Tamar Tskhakaia History of Ancient Philosophy Dr. Jamey Findling December 5, 2016 Take Home Final Questions (answer two): 1. Ever since the first Pre-Socratics, philosophers have pondered the fundamental nature of reality. What is the universe ultimately made of? What is most real? Is it something material? Something immaterial? Something ideal? Does reality at its most basic level undergo change and motion? Or is it fixed and eternal? Discuss the views of 3-4 of the figures covered in this course as they relate to questions like these, being sure to include Plato as one of your figures. Many pre-Socratic philosophers have presented with ideas and concepts in which they present one single principle as the cause behind all the things. Here, …show more content…
For this reason, he had many followers during and after his life. One of these followers was Plato, he believed that everything we see is part of the forms. These forms are things that do not change and they are the actual reality behind everything. For Plato, everything that is a material in the world will die that is why the true reality is the reality of the forms because the forms do not die and they are not materials. Plato also presented the theory of recollection, this theory talks about how knowledge is transferred from something that existed before, this knowledge is passed from a higher life in a different world. Also, this theory says that the soul and body are separated from each other in the moment of …show more content…
Since I came to the United States from Georgia, so many things have changed and the sciences explained so many things that we did not know in this short time that I know myself as a person. Personally, I never expected for sciences so answer so many questions, but I believe that they will not be able to explain why we exist, or why our reality is this one, or what is the nature of our existence. Even though there are many and many philosophical theories and scientific theories, I do not believe they will be able to explain in an adequate way how we ended up here. In my point of view, scientific method and philosophical thinking only tend to advance and evolve, but I also believe that a point that they will eventually get that they will not be able to answer the question. I believe this point and question is what is the true nature of reality. This question will be limit that science and philosophers will
Do we create our own reality? Science has concrete evidence, but religion has faith and a God that watches over and acts as an anchor in one’s life. Both science and religion have their merits which one believes in and lives by, but at the same time they both lead to pseudo security and reach for some intangible result that may never come. Similarly, the song “Cat 's in the Cradle” by Harry Chapman reflects a goal that is never reached because of selfish blindness.
From the DNA example, it can be safe to assume that reality today will continue to evolve and expand. Because of this, perceptions of what is unknown will also continue to change over time. Research brings about so many new questions and insights that have people regularly questioning how much of what is known knowledge. Even though a lot is still not certain right now, what is certain is that people are making gradual, but steady progress toward true
The founding of western philosophy can be routed to the philosophers of 5th century Athens. One of the most well known
If the soul cannot possibly begin when a person does, when and where else could the event take place? However, Darrow 's argument is impaired by his incongruous application of the term soul. He mentions that the soul is popularly equated with identity, consciousness and memory, but fails to specify whether it is this notion or another that he uses. (42) Presuming, for the sake of moving forward, that it is this definition he himself adopts, it seems directly in conflict with his belief that the soul would exist outside of the physical body. (43) Darrow 's argument lacks a clear explication of his concept of the soul and, furthermore, it presents a confusing, contradictory account of the soul 's nature and
(This is the first metaphysical question that all Pre Socratics were responding too) Parmenides answer to the metaphysical question was Permanence (change is an illusion) *Discuss Parmenides’ arguments for the conclusion that reality is only one sort of thing which never changes. Notes Parmenides believed that change is an illusion: He proposed that all reality is permanent. (the root word permanence is from Parmenides)
It never changes and yet causes the essential nature of things we perceive in the world. These two perceptions are what Plato describes as the divided line or the journey of self discovery. This progression of the spirit, that can never be reached, becomes the ideal. Plato’s discussions include the involvement of the soul. It is clear, that the main reason for dealing with the soul is to achieve this state
The intelligible world (the world of Forms) that gives the visible world it’s being.” (16) He believed that the soul exists without the body, and that we obtain wisdom from our thoughts and therefore we inherit this at the start of conception. Plato thinking were based on the divine being, who he believes made us, and the objects of the world. He believed, the soul was already formed, as what we see here on earth is just a reflection of what is already made.
Specifically, this notion derives from Plato and his conception
He mentioned that he would worship the idea of asking them questions, discuss his sufferings to others. He believed that he would win either way because he would be living a better life of finding out who is wide and he could continue his search for true and false knowledge. His arguments are valid because after he states his beliefs, he explains why he thinks what he thinks to be true. He created the theory of, “Either death is a state of nothing ness and utter unconsciousness, or, as men say, there is a change and migration of the soul from this world by another” (Plato).
They both share the same sentiments that the soul appears in non-material form and hence it cannot be categorized with the other parts of the body. This explanation shows that they do not differ in all
South African Journal of Philosophy, vol. 28, no. 4, Nov. 2009, pp. 415-432. EBSCOhost, dcccd.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=48656660&site=ehost-live. 3. Plato.
The Hellenistic period saw scholars who concentrated on reason as opposed to the mission for truth. These logicians had a key view for reason as the way to tackling issues, and they prevented the likelihood from claiming achieving truth. Rather, we see philosophers return to a dependence on confidence - tolerating the failure to know truth. The major philosophical gatherings of this period incorporate the Cynics, Epicureans, Stoics, and Skeptics. Not at all like the Hellenic time frame, not very many individual rationalists existed free of these schools of
In Plato’s dialogue Phaedo, he explains the soul and comes to the conclusion that the soul is immortal. Through describing the last hours of Socrates life before his execution, he lays out three arguments in support of the idea that while the body may cease to exist the soul cannot perish. In this paper, I will explicate Socrates three arguments for the immortality of the soul and their objections. Then I will argue on the presupposition of the Law of Conservation of Mass, that the universe, entailing the soul, must be cyclical. The Law of Conservation of Mass
To reach this conclusion, I will be splitting this passage into 3 parts. The first section is Aristotle’s introduction to
Part A- Socrates In thinking of Socrates we must recognize that what we have is four secondhand sources depicting him. That of Plato, Xenophanes, Aristophanes, and Aristotle. All having radically different accounts on Socrates and his views. Out of all them we consider Plato’s to be the most possible account, even though we face a problem of different versions of Socrates.