Comparison Between Aristotle And Socrates

Socrates was a Greek philosopher who stood for knowledge and virtue. He believed that in order for people to live their best lives, it is necessary for them to do what is right. “It is wicked and shameful to do wrong, to disobey ones superior, be he god or man (Cooper, 29b).” Socrates represents self-knowledge which is evident through his quest for finding someone who was wiser than he was. After his run ins with the likes of the local politicians, craftsmen and poets, Socrates comes to the realization that although these individuals had mastered their craft and were knowledgeable in their field of work, they were clueless in many other important aspects of life. Through this awareness, he accepts the fact that

Love is exclusive between the loved and lover because humans tend to prioritize love above all else in the world as it leads to fulfillment. For the beginning of my paper, I intend to compare two useful arguments from Aristophanes and Socrates that transpired in Plato’s The Symposium as their ideas apply to the exclusivity of love. Additionally, my paper will contain my reflection on love through examining the importance of love to human flourishing, perfect and imperfect loves, what and who love is properly for, the relationship between love and beauty, and the relationship between love and desire in order to further comprehend the encompassing relationship between love and exclusivity.

From this, he deduced that “those who had the highest reputation were nearly the most deficient, while those who were thought to be inferior were more knowledgeable" (Plato 25). Now, to achieve this society in which being wrong is accepted would require man to graciously accept the bespoken of one’s wrongs by another. This should occur naturally, because as Socrates recognizes, someone pointing out somebody’s wrong is the equivalent to that person saving him or her. On the contrary, a wrong may not be wrong merely due to someone saying that such is the case. Often, something will be viewed as wrong for being different from what is standard. Aside from all of this, Socrates believed in highlighting justness rather than ever focusing on being right or being wrong. Knowing that wisdom and being right are worthless is the somewhat paradoxical product of wisdom. Being right should not be glorifying.

Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own

In this paper, I will argue that Aristotle view of the 4 kinds of people are accurate. These 4 kinds of people are the virtuous, strong-willed, vicious, and weak-willed. First, I will set out Aristotle’s argument about a strong-willed person who struggles to overcome desires, and does it make them morally wrong. Next, I will show the 4 kinds of persons that Aristotle believes exist, they are the virtuous, strong-willed, weak-willed, and the vicious persons and his arguments concerning them. Finally, I will set out my own position to support Aristotle’s view.

Socrates thinks that it requires wisdom to know the difference between the knowledge and an opinion. And what he means by that is knowledge is based on reasoned ideas beliefs, and can be proved and confirmed by rational arguments, where’s other opinion is not proved. For Socrates, the reason is the bigger way to show the truth. Socrates explained that role model is how to act well for example an equivalent way, knowledge is in an unqualified manner, according to Socrates statement beauty and wealth could benefit us sometimes if we used correctly, however, also harm to us if we did not use it the right way. This is means with knowledge we know how to act well. Socrates explained of wisdom and knowledge, as expressed by Plato in The Apology (StevenM. Cahn 29p-30), is sometimes interpreted as an example of a humility theory of wisdom Socrates and his friend Chaerephon visit the oracle at Delphi. As the story goes Chaerephon asks the oracle

What make a man virtuous? Throughout many texts of Greek society the picture of a perfect man is painted and apparent. This man, the “perfect man”, is the virtuous Greek citizen. Who is virtuous not only in the eyes of society, but also at home, in war, and in his relationship to the God(s). Also in Greek society, there was a man named Socrates who’s opinion differed with his culture’s thoughts, and he constructed his own thoughts and beliefs of what characteristics a virtuous man should hold. Not only did Greek society have thoughts of what their virtuous man should be; Roman society did as well. All cultures have a belief of what a virtuous human is and it is described in four ways: in the home, at

There is no doubt to the fact that Socrates and Martin Luther King Jr. had similar characteristics—whether it be their willingness to make the public aware or their passion to do what was right to them. But to say that Martin Luther King Jr. is a twentieth century Socrates does not seem fit to par. The way I will attempt for you to understand this will proceed as follows: I will first explain each of our character’s stories, perhaps heavily implicating some of their most distinct characteristics that can be discovered from the text. I will proceed to include their similarities, as well as their differences. Then I will attempt to explain both subjects’ profession/title, and comment on how the two may have similar things they want to

     “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)

In the various discussions of imitative art there has been a notable disagreement between two distinguished philosophers; Plato and Aristotle. Although it was Plato who first discussed the concept of imitative art, it is my belief that Aristotle was justified in his praise and admiration of imitative art, specifically, the tragic drama. In my discussion on the two philosophers’ dissertations I will begin with the ideas of Plato and his position and requirements for imitative art and its respected uses, after which I will discuss the ideas of Aristotle to show that the tragic

Socrates and Confucius were both considered well-known philosophical thinkers that made a major impact to the lives of the people who followed their work. Socrates had a mission which was to, “expose the ignorance of those who thought of themselves as wise and try to convince his fellow citizens that everyman is responsible for his own moral attitudes,” and proved to be a major influence in the city of Athens (G.M.A Grube IV). Confucius was also more of a teacher figure and sought out as a philosopher to, “be actively involved in intellectual and social trends, and to improve the quality of life that was dependent upon them,” which he pursued by the teaching of his “six arts” (Ames & Rosemont 4). In order for one to comprehend some of the of the similarities and differences between Socrates and Confucius one could compare their moral convictions, religious beliefs, views on wisdom, and their views on virtue.

Socrates had a unique way of teaching and expressing his thoughts and ideas. He taught by constantly posing questions with the assumption that any person could approach the truth through logic if he set aside ingrained prejudice and received knowledge (Hattersley 17,18). His dialectic method of questioning consisted of a subject being broken down by one or more people, in search of the same truth but with differing views. Instead of merely trying to convince listeners, Socrates would approach others by questioning what they felt to be true and therefore would be able to determine that person’s true feelings and the basis for those feelings. Socrates was open to receive knowledge wherever he could find it, yet when he approached people who claimed to be wise, he found they really knew nothing. He would challenge preconceived opinions, based on the words of others and fallacious logic. Many felt that he was attacking their identity and security causing them to resent Socrates when he pointed this out. Due to his search for truth, Socrates would, eventually, pay the ultimate price. Socrates teaches us to assume nothing and to question everything. In scientific study today, this is a fundamental element of scientific study, starting with a theory and afterward refining it to the point of when a decisive conclusion is made.

1. Increasing time pressures have led people to overextend themselves in certain areas of their lives, which can lead to a life imbalance and no way to achieve well-being. Aristotle believed that in order to achieve well-being, one must be able to balance and achieve virtues, pleasure, and happiness. This is known as an objective list theory. Epicurus believed that the key to achieving well-being was through pleasures. This theory is known as hedonism. Even though Aristotle and Epicurus did not agree on how to achieve well-being, their theories did offer one similarity which was balance. In order to achieve well-being, one must have a balanced life. For example, if a person were to overextend themselves at work, they would not be able to achieve certain pleasures, virtues, or happiness. Regardless of which theory one believes, a person must be able to balance their life in a way where everything is in perfect harmony. From my understanding, balance is the key to achieving well-being.

Many philosophers through history have dealt with happiness, pleasure, justice, and virtues. In this essay there will given facts on virtues between two philosophers who have different views on the topic. Aristotle and Kant have two totally different views on virtue, one being based on the soul and how you character depicts you virtue and the other which is based of the fact that anyone has a chance of being morally good, even bad people. There is a lot of disagreement between Aristotle and Kant, which has examples to back the disagreements. Aristotle takes virtue as an excellence, while Kant takes it more to being a person doing something morally good in the society and for them as a person. One similarity between these two philosophers though, is that these two descriptions of virtue lead back to happiness in the individual. At the end of this essay, the reader should be capable of understanding that Aristotle’s theory is more supported than Kant’s theory. Of course, explanations for both sides will be given thoroughly throughout this comparison.

There are two significant empiricists I’m going to focus on, Aristotle and David Hume. Specifically, the focus is on their ethics: what those ethics are, how they differ from each other, and which is superior. Superiority will be determined by the philosophy’s usefulness—whether the epitome of a philosophy’s virtue is attainable by man; and how conducive the philosophy is to human happiness. In both of these respects, Aristotle is superior to Hume.