Comments
Note: The conversation occurred over social media, and then was transferred here above some minor grammatical corrections for readability.
The conversation was every bit as sarcastically pleasant as predicted on the assignment sheet meaning, of course, that it had the same pleasantness of pulling teeth. However, the point of the conversation is not for what is pleasant but, rather, what is good. In that regard, it may have been marginally successful.
My interlocutor – my father, Jeff – became upset during the conversation, so much so that my mother sent me a text telling me that I was making him grumpy. However, despite this, he did seem to recognize that some of the foundation of his opinion may not be solid or grounded in fact, which was the purpose of the conversation.
…show more content…
This difficulty is furthered by, essentially, the stubbornness of people. Getting an interlocutor to outright admit that one of his life views is not secure is, unsurprisingly, difficult to do, thus the neat conclusion of a clear admission of this that Socrates often gets in Plato’s writings becomes a challenging proposition. This is most certainly influenced by the nature of a real life conversation contrasted with the nature of the conversations in Plato’s writings. Specifically, in Plato’s writings, the questions and responses are dictated by the same person – Plato – and, thus Socrates can get desired responses and clear admissions if Plato wants him to get them. In an actual conversation, this is obviously not the case, as the interlocutor can continually respond in unpredicted or irrational
Things are not always what they seem. The Republican Party has now captured the House of Representatives and the Senate. Many were not surprised, as history has shown that when a president has low approval ratings, the opposing political party usually gains seats in Congress. The Republicans’ main argument was the failure of the Affordable Care Act. The platform was that they would work on their constituents’ behalf to repeal the health care law. However, it has been shown that the health care law is working, providing health insurance for many who previously did not have any health insurance. How did the Republicans convince their constituents to believe the contrary? Plato would argue that the Republicans are truly the masters of rhetoric.
In the Dialogue Crito, Socrates employs his Elenchus to examine the notion of justice and one’s obligation to justice. In the setting of the dialogue, Socrates has been condemned to die, and Crito comes with both the hopes and the means for Socrates to escape from prison. When Socrates insists that they should examine whether he should escape or not, the central question turns into whether if it is unjust to disobey laws. Socrates’ ultimate answer is that it is unjust; he makes his argument by first showing that it’s wrong to revenge injustice, then arguing that he has made an agreement with the city’s law for its benefits, and finally reasoning that he
In “The Apology”, Plato’s written account of Socrates’ trial, Socrates rhetorical goal is not only to exonerate himself from the crimes he’s been accused of, but, more importantly, to show how he is devoted to the pursuit of justice. Socrates shows this by demonstrating his determination for doing what is righteous, rather than focusing on being abdicated from his crimes. Throughout his speech, Socrates uses an emotional appeal to establish himself as being on the side of truth, justice, and wisdom, and shows that by trusting in his words, the jurymen would also be in support of these principles. Furthermore, Socrates is able to establish his support of the truth and justice by addressing specific rumors and accusations set against him using an appeal to logic. These logical appeals are used to show how his defense is the truth and that the allegations against him are opinion, rumor, and unjust.
“A person’s a person, no matter how small” (136). The ethics of abortion has been argued emotionally for many years. In The Unaborted Socrates (Inter Varsity Press: Downers Grove, IL, 1983), Peter Kreeft approaches this important debate using fictional characters and a logic based argument. Socrates, the great ethical philosopher who lived in Athens, Greece in about 400 BC, returns in the present day (then 1983) to challenge the pro-Choice position of an abortion doctor, an ethicist and a psychologist. The result is a thoroughly logical and entertaining exposure of flaws in the pro-choice platform. The author organizes the debate of this serious moral issue -- is abortion murder -- by engaging Socrates in three dialogs. In each dialog Socrates questions a pro-choice representative about his beliefs. In each case, Socrates shows his opponent the fallacy of his position using the opponent's own words. Socrates mission is to “follow the common master” (20), using rational thought to follow the argument wherever it leads. The Unaborted Socrates draws the reader into questioning thoughts of all human beings having the right to live, the harm and evil of liberal abortion laws, and being pro-choice or pro-force.
Socrates, the Inquisitive Catalyst The "Apology" in The Trials of Socrates is a translation of the defense Socrates makes at the trial where he is charged with not believing in the gods recognized by the state, inventing new beliefs and modes of thinking, and corrupting the youth of Athens. Socrates' speech is more him trying to defend his logic rather than an actual "apology" in our understanding of the word. So, Socrates attempts to defend himself and his actions rather than actually apologize for it. He explains that he has no experience with the law courts and that he will instead speak in an honest and straight forward manner.
Finally i will have to tell you who is this man you are falsely accusing today. Even though we all, men of Athens, hates Socrates’s way of seeing and doing things and the way he embarrassed our greatest men of Athens in public. But the past had proven to us that he is a good wise man that rarely been mistaken in term of what was good for Athens. Moreover, one event that we cant forget is the trail of the 8 Generals where he oppose the exception of the 8 men. Even though he was threaten to take the same fate as theirs. Athenian thought he was crazy back then and ordered to execute the 6 Generals they have at hand and the same fate awaits for those who fled. However, few years later Athens needed as much strong men as they can get so they dropped
The phrase “I know that I know nothing”, often referred to as the Socratic paradox is famous saying that has been derived from Plato’s account of Socrates in The Apology. It demonstrates Socrates moral philosophy that true wisdom is accepting one’s ignorance. In Delphi of Ancient Greece, there is a sacred temple that lived a woman who has been known to be possessed by the gods, and thus able to obtain answers from them. In 440 BC, the Oracle of Apollo declared that “Socrates was the wisest”, and in great disbelief it made Socrates feel obliged to seek the true meaning of her remark. Socrates did this by “interviewing everyone who had a reputation for knowledge” to prove the oracle was wrong. For instance, in Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates
Socrates was a unique character in ancient Greece, specifically in the city-state of Athens, which was the seat of democracy at the time. Athens practiced direct democracy where citizens, specifically male, directly participated in and voted on legislation. The implication is that most of the men of Athens served in some political way. A way to distinguish oneself apart from the citizenry was to invoke the power of speech and persuasion to be more respected, powerful, and thus wealthier. Socrates’s philosophy in Plato’s dialogue Gorgias is shown in contrast to rhetoric and its perceived benefits to the individual and the people of the democracy. It offers severe critiques on the practice of rhetoric, specifically for the harm it does instead
Athenian citizens, I implore you to understand Socrates guilt within the matter of impiety. Impiety is lacking respect for a god or gods. Actions or words that go against the status quo of religious activity would certainly fall under the category of impious behavior. This includes the unnamed “divine” voice within Socrates head. Those that accused him may not have done so for the right reasons, but it does nothing to prove he is innocent of impiety.
In Plato’s: The Apology Socrates was charged and put on trial for impiety, as well as accused of committing many other crimes. I will first explain the most important issues of why Socrates was sent to death. Then I will argue the position that Socrates is innocent, and should not be have been found guilty.
In Book II of the Plato’s Republic, Glaucon and Adeimantus challenge Socrates’ claim that justice belongs in the class of goods which are valued for their own sake as well as for the sake of what comes from them (Rep. 357 b- 358 a). Unconvinced by Socrates’ refutation of Thrasymachus, Glaucon renews Thrasymachus’ argument that the life of the unjust person is better than that of the just person. As part of his case, Glaucon states what he claims most people consider the nature of justice to be and what its origins are. He proceeds to present a version of the social contract theory:
Socrates is put to trial by three accusers Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon. They claim that Socrates is an evildoer, that he is corrupting the youth of Athens, and that he is promoting atheism. In The Apology Socrates is not truly apologizing for his actions, rather he is defending himself and his actions. At the beginning of Socrates trial he merely states that he has no experience with the courts and he wishes no one to judge him by the way he speaks.
In the beautiful city of Athens, Greece, there was a philosopher Socrates, and his "Socratic method," was laid on the groundwork for the Western systems of logic and philosophy. Socrates did believe that he didn't know anything, and It was because of this that the Oracle told Socrates that he was wise and that he should seek out the 'wise men' to hear what they had to say. So Socrates began to travel to different parts of Greece to question the suppose 'wise’ men to see if they really knew all the answers to life. The youth laid their eyes on Socrates since he possessed a different way of thinking and living. His unique method of questioning and insulting was believed that he
The problem with Socrates concerns the problem with the role of value and reason. Nietzsche believes that the bulk of philosophers claim that life is a corrupt grievance for mankind. Nietzsche reasoned that these life deniers were decadents of Hellenism, as a symptom of some underlying melancholy. For someone to paint life in such a negative light they must have suffered a great deal through the course of their own life. Furthermore, these no-sayers agreed in various physiological ways and thus adopted the same pessimistic attitudes towards life. Socrates was ugly, alike decadent criminals and by ways of these similarities was decadent as well. Nietzsche also claims ugliness as a physiological symptom of life in its decline supported by studies in phenology.
Aristophanes’ Clouds, if read hastily, can be interpreted as a mindless satyr play written in 419 BCE. Yet the chorus warns the reader not to expect the play to have farcical ploys like “a hanging phallus stitched on” the actors to evoke a laugh, but has underlying seriousness as “she [the play] comes in trusting only her words” (Clouds 538-44). Even if the play does use some low devices, the play’s message is sophisticated and can be read as a warning to Socrates. Aristophanes is a “friendly critic” of Socrates and warns Socrates to change his ways for Athens and for the good of himself (Whidden). Plato’s Symposium and especially his Apology of Socrates justify the claims made in Clouds about the dangers of philosophy and Socrates to