Who Was One Of The Most Important? Pre Socratic Philosopher?

In most philosophy and in modern science, there exists the idea that there is no such thing as “nothing”. Modern science cannot explain the existence of anything before or after the physical universe, although proving that there was a time when the universe did not exist (about 13.7 billion years ago). The All, in the Hermetic tradition, is the title given to that “nothing”. The All is everything that was, and everything that will be – it cannot grow because it is already everything, and cannot be lessened because that would imply something reaching beyond The All. Now, back to the cave. To understand the origin of our universe, one needs to grasp what I learned from Plato’s cave; that all things have a substantial reality. That being the case, it is only fair that the universe should have a substantial reality

A crucial concept required for this discussion is the concept of “emptiness”. Emptiness is the notion that nothing has an underlying essence or inherent existence. Therefore, even though things may appear to

Yet if there was nothing at one time, then there was nothing that could be, and

In The Phaedo, one of Socrates’ aims is to convince us that our souls existed prior to our birth. In making this argument, he claims that we had some knowledge of imperceptible things prior to our birth, and that through “recollection” of our pre-birth knowledge of imperceptible things, we are able to perceive certain qualities of things like equality beginning after our birth. Socrates’ argument begins by defining recollection as when someone ‘perceives one thing, knows that thing, and also thinks of another thing of which the knowledge is not the same but different’ (73c). Socrates asks that we consider our perception of equal things, such as sticks and sticks or stones and stones. He claims there is “Equal itself” or the Form of Equality, which is unmistakably equal at all times (74a). Once the Form of Equality, is agreed upon, Socrates claims that “as long as the sight of one thing makes you think of another, whether it be similar or dissimilar,” you are recollecting (74d). Socrates then concludes that because we are able to make judgments about equal things through perception, we must have knowledge of the Form of Equality prior to making these judgments about equal and unequal things, and we are able to recognize these things as equal or unequal by recalling the form of equality. Socrates’ argument begins with the idea that our souls were acquainted with all forms prior to our births, and he outlines an argument that illustrates his Theory of Recollection, concluding

For, in fact, what is man in nature? A Nothing in comparison with the Infinite, an All in comparison with the Nothing, a mean between Nothing and Everything. Since he is infinitely removed from

It is said that in the beginning, there was Chaos, the silent and dark abyss. Out of Chaos, all things came into existence. According to the Theogony of Hesiod, Chaos created the

Parmenides of Elea once presented the expression ex nihilo nihil fit, which translates to nothing comes from nothing for one of his many theses. The Cosmological Argument, an argument of the posteriori category, meaning that it requires data based on past experiences, argues for the existence of God with this type of expression at its core. By attempting to prove how the universe must be influenced by an independent being that has godlike qualities, cosmological arguments suggest that it is rational to believe in an omnipotent being and its accountability of creating the universe.

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 and Niccolo Machiavelli were both incredibly influential in the development of Western philosophical thought, specifically in relation to ethics in politics. Machiavelli’s text The Prince, written during a period of political turmoil in Italy, outlines the necessary steps a prince must take to obtain both power and authority. Plato’s The Last Days of Socrates assesses the moral and ethical guidelines an ideal leader should possess through the beliefs and teachings of Socrates. While both texts had similar objectives, their opinions were quite contradictory. Socrates would have found Machiavelli’s concept of the “Prince”, and the government he creates to be both unethical and fundamentally flawed. Socrates places higher value on the maintenance and creation of justice, while Machiavelli stresses the process of obtaining and preserving power, unethical or not. Due to their differences in their ideas of virtue, knowledge, and justice it can be concluded that Socrates would not be supportive of the government in which The Prince proposes.

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

The ancient Greek storyteller Aesop tells us a deep yet simple quote. We use kindness everyday and not have any unused. Even if you never used any kindness before or if it's a small thing, none of it is ever wasted. One example of kindness would be donating to charity. Take time out your day to make your community a better place and help find cures to brutal diseases like cancer or start a bake sale and give food for the homeless. If you can’t donate why not help the elderly

Each of them is itself one, but because they manifest themselves everywhere in association with actions, bodies, and one another, each of them appears to be many.' "

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).

Throughout the history of human civilization, logic has played an important role in the development of thought and the innovation of new technological discoveries. Without logic, there would be no reasonable or coherent way of thinking. Furthermore, there would be no person capable of coding a program today. Two important logicians who have contributed a great amount to the study of logic are Aristotle and Gottlob Frege.

“On this way there are signs exceedingly many—that being ungenerated it is also imperishable, whole and of a single kind and unshaken and complete. Nor was it ever nor will it be, since it is now, all together one, continuous. For what birth will you seek for it? How and from where did it grow? I will not permit you to say or to think that it grew from what is not; for it is not to be said or thought that it is not. What necessity would have stirred it up to grow later rather than earlier, beginning from nothing? Thus it must either fully be or not” (38).