Socrates And Confucius. Numerous Thoughts And Behaviors

Both St. Augustine’s Confessions and Confucius’s Analects are significant teachings that have influenced people around the world not only in ancient times but in current history as well. Both doctrines provide discussion on the ethical values of society back in the ancient time they were written and lead us to discover similarities between the two beliefs. Although we find these connections, there are significant differences between St. Augustine and Confucius’s views on life and beliefs since they were living in different time periods and environments. Their experiences are the influencers that have impacted to the way that philosophies and traditions have grown today between the West and the East. I agree that Confucius celebrated social

Both St. Augustine’s Confessions and Confucius’s Analects are influential teachings that have a vast influence on people around the world in the ancient time and currently. Both doctrines discuss ethical values of society back during the time they were written and leads us to find some similarities between the two. There are substantial distinctions between Confucius and St. Augustine’s experiences and beliefs since they are living in different environments and time periods. Their insightful differences are the influences that contributed to mold the distinct philosophies and traditions between the West and the East today. I

Confucius created the doctrine that 300 years after his death became a permanent impulse of social life in China, established rules of behaviour not only in the state, but also the family as a social unit.1

Confucius’ high emphasis on morality instead of profit was one of his major political ideals that he tried to persuade the the rulers of the kingdoms to pursue. However, his failure to convince any of those rulers reflected the prevalent pragmatic political culture at that period. After all, the kingdoms were at war with each other so that Confucius’ idea was inevitably less popular than those battle-winning strategies in favor of “profit.”

The great and well known philosopher Plato, is the man who was in love. He wasn’t in love with one particular materialistic item or person, but rather the idea of love itself. Then there is Buddha, a man who fears love. Buddha understands that life always ends and in death comes pain. The idea of love to him, only ends in pain and suffering. As expressed in The Gospel of Buddha, Buddha’s eyes were opened to world and when they were opened “he saw the pains of pleasure and inevitable certainty of death that hovers over every being.” He isn’t like Plato, who believes to life, is to live with happiness and to have a happy after life, requires love in the human life or physical world. He also believed that love could carry a man threw tremendous conquest. In Plato’s Plato-Symposium, he expressed that if government consisted of lovers, even in unfavorable odds “they would overcome the world.” These two lifestyles however, aren’t so different. They both revolve around the same concept and that is, life is filled with pain and suffering. The ways they avoid or overcome it, is the only difference. Plato is like the man at the funeral who says, “we had a good life together and I’m glad we got to be together.” Then there is Buddha and he would be the man saying, “her life was too short.”

Breaking the law might or might not be morally permissible in special situations. It is not clear whether it is morally correct to always follow laws. Two points of view were examined: Martin Luther King in the “Letter from Birmingham City Jail” and Socrates in “Crito”. King, (1991) says that breaking the law can be excused for good reasons. However, Socrates says that breaking the law is never permissible (Gallop, 1997). Breaking the law is not moral because it breaks the conditions to be a citizen.

Socrates, at the other end of the spectrum, saw politics as a wasted venture for him because his life was devoted to a quest for knowledge. He stated his way of life, which conflicts with that of Pericles' model, to differ from that of the democratic system of Athens because he saw the government to be corrupt and the majority to not be just. Socrates did not bother to lead a life of servitude to the ideals of the state because he showed through his actions that an unexamined life without critical thinking was not a life at all. As is made clear by the admittance of Socrates himself, his defense plea is the first time he has appeared in a court of law, even by the age of seventy. Socrates' life was dedicated to the pursuit of further comprehension and debate with the Athenian people on the deeper issues of life, not to a court

The texts of Socrates and Confucius examine what it means to live the good life. Although, the texts have similarities, especially in clarifying what the good life isn’t, their philosophies on how to obtain the good life differ greatly. Additionally, the two texts are even ambiguous on what living the good life truly means, so it is first necessary to identify what the good life is.

Availability and understanding of available information by an individual was taken as a very important treasure. The issues that Confucius taught to be followed were not entirely scientific learning but rather the study of the consecrated contents and the tenets of good worth and propriety (Oliver, 1985). An additional element which he held high was the control of proper example. The heroes, heroines and great people that existed were greatly exemplified by Confucius. Confucius did this by persisting on the scrutiny of the conservative models. Many of his well recorded aphorisms are tributes of his considered men of high caliber. Confucius trained his supporters the significance of constantly welcoming the rectification of personal liabilities. To further assist in the creation of an upright moral fiber, he cherished a particular amount of strength of will. He acknowledged the threat, particularly in the youthful, of falling into unwanted behavior, so he persisted on eradicating the push for uncalled for reassurances (Ferguson, 1972).

Socrates and Machiavelli are both very influential philosophers and two of the great minds of their time. However, both of these men had their own separate ideas that did not completely agree with one another. Machiavelli was born into a Renaissance time period of fragmented politics, lots of bloodshed, and angry citizens while Socrates grew up in a time of political adjustment and instability in Athens. Machiavelli constructed The Prince as a political pamphlet to his friend Lorenzo de ' Medici on how a prince would successfully rule his land or kingdom most effectively. This guide consisted of ideas that involved cheating and lying to keep people happy and asserting dominance over others. The Greek philosopher Socrates, on the other

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.

The political setup, according to Confucius, is significantly affected by his general moral teachings. That is the general moral teachings, namely, on trust, relationships, and the difference between right and wrong.

Confucius created a system of thinking called Confucianism. If only one word could be used to summarize the Chinese way of life for the last two thousand years, that word would be Confucian. No other person has had as great an effect on the life and thought of the Chinese people as Confucius. He is the most adored person in Chinese history. Confucius claimed no greatness, instead he looked to a past time that he saw as the golden age. He told one of his disciples, "I transmit but I do not create. I am sincerely fond of the ancient. I would compare myself to Old P'eng who was fond of talking about the good old days." Confucius was a transmitter of the wisdom of the past. From his study of Chinese tradition, he gathered the

Separated by more than 8500 kilometers but only 52 years, two seminal thinkers have shaped the moral philosophy of their respective cultures. While Western ethical theory has been deeply influenced by Plato’s Republic, Eastern ethical theory has been deeply influenced by Confucius’s Analects. David Haberman describes the Republic as ‘one of the most influential books of all time’ (86). And Bryan Van Norden compares (with considerable fervor) the Analects to ‘the combined influence of Jesus and Socrates’ (3).

In ancient Greece, being a philosopher carried various implications, several of which were unfavorable. In a time when natural philosophers were accused for being non-believers in the traditional deities and sophists were defamed for selling their intellectual services for money, Socrates fit in neither category. Nonetheless, the moment Socrates decided to become an enquirer, or a philosopher of human nature, he was chastised. His enemies, men he had either insulted or embarrassed, sought vengeance and in their process to do so, tried to define him. Accused of being an atheist and a corruptor of the youth, Socrates was viewed harshly by the society he lived in, but, despite this, his true nature revealed itself through his words and Plato’s dialogues. His prosecutors aimed to vilify his name and profession, and ultimately sentence him to death, a goal they eventually completed, but the accusations were not definitive of who he was. Socrates was a philosopher, first and foremost, attempting to find the reasons for various phenomenon, but he was also a self-professed prophet, indirectly given a prophecy from the gods, determined to use dialectic to bring about self-awareness in his fellow citizens. His ideologies, thus, became the building blocks for the philosophers of the generations succeeding him.