The Soul: The Beholder Of Soul And Knowledge

Knowledge is something that we know that you have facts to back up to form your argument and is justified. Knowledge isn’t something that can be created overnight but something that we form over the course of life. I feel that being raised by my grandmother I gained a lot of knowledge and wisdom because she has years and experience over me and wouldn’t tell me anything to hurt me but to help me in life. We all learn from mistakes but with mistakes gain wisdom then knowledge. We don’t gain knowledge overnight but with growth we become more aware of our worldview.

In the Meno, Plato believes that true beliefs becomes knowledge by the grounding true belief. As mentioned before, if virtue is x, then it can be taught (because knowledge can be taught), therefore virtue (x) is equal to knowledge. Plato's expositions of elements of his own theory of knowledge, yet, the investigation of knowledge is indirect. I believe Socrates states that everyone was born with a knowledge of right and wrong, he / she needed to experience situations where he / she needed to recall this knowledge. He makes reference to the initial knowledge being in the soul.

Knowledge is the beginning of wisdom. Knowledge is a gift from God. Knowledge is God, God is a someone, not a something. Full knowledge concerning God can’t be explained.

“A Spirit Reborn” is a well-known article published by the New York Times and written by William Safire. This New York Times columnist has written everything from novels and newspaper articles, mainly focusing on current events and political views, even presidential speeches. His titles have ranged from TV and radio producer, a publicist, a speechwriter, along with others. As a result he has been given many opportunities to discuss a wide range of topics, earning him prizes and even being quoted in a campaign ad for Ronald Reagan. Since the New York Times Newspaper is open to the public, it can be assumed the targeted audience for this article is U.S. Citizens troubled by the terrorist attacks that took place on September, 11 2001. Furthermore

One who seeks to know what justice is should be dissatisfied with the lovers of spectacles; if you let someone believe a false idea of what justice is, then that is an injustice in itself. It is like letting someone believe that santa claus is real for their entire life. Lovers of spectacles focus on fair things, subject to opinions and change what they think is beautiful. Its just to appreciate the form and idea of beauty but it is unjust to not seek out wisdom/truth and only focus on beautiful things. By explaining to the lovers of spectacels that they need to be lovers of the truth instead, is a just action because you are opening their minds to true wisdom. A philosopher aspires to know what justice is and they aspire to know the truth. They focus on the eye of the soul and mind. Philosophers are lovers of learning and seek out wisdom. This is shown when Socrates says, “But the one who is willing to taste every kind of learning with gusto, and who approaches learning with delight, and is insatiable, we shall justly assert to be a philosopher, won 't we?”

I belief that saying that a person can be taught to have knowledge is the same as saying a person who already beliefs in a topic or subject has a opinion. Which we know that opinion can be taught, but so can knowledge because you are teaching an opinion that soon will become a piece of information in a person's mind and that is what the definition is for knowledge. In other words, by learning an Opinion then they also will be receiving knowledge. Again like Socrates explains what Daedalus had told him about how we all will always have knowledge but our true opinion can be lost and maybe never be thought again. For a true opinion to stay in our minds we need to practice and think about the idea or a fact and turn it into an argument.

“If the truth of all things always existed in the soul, then the soul is immortal” (The Philosophical Journey 89). This states that since the soul has all knowledge integrated, one recollects this knowledge through situations in an individual’s life and use one’s reasoning. With the dialogues of the Meno and Phaedo, Plato discusses the ideas of recollection and immortality of the soul in general. As well, the Republic, through the three different situations shown, Plato shows the ideas of the forms and what is real and what is not.

Read the following in Plato's The Last Days of Socrates: Phaedo Wisdom and the Soul

Aristotle has a different view on the make-up of the soul. In Aristotle discussion On the Soul he talks about the kinds of souls possessed by different living things such as plants, animals and, beings. Aristotle then goes on describing the substance that makes up the soul, the first is matter which is not this in its own right, the second is form which makes matter this and the third form is the compound of matter and form. Every living body is a substance and the soul is the actuality of the body. The soul

Melinda may also argue that knowledge can justify the existence of the soul. According to Plato,

Plato and Locke have opposite opinions on the matter of innate ideas. Plato argues that the recognition of truth in reality is derived from the "recollection" of truth in the soul. A necessary part of Plato's argument is that "recollection" of Truth depends upon the existence of an immortal soul. Locke, on the other hand, rejects Plato's argument by stating that the recognition of truth is not dependent on "recollection" but is rather "self-evident." In other words, Locke argues that one does not need to "understand" truth to know it or admit of the existence of an immortal soul, for truth according to Locke reveals itself by virtue of its being true. This paper will analyze the arguments of each philosopher and show why I believe Plato to have the better argument on the matter of "recollection" and innate ideas in the soul.

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.

A perpetual conflict emanating throughout all mankind questions the significance of knowledge to human nature, regarding knowledge’s definition, acquisition, branches, and value. Major role models in the foundation of philosophy - specifically, in this essay, Plato and Aristotle - obsess over the significance of knowledge and its importance to and relationship with the development of human beings and their mindsets. Although Plato’s view on knowledge describes the internal predisposed essence of all Forms and the need for a superior being to extract them from the student, Aristotle’s outlook resides as more reliable and realistic due to his beliefs in the premise of knowledge in the sensation and perception, with continuing development in memory, experience, art and science, and, ultimately, true wisdom.

Plato contended that all true knowledge is recollection. He stated that we all have innate knowledge that tells us about the things we experience in our world. This knowledge, Plato believed, was gained when the soul resided in the invisible realm, the realm of The Forms and The Good.

Plato and Aristotle view knowledge and the process whereby it is obtained. They both point out that many epistemological concepts which they believe where knowledge comes from and what it is actually. Most of them have been astonished me in certain ways, but I found that rationalism and "wisdom consists in knowing the cause which made a material thing to be what it is" make the most sense to me regarding the nature of knowledge. As the following, we will discuss about why these two philosophical viewpoints are superior and the others are inferior.