Intro : In this essay I will relate how we struggle with truth and self definition,while society gives us responsibilities , but reality tests our characterization. As humans we are expected to understand what is best for society while struggling with our own perception of what the truth is. In this essay I will relate the Ideas of Plato, Aristotle and D.T and how our personal and ethical choices reflect the way we are perceived in society.
1st point: The Idea of “Transcendent good” by: Plato in the Book VI of the Republic. Where he viewed the universe as having two realms, the realm of reality “the world we live in everyday” and the realm of “transcendent good” which is unattainable because we are corruptible by society.
2nd point: The
Our actions and interactions with others and society are what define us. Society’s perception of an individual may contrast with that individual’s perception of self. Our actions and interactions with others create certain stigmas which may not change despite progression and change an individual has undergone. But however at the end of the day we are our own creators and we chose who we interact with.
In his philosophical text, The Republic, Plato argues that justice can only be realized by the moderation of the soul, which he claims reflects as the moderation of the city. He engages in a debate, via the persona of Socrates, with Ademantus and Gaucon on the benefit, or lack thereof, for the man who leads a just life. I shall argue that this analogy reflecting the governing of forces in the soul and in city serves as a sufficient device in proving that justice is beneficial to those who believe in, and practice it. I shall further argue that Plato establishes that the metaphorical bridge between the city and soul analogy and reality is the leader, and that in the city governed by justice the philosopher is king.
In Plato’s The Republic and The Apology, the topic of justice is examined from multiple angles in an attempt to discover what justice is, as well as why living a just life is desirable. Plato, writing through Socrates, identifies in The Republic what he thought justice was through the creation of an ideal city and an ideal soul. Both the ideal city and the ideal soul have three components which, when all are acting harmoniously, create what Socrates considers to be justice. Before he outlines this city and soul, he listens to the arguments of three men who hold popular ideas of the period. These men act to legitimize Socrates’ arguments because he finds logical errors in all of their opinions. In The Apology, a different, more down-to-Earth, Socrates is presented who, through his self-defense in court, reveals a different, even contradictory, view of the justice presented in The Republic. In this paper, the full argument of justice from The Republic will be examined, as well as the possible inconsistencies between The Republic and The Apology.
Since man is the only creature to have free will and a conscience, these must be central to a good life for a human.
Socrates is believed to be one of the greatest philosophers of all time and he is credited as being the founder of western philosophy. This paper will explain some of his views to the most fundamental questions of today’s age. These questions will include topics about morality, the human condition, solution, and death. After Socrates’ views on these topics are explained, a critique will be done on his answers. I will start out by explaining exactly who Socrates is, and the time that he lived in. To start out, we will first examine Socrates’ view on morality.
The ethical egoist is one who believes that it is morally right to act strictly in one's own self-interest. Understandably, this belief poses a threat to social cooperation and, therefore, clearly introduces a significant political problem. I believe that the best example of ethical egoism is displayed in Book I of Plato's The Republic. In this Book, Plato introduces the idea of ethical egoism, explains the political problem posed by it, and addresses the problem through the words of Socrates. I will use this paper to explain and clarify the arguments for and against the concept of ethical egoism, with specific focus on the political problem it poses and the proper approach to addressing that problem, in terms of Plato's social
Philosophy can best be described as an abstract, scholarly discourse. According to the Greek, philosophia refers to ‘love of knowledge’. This is an aspect that has involved a great number of clever minds in the world’s history. They have sought to deal with issues surrounding the character of veracity and significantly exploring the endeavors to respond to these issues. This paper seeks to compare and contrast the philosophy of Aristotle with that of Confucius. This is with a clear concentration on the absolute functions of these philosophies and how they take care of the particular responsibility of a person and the broader society and the resultant effects on societies (Barnes, 1995).
There is a machine that take people, and makes them into things. It takes passion, creativity and individuality, and strips it away leaving not even a person but thing embraces monotony and conformity. Every person who embraces it, simply becomes a replaceable clogs to eventually be thrown away. They becomes destin for a meaningless life devoid of purpose.This disastrous machine is society. These views are the only way one can live life to the fullest through the views of nonconformity and self reliance while being willing to accept the consequences it entails
The portrayal of Socrates, through the book “the trial and death of Socrates” is one that has created a fairly controversial character in Western history. In many ways, Socrates changed the idea of common philosophy in ancient Greece; he transformed their view on philosophy from a study of why the way things are, into a consideration man. Specifically, he analyzed the virtue and health of the human soul. Along side commending Socrates for his strong beliefs, and having the courage to stand by those convictions, Socrates can be commended for many other desirable characteristics. Some of those can include being the first martyr to die for his philosophical beliefs and having the courage to challenge indoctrinated cultural norms is part of
Plato, in addition to being a philosopher, wrestled at the Olympic level, is one of the classical Greek authors, mathematicians and the founder of The Academy, the first higher learning institute in the west. In short, Plato is one of the great thinkers in history and his contributions to philosophy, ethics and politics are many and varied. One of Plato’s main philosophical ideas is based on the idea that the world
Plato’s Republic proposes a number of intriguing theories, ranging from his contemporary view of ethics to political idealism. It is because of Plato’s emerging interpretations that philosophers still refer to Plato’s definitions of moral philosophy as a standard. Plato’s possibly most argued concept could be said to be the analogy between city and soul in Book IV, partially due to his expansive analysis of justice and the role justice plays in an “ideal city,” which has some key flaws. Despite these flawed assumptions that my essay will point out, Plato’s exposition on ethics is still relevant for scholars and academics to study, due to his interpretive view on morality and justice.
“Nothing in excess.” This Doric saying situated in the foreground of the temple at Delphi, is one of the earliest elaborations of the doctrine known as the Golden Mean. It was this one saying that sparked the birth of an ethical principle, in which the concepts are tenfold. In the aftermath of reading this excerpt, scholars alike have interpreted this statement, gradually contributing to the pantheon of perceptions that revolve around the connotation of the Mean. First reflected in Socrates’ teachings, the Mean was passed down by Plato, and then utterly revolutionized by Aristotle. Utilizing cross-fertilization, it eventually spread throughout the known Earth. (Aristotle on the Concept of the Golden Mean) Simply, the Golden Mean is the the belief in moderation between two extremes, and it reaffirms the balance that we, as a thriving species, need in life. The golden mean is the most influential axiom that was developed by the Ancient Greeks because it is prevalent in many Greek myths, was theorized by Aristotle, and has influenced the livelihood of people in the Western World.
The Republic by Plato examines many aspects of the human condition. In this piece of writing Plato reveals the sentiments of Socrates as they define how humans function and interact with one another. He even more closely Socrates looks at morality and the values individuals hold most important. One value looked at by Socrates and his colleagues is the principle of justice. Multiple definitions of justice are given and Socrates analyzes the merit of each. As the group defines justice they show how self-interest shapes the progression of their arguments and contributes to the definition of justice.
“Justice is the art that gives each man what is good for his soul”. This statement is implies that justice is goodness and doing what’s right. This also implies that being a good person and doing good actions will in turn benefit the people by improving their Lives. Justice is good because it sets a standard of goodness that people in society would have to uphold and follow. Therefore this would lead to an environment of positivity and goodness for individuals. The Mariam-Webster dictionary gives the world one definition that states “Justice is the maintenance and administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of confliction claims”. However According to book one of The Republic by Plato, Justice is conveyed as a very complex topic that cannot be defined by a single definition. The topic of justice is discussed and broken down by Socrates, who asks the question “what is justice?” , he seeks out a definition from the company around him and through different given definitions of Justice, Socrates proves that there is no one definition for justice because there are many contradictions and exceptions that have to be considered in certain situations. In this essay I will discuss how justice relates to goodness and how it can be “the art that gives each man what is good for his soul” by using the Socrates’ discussion on the various definitions of justice from book one in The Republic by Plato.
Interaction with the society helps human beings to develop their worldview over a subject (Wilmer 28). Without a society, it will be difficult to differentiate a human being from other animals. Therefore, it is right to say that a man is humanized by society. The basic society where a man belongs is known as a family. It is in the family that a man learns the necessary feature of becoming a member of the whole society. As the man continues to live in the social environment, he will get to learn values, moral behaviors and responsibility. An individual’s intellectual characteristics are a clear imprint of their society (Wilmer 102). Therefore, the level of development of a society is determines the level of individual development in that society and vice versa.