Philosophy

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.

In simple words skepticism means the ability to doubt.Theres a very famous argument termed as " The Dreaming Argument " by Chuang Tzu .The argument goes as Tzu dreamt of being a butterfly in his dream so now when hes awake how can he be sure that it isnt a butterfly dreaming of being a man .Its one of the greatest examples of thinking symetrically.There are two skepctical traditions that is Academic and Pyrrohonian Skepticism

All the symptoms that were described were based on the kidney functions, so more and further

To add context to my response, I shall give a brief description of the Socratic method. According to the textbook, the Socratic method is “ a conversational method that proceeds by means of a series of questions and answers…” (Text). The goal of this method is to force the person being questioned to evaluate their originally inadequate responses and to work toward clearer answers brought on by thinking more deeply about what is being asked. This method allows a person to grow not by being given the answers, but by

How would you describe your inner mind? crazy? genius? They say that both are two sides of the same side. Through my experiences, I shape the world around me, developing a unique perspective from my worldview. When it comes to how I perceive reality I just summarize it in these six concepts: culture, meaning, self, self-fulfilling prophecy, and scripts, and self-serving bias. My culture defines me down to my very genetic core. It explains why I drive the way I do, how I talk, what is socially acceptable, why I react to things the way I do , why I attend LIU, etc.

Which of the following groups have the highest incidence of use and abuse of alcohol?

For instance one must be “pious” and avoid being “impious.” One must not claim that he knows more that he actually does. In the first dialogue “Euthyphro” Socrates is waiting at the courthouse where he ran into his fellow peer Euthyphro. Euthyphro is also waiting outside of the courthouse to open, Socrates inquires why Euthyphro is at the courthouse. Socrates and Euthyphro exchanged reason for being at the courthouse Socrates states that he’s been accused by Meleus of corrupting the youth “He says he knows how the youth are being vour report and who are their corruptors.” (1) and creating new gods “He brings a wonderful accusation against me, which first hearing excites surprises: he says that I am a poet or a maker of gods and that I deny the existence of old ones.” (2) Euthyphro is at the courthouse to prosecute his father for murder. Euthyphro then states that he is doing the pious thing by prosecuting his father, and others who are telling him not to prosecute his father know very little about piety. “That shows how little they know of the opinion of the gods and about piety and impiety.” (4) Through the Socratic method which are a series of simple question Socrates proves that Euthyphro doesn’t know as much as he thinks he does, in fact he doesn't know what piety is at

Socrates uses a cause and effect method throughout the argument. As Socrate is asking Euthyphro to approve along the way down his points he gets certainly confused. Ending their argument with a point that, piety and what is pleasing to the gods are simply not the same. By the end of the argument Euthyphro is contradicted and can no longer identify what he thinks. Socrates makes a point of the difference of a fact and an opinion. The definition of a moral quality is not a matter of what people think. You cannot determine what goodness, or piety is by asking people around you. Consequently, whether something or someone has a given moral quality is also not a matter of their opinion. Whether an act or a person is good, or pious, for example, is not to be settled by a

Socrates was placed at the origins of Skepticism. It was understood that he only asked questions and never taught positive doctrines, many sought to “attempt to make sense of his seemingly paradoxical claim that the one thing he knew was that he knew nothing.” (Gascoigne, 2002) Plato and Aristotle strayed from Socrates path when they claimed to know the truth. Plato viewed knowledge as an awareness of absolute and existing independent of any subject trying to apprehend to the philosophers. Though, Aristotle put more emphasis on logical and empirical methods for gathering knowledge. Aristotle still accepts the view of such knowledge is an apprehension of necessary principles. Around the Renaissance period, the two main epistemological positions dominated in philosophy are empiricism, in which sees knowledge as the product of sensory perception, and rationalism sees epistemology as the product of rational reflection (Tempo). Another philosopher by the name of Arcesilaus, gave a renewed form of skepticism, arguing against the opinions of all men. Arcesilaus also claimed that skeptics could make

Pyrrhonian skeptics and Descartes’s response to skepticism are two interesting reads that make one curious. Pyrrhonian skepticism has a goal which is the suspension of judgment and tranquility, while Descartes brings reason and doubt to the senses about what one perceives and feels. This essay will inform about the Pyrrhonian skeptic and the response Decartes has to the skeptic views.

Thus these could be the early influences to young Socrates and used their teachings as a basis to establish his own set of principles and moral philosophies. Although these philosophers did not live in the same time period as Socrates, he responded to their ideas and challenged them later on. Particularly, he challenged people to think about different things such as : what is virtue? what is justice? what do you mean by piety? Unlike other philosophers, he wanted people to consider the true meaning of qualities such as justice and courage, and therefore also challenged the Greeks conventional idea of wisdom. Socrates challenged philosophers by insisting that they must question conventional wisdom and challenge the traditional beliefs. He did this through the Socratic method, where it served to reveal the disputers lack of knowledge and ignorance. Ultimately by challenging Athenian people to think about the beliefs eventually earned him many enemies from different sectors of the society. While many Athenians admired Socrates challenges, an equal number grew resentment and felt he threatened their way of life and uncertain future. The effect of Socrates investigations had therefore aroused “a great deal of hostility” and this lead to this trial in the Athenian court of being a

Socrates was a Greek philosopher, who is one of the founders of western philosophy. Socrates never wrote down his ideas or thoughts, his students or compressors, Plato, wrote down his ideas and thoughts. Socrates was accused of expressing there were different Gods and he was brought to trial in 399.B.C.E. Socrates character, in the different passages I read, Euthyphro, Apology and Citro are a little contradictory. And if the act of persuading the state is the only alternative to blind obedience, why did Socrates' in both of specifically in his defense and generally in his career make so little effort to persuade the people when they were acting unjustly? In this essay I hope to demonstrate how Socrates character contradicts in these different passages and why didn't he persuade the people when the people were acting so unjustly.

     Skepticism is the belief that people can not know the nature of things because perception reveals things not as they are, but as we experience them. In other words, knowledge is never known in truth, and humans should always question it. David Hume advanced skepticism to what he called mitigated skepticism. Mitigated skepticism was his approach to try to rid skepticism of the thoughts of human origin, and only include questions that people may begin to understand. Hume’s goal was to limit philosophical questioning to things which could be comprehended.

Isn’t that the case, Meletos, both with horses and with all other animals?” (Plato, 512). In a nutshell, the Socratic Approach initiates with an allegory or question, expecting an answer which will lead Socrates to another question, and another, until finally any argument to the initial question is squashed and disproven,without finding an actual solution to the original question. This leaves listeners with an open ended question to find an answer for themselves based on personal knowledge and beliefs. “Socrates’ teaching method does not treat students as empty vessels to be filled with knowledge of facts, formulae and theorems. Rather, the teacher and students embark on a voyage of discovery. The teacher does not so much impart knowledge as elicit knowledge,” (Masud). Overall, his teaching method was a very introspective method that keeps great minds challenged to this day.

Skepticism is something that we all have to one degree or another. Some of us who carry some Limited (Local) Skepticism might question whether we can really know if the news anchor is giving us correct information or if the five day forecast is really on track this time regarding the rain it is predicting. Others subscribe to the Global Skepticism view; that is, they would argue that we cannot know anything at all, and, therefore, we can’t have knowledge of anything (Feldman 109). As a global skeptic, we would not only challenge the same things that limited skeptics confront, but we would challenge the very essence of our being. If this form of skepticism is valid, we would have to reexamine