Plato vs Isocrates Essay

Aristotle argues that in order for a polis to emerge, a union between man and women must convene. Later a household must be introduced which unites with other households to form a village, villages come together to form city-states. This theory is Aristotle’s natural view that an individual can not be self sufficient Plato argues that, in order to achieve absolute justice, a city-state is needed.

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

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.

Excellence is a function which renders excellent the thing of which it is a function is Plato’s definition of virtue. What does this definition really mean though? Plato and Aristotle both had their own unique arguments devoted to the topic at hand, and their own ways of describing what virtue really is. Defining virtue may seem to be an easy taste, but to truly understand the arguments behind the definition can prove to be very challenging.

Socrates’s image in the two works differ firstly in his attitude towards knowledge and towards himself. A typical statement of Socrates, both in the Euthyphro and in other Plato’s works, is that he has no clear knowledge. He is different from the public because he knows that he does not know. Neither does he claim to teach or corrupt the young (Euthyphro, p.2

However, the philosophical approach is quite the opposite in The Republic, Plato displays Socrates as the main speaker and provides an ultimate approach to how the government should be set up. This is quite the contrast from Socrates’ philosophical approach in The Apology. For example, in book 7, the philosopher/freed prisoner is the wisest person and is all knowing after he leaves the cave. “...In the knowable realm, the form of the good is the last thing to be seen, and it is reached only with difficulty. Once one has seen it...one must conclude that it is the cause of all that is correct and beautiful in anything…” (Plato, 1135) This meaning that wisdom can be reached and once it has been, a person will understand everything. This wisdom is referred to by

Compare and contrast Thucydides’ and Socrates’ analyses of the fate of Athenian democracy in war, of why the Athenians went to war, and of how and why they failed.

The “men of Athens” refer to Socrates as a sophist. According to Socrates, sophists are men who persuade young, impressionable men and charge money for their time (20b). Socrates admits that he does neither of these things. Instead, his followers merely wish to listen to him. In order to defend this statement, Socrates must

This, I believe, is what Socrates viewed wisdom as in Plato’s Apology. While it can be inferred that Socrates viewed wisdom as humility, knowledge, and self-knowledge through his examinations of the politicians, poets, and craftsmen, this is not Socrates’ complete view of wisdom. The more comprehensive view Socrates held of wisdom lies in his belief

Socrates was one of the most influential and thought-provocative people in all of Ancient Greece; he was so monumental in his teachings that his theories and argumentative styles are still utilized today. One of Socrates’ most influential students was Plato, another ancient philosopher that followed Socrates through Greece and kept record of his arguments and teachings, who would go on to be some of the most significant philosophical academia to ever be published. In one of Plato’s recordings, the Meno, he records an argument that Socrates enters with a friend of his, Meno. In this argument, Socrates and Meno are attempting to define virtue, and are having a very difficult time in doing so considering that they were two brilliant and learned men. In the Meno, Socrates argues that true opinion and knowledge differ from each other, although sometimes it seems that they can serve as replacements for one another. However, Socrates is able to form an argument to help Meno see how knowledge and true opinion differ from each other. As I read the Meno, I found that I agreed with Socrates and his platform which argued that the two did in fact differ from each other, but they could also serve as two separate means for the same ending.

A sophist would speak, a sophist would teach, a sophist would use language and words to manipulate a situation to fit his point. A sophist would engulf you in his words and make the impossible seem possible. A sophist would share his views on the world, life, and the future with you; he would make you see the light of day even if it was night. A sophist was a wise man who had the gift of gab, the ability to influence, the ability to sway, the ability to teach the young how to be better speakers. All of the qualities that Socrates claimed he did not possess. Socrates was depicted as a clever man, yet one who never taught, never persuaded, never tried to make his thoughts shared by others. He was not a sophist, not a teacher, not a "wise man". "A wise man knows that he knows nothing". Socrates always spoke of the fact that he was not a sophist because he was only out for the truth. He never wanted you to believe his words just because they came out of his mouth, he only asked the questions that were necessary to draw out the map to the truth buried down below the layers of rhetoric.

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

Socrates, in skepticism, began a search for those with a reputation of wisdom. After studying men and their knowledge, he reasoned that the only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. Although one may have extensive understanding in one area, there is way too much knowledge in the world to be contained by one man. Socrates stated, “I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish, and that some inferior men were really wiser and better” (Plato, 23). Those who believed that they knew it all could not be more ignorant, and those who admitted ignorance achieved the highest wisdom attainable on earth. Socrates accepted the idea that he, just like all men, contained very little or no wisdom at all. He was content with knowing this, and upon meeting others that lacked this philosophy, felt he was superior to them. He was unsure of the limitations the afterlife had on wisdom, but he was aware of it’s constraints on earth. This self awareness is what gifted him with the highest sense of enlightenment.

The analogy of the divided line that Plato proposed dealt with two sections divided into two more sections. The bottom part of the line can be labeled as what is not, here contains what is of the imagination or copies of the sensible and or images. Moving up the divided line, we then reach the top of the bottom sections, which contains the belief or the sensible. Entering the first part of the top section, what is thought or the scientific forms are encountered. Following that section at the top is knowledge or the form; the top of the line is labeled as what is. Now once someone understands the two extremes of what is and what is not in relation to Plato and his divided line, then it becomes clear why he only allows only specific pieces of art. When it comes to poetry and actual paintings then Plato becomes very unsettle because of the imitations that they posses whether it be a painting of tree or poem that is very relatable. When a painter creates a painting, he or she first uses the imagination to visually create a tree in the mind. Once then when the painting in the mind is actually drawn, it essentially holds no value for it is not the actual tree. A painter can artistically manipulate how a tree actually looks but it still would not be considered good enough art for his Republic. Then someone can get into the genetic and biological make up of the tree in an artistic way, which then will bring it closer to being exhibited in the republic. Now when the tree is