideas very thoroughly. (Soccio)

The Gettier Problem is a widely acknowledged philosophical question, named in honour of Edmund Gettier who discovered it in 1963, which questions whether a piece of information that someone believes for invalid reasons, but by mere happenstance is correct, counts as knowledge. Before the Gettier paper was published, it was widely believed that the Tripartite Theory of Knowledge- which states that Justified True Belief equaled knowledge- was fact. This means that with three conditions, one could know something. Firstly, if you believe something, secondly, if you have justification for believing, and thirdly, that your belief is in fact true. If all three of these conditions were met, then this amounted to knowledge. However, with the publication of Gettier’s paper, “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”, he attempted to prove, with the aid of a number of problems, that it was not sufficient to have only these three conditions in order for a belief to become knowledge.

Socrates and Glaucon conclude that knowledge and true belief are different powers so their natures cannot be the same (Republic 477c-478a). Knowledge is the most effective power, while true belief

In this counterexample of the traditional view of knowledge that Gettier illustrates, a true justified belief evolved from a false justified belief. What the Gettier problem shows us is that in order for a true belief to qualify as knowledge, it must satisfy two conditions; it must not be a lucky guess (that is, it must be justified), and it must not be a lucky truth. A true belief that isn't a lucky guess, it may still be a lucky truth, and thus fall short of being knowledge. So where must knowledge come from?

       The theory of the Ideas is the base of Plato’s philosophy: the Ideas are not only the real objects ontologically speaking, but they are the authentically objects of knowledge epistemologically speaking. From  the point of view  of ethics and  politics,  they are the foundation of  the right behaviour,  and anthropologically speaking they are  the base  of Plato’s dualism and they even allow him demonstrate  the immortality of  the soul.

In Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro had a conversation about piety. During the conversation, Socrates raised a question which was a challenge to the Euthyphro’s definition of piety. Also, this question is a challenge to the theists’ view of divine command theory. I agree with the arbitrariness objection which succeeds giving a good reason to theists to reject the divine command theory. This objection indicates that the arbitrariness of God’s commands contradicts to the fundamental attribute of God, and God’s commands are unable to make an act morally good or bad.

Plato argued that true knowledge was not obtained through the knowledge of the physical world around us, but from these unchanging ideas. Plato’s theory of knowledge is well explained through his discussion of the Divided Line; a line divided into two unequal parts. One section represents the visible order and the other intelligible order, relating to opinion and knowledge, respectively. The stages of cognition flow upwards: imagining, belief, thinking, and intelligence. The visible, changing world of opinion begins with the awareness of images through perception. Awareness of images can include

A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.