A Philosophical Examination of the Benefit of Critical Analysis in the Examination of Knowledge and Belief in the Writings of Plato, Kant, Kierkegaard, and Clifford
In this philosophy study, an examination of the importance of critical analysis of knowledge (facts) and belief are important features in the writings of Plato, Kant, Kierkegaard, and Clifford. In Socrates view, the fickle nature of beliefs are often misconstrued as being “knowledge”, which defines the ambiguous barrier between reality and non-reality as a basis for values. Clifford defines the importance of gathering factual evidence as part of forming knowledge as truth over time, instead of the fickle nature of belief that is often formed without facts. Kant’s evaluation of
…show more content…
In this context, he understands the difference between a true understanding of belief, such as that the Gods have given knowledge to humanity), but he is also aware that these beliefs may, in fact, be unfounded in terms of factual knowledge:
Socrates. I myself do not speak as someone who knows; this is only an image. Still, I don’t think I am speaking in images when I say that true opinion is something different from knowledge. I would not claim to know many things; but this is one of the few things that I do claim to know (Plato 98b).
In this manner, Socrates is discerning between what he knows and what he does not know, which creates an analytical context in which he argues about beliefs and knowledge with Meno. This discerning quality in Socrates’ argument is based on understanding knowledge and true beliefs in relation to what he calls “correct belief” as part of social norms: Then if they weren’t virtuous by knowledge, the only other alternative is that they were virtuous by correct belief. It was by correct belief that these statesmen guided their cities” (Plato 99c-99b). In this manner, Socrates provides a critical analysis of beliefs, which are often followed without having any factual evidence to support these beliefs. This is an important reason why critical analysis of belief and knowledge are crucial in understanding what is deemed “truth”
With this lesson, we begin a new unit on epistemology, which is the philosophical study of knowledge claims. In this first lesson on epistemology, we begin by examining the question “What do we mean when we say we know something?” What exactly is knowledge? We will begin with a presentation that introduces the traditional definition of knowledge. Wood then discusses some of the basic issues raised in the study of epistemology and then presents an approach to epistemology that focuses on obtaining the intellectual virtues, a point we will elaborate on in the next lesson.
Socrates was a Western Ancient Athenian Greek philosopher who lived from 469 BCE until his death in 399 BCE. He was a student to another philosopher, Sophists, Socrates was different from most Greek philosophers he wanted to get at the truth and find out how one can truly be ‘good’ and moral in life. “To Socrates the soul is identified with the mind; it is the seat of reason and capable of finding the ethical truths, which will restore meaning and value of life” (ADD IN-TEXT CITATION SEMINAR). We continue to use many of Socrates teachings today, such as, ‘The Socratic method’, which is known as asking a question and within these questions you lead it to the answer you wanted to hear, many uses this as a teaching technique and is shown to be highly effective. A great number of Athenians looked up to Socrates and considered him the wise man of Athens, he had many followers whom would ask questions and seek answers. As popularity and following of Socrates grew so did accusations. The charges laid on Socrates by the Athenians were unjust and therefore his death was highly wrong in the eyes of true democracy that Athens was apparently known for. In this paper, I will discuss how Socrates was wrongfully convicted for the corruption of the youth despite having many young followers, introducing new Gods while still being considered an Atheist, and the main reason he was seen as a threat to Athens was that he brought change to the city.
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
Socrates spent most of his time in the streets and marketplace of Athens, approaching people like the sophist and other powerful leaders about whether they had any knowledge of what they spoke of. For example, he would question leaders on whether they had any knowledge of the terms they used; what is virtue? Eventually, Socrates would get them to realize that they didn’t have any idea of what they were talking about therefore, showing their ignorance. In his quest of truth, Socrates managed to offend many powerful leaders, which lead to his enemies conspiring against him and getting him executed for corrupting the youth and failing to acknowledge the gods of Athens. After Socrates’ death, Plato picks up where Socrates leaves off and comes up “with his metaphysical theory called the theory of forms.” (Socrates and Plato intro lecture 10)
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.
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
Towards the end of Meno, Socrates states that knowledge differs from true opinion in its ability to last over long periods of time. Socrates acknowledges that in many ways, knowledge and true opinion are equal; since both are certainly true, they lead to correct action without distinction. For example, in the passage Socrates compares a man who knows the way to Larisa to one who has a right opinion about the directions but has never actually been there, concluding that both would be equally competent guides. However, knowledge is, he argues, “fastened by the tie of the cause,” meaning one who has knowledge of a certain statement has grounded that truth in explanations and reasoning. Earlier in Meno, Socrates
In Plato’s Meno, there are many arguments Socrates and Meno encounter. They never seem to find a common ground and that leads to disagreements. The disagreements seem to never become an agreement because not only does Socrates makes it so difficult to give a definition of a word that he thinks is suitable but Meno is just letting him change his mind about his definition. The argument does not just consist on if knowledge an opinion can be taught, they argue that knowledge can be the only way to find correct actions, but opinion can also mean the same. Meno brings up a question, “ What makes Knowledge so prized than correct opinion.” Socrates answers with an example of Daedalus and when he uses a slave for example. That a slave will still
He is additionally alluding to the constrained way of human knowing as he says; all human knowledge is useless, nothing, at the end of the day, uncertain. Indeed, even in their best operation, notwithstanding with respect to those convictions for which we have the best reasons, and invested the most energy
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
The use of Socrates’ inquiry in the Meno is a perfect example to show how Socrates pushed his listeners to question their own knowledge. Socrates never told Meno his definitions were wrong and his own were right, rather continued to question Meno’s conclusions to show him that he did not know the true meaning of virtue. The people of Athens were unable to accept the fact that many of them were ignorant on topics such as the definition of virtue, whereas Socrates himself was able to admit it. The Athenians disguised Socrates’ true desire to teach people for corruption and impiety because they believed he was trying to humiliate them. Although the people of Athens were blind of Socrates’ true intentions, his method of inquiry did in fact benefit the city of Athens. Socrates’ methods eliminated ignorance and increased proper knowledge on important things such as virtue and knowledge within the city of Athens, which is what he meant when he said he was “a gift of the gods to the city of Athens.”
This paper is a summary of critical evaluation of the suitability of an article as an academic source. The title of the article is Critical Thinking: An Extended Definition. The author, Professor Ken Petress, analyzes various definitions of critical thinking and provides his definition of the concept as well. It is vitally important when performing research on a topic that we completely understand the topic and that we can apply certain tests or questions to the topic in order to determine its relevance and validity.
The discussion of true belief and knowledge in the Meno develops in the analogy of the traveling men; one who knows the correct path to Larissa and the other who has a true belief of the correct path to Larissa (Meno 97a-c). Socrates tells Meno that if both men led to the same result, then true belief is no more useful than knowledge and both beneficial (Meno 97c). This comparison changes in book five of the Republic when Socrates says an ideal state must have a philosopher-king as a ruler (Republic 473d-e).
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.
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.