James's Pragmatism and Plato's Sophistes

Plato is remembered as one of the worlds best known philosophers who along with his writings are widely studied. Plato was a student of the great Greek philosopher Socrates and later went on to be the teacher of Aristotle. Plato’s writings such as “The Republic”, “Apology” and “Symposium” reveal a great amount of insight on what was central to his worldview. He was a true philosopher as he was constantly searching for wisdom and believed questioning every aspect of life would lead him to the knowledge he sought. He was disgusted with the common occurrence of Greeks not thinking for themselves but simply accepting the popular opinion also known as doxa. Plato believed that we ought to search for and meditate on the ideal versions of beauty, justice, wisdom, and other concepts which he referred to as the forms. His hostility towards doxa, theory of the forms, and perspective on reality were the central ideas that shaped Plato’s worldview and led him to be the great philosopher who is still revered today.

In Phaedrus, Plato expands on the social implication that those who wield rhetoric ought to be just and act justly when utilizing it. This recurring theme is clearly portrayed through his analysis of love, the soul, and rhetoric itself. Phaedrus is written as a dialogue, with Phaedrus and Socrates discussing their views on rhetoric. Plato structures his writing so that Socrates is the one bestowing knowledge upon Phaedrus, his young and playful pupil, by asking pointed questions to which Phaedrus replies. The relationship between Phaedrus and Socrates is both one of a student and teacher but also one of lovers, made clear by Socrates’ soft attitude and affection towards Phaedrus.

ABSTRACT: This paper discusses the viability of certain aspects (the sex lottery) of Plato's Republic, book V. It is college level 'A' paper.

Philosophers are known to question, analyze and evaluate everything but do not always end with concrete conclusions. Plato’s Euthyphro and Apology, to no surprise, highlight one of such debate: the human characteristics of wisdom. Though Plato was one of the earliest philosophers, the topic of wisdom is still debated by modern philosophers today, contemplating questions such as “What are the classifications of ‘wisdom’?” According to Plato’s two dialogues, the characteristics of wisdom have a strong correlation with the characteristics of “being a good person”. This concept highlights the values of virtue and selflessness and at the same time juxtapose views on virtue while taking into account the different forms of rationality. In this paper, I will highlight how Plato uses his two dialogues to enforce his own opinion about the relationship between being wise and being a good person, and evaluate the inconsistencies within this claim.

In “Euthyphro”, a dialogue written by Plato, Euthyphro is faced with a series of questions from Socrates regarding what piety is. Euthyphro’s answers continuously contradict one another, and he cannot create a definition. Euthyphro makes reference to the Gods when stating a definition, which leads to the questions, is Euthyphro a theological voluntarist? After examining the claims of Euthyphro and the definition of theological voluntarism, it will become apparent that Euthyphro is not a theological voluntarist. This paper will first explain the definition of theological voluntarism, and what it means to be a voluntarist; next it will describe Euthyphro’s definitions of piety and the flaws of them. Finally, I will consider an objection and follow with my answer and conclusion.

In this essay I would like to talk about the nature of sophism and how it changes religion, politics and education. In the first part of my essay I am going to define the meaning of sophism, in the second part I am going to talk about the connection of sophism and aristocrats, in the third part of my essay I am going to talk about the changes in religion with the help of sophism; in the fourth part I will examine the changes in decision-making and in last part I will talk about Socrates use of cross-examination to find out the meaning of the oracle’s message. As a source of information I am going to use Plutarch’s essays Pericles and Alcibiades, Plato’s Apology and Crito, and Thucydides’ Peloponnesian War.

Interpretive essay for Euthyphro Euthyphro, a priest in Plato’s dialogue, strives throughout the reading to teach his religion to Socrates. Since Euthyphro portrays himself to be the most intelligent human to mankind, Socrates believes that he must know every words meaning and that guides Socrates to ask him about a word he is curious about; piety. Piety is something he is very curious about and asks Euthyphro many questions about it. Euthyphro gives five intricate versions of piety, but one of them is peculiar and brings to my attention.

pious, but every answer he offers is subjected to the full force of Socrates' critical thinking. Socrates systematically refutes Euthyphro's

In Plato’s Sophist, the character of the Stranger appears and enters discussion with Theaetetus to discover what, exactly, a sophist is. In the final section of the dialogue in the final diairesis, the Stranger and Theaetetus agree that a sophist can be described as under the productive art, of the human kind, an image maker, in the fantastic class, using one’s own person, of the art of dissembling opinion, and one who speaks in private conversation. After this conclusion, it becomes clear that the Stranger himself is representative of this final definition of what a sophist is, and can be proven to be so by finding moments where he epitomizes these various characteristics.

In 242-243 d Theo and the visitor are talking about other philosophers. Greek places and divine beings. These dialogue shows that the visitor thinks that the philosopher are people who could easily get their ideas out. I believe in this too because they were very intelligent and successful people to figure out many things. Things like in mathematics, nature, the universe and what out here that can’t be seen. As their ideas easily get pass to other people making them believe it because it could make sense to them or those who uneducated could think that this guy saying something smart and does make somewhat since. They would just go with it and believe it. Another thing they talk about was the visitor himself believe that everything philosophers

In Plato's Dialogues, there is the singly ignorant person, the individual who is ignorant of some information or truth but who knows that he is ignorant, and the doubly ignorant person, the individual who is ignorant of his own ignorance. Socrates, in the Apology, maintains that he is singly ignorant when he states that the only thing he is that he knows nothing. The singly ignorant person is in a far better position to learn than the doubly ignorant person, because the singly ignorant person admits of his ignorance and can, if he desires, take the necessary steps to remove that ignorance. This is what Socrates does in his dialoguing, a.k.a. "teaching." He is attempting to remove his own ignorance, and in some cases (such as in Euthyphro) move the doubly ignorant person to a state of single ignorance. This paper will show in context the meaning of Socrates' "ignorance" in the Apology and how it relates to his search for the truth about piety in Euthyphro.

The Sophist views and beliefs originated in Ancient Greece around 400 B.C.E. The Sophists were known as wandering rhetoricians who gave speeches to those who could afford to listen. The Sophists deeply believed in the power of rhetoric and how it could improve one’s life. Plato on the other hand was opposed to all Sophist beliefs. He viewed the Sophists as rhetorical manipulators who were only interested in how people could be persuaded that they learned the truth, regardless if it was in fact the truth. Plato basically opposed every view the Sophists held true and tried to disprove them throughout his many dialogues. The Sophists and Plato held two very contrasting views and this paper will attempt to sift through them all in hopes of

The Sophist, written by Plato in 360 B.C.E. attempts to search for definitions through deep philosophical searching. The persons of dialogue in this piece are Theodorus, Theaetetus, Socrates (who mainly serves as a silent authority), and an Eleatic Stranger, who leads the majority of the dialogue. As the dialogue commences, Socrates asks the stranger what is thought of sophists, statesman, and philosophers in his home country of Italy. However, Socrates does not simply ask the Stranger to define the three, he instead asks him how the three types of men are regarded in his country- under one, two, or three names. As the men (Theaeteteus and the Stranger) debate the likes of the “angler” and the “sophist” they find that the definition of

In his dialogue Protagoras, Plato relays to his audience a debate between the philosopher Socrates and the renowned sophist Protagoras. Throughout the course of their interaction, it becomes clear that the two men differ in more ways than simply their opinions on the topic at hand. Not only are philosophers and sophists inherently different in nature, but these differences are illuminated specifically when analyzing Socrates’s and Protagoras’s motives for entering their intellectual discussion. Moreover, when considering the qualities embodied by both a sophist and a philosopher, it can be argued that to be a philosopher, rather than a sophist, would prove to be most beneficial for oneself and the community at large.

The word sophist is a collaboration of two Greek words sophia, meaning wisdom, and sophos, meaning wise. The age of the Sophists began in the fifth century B.C.E in ancient Greek cities like Athens. They were travelling professional teachers who taught young, wealthy, Greek men (women were of no