Rather, he is tolerant in his discourse on whether he should take Crito 's offer. His contention was making sense of what was the proper act of what is just for this situation. Despite the fact that he was at the bleeding edge of the execution, he needed to make a point that, regardless of whether it was at the cost of his own life, it may not be just to flee from his looming destiny. Crito at first is perplexed and dumbfounded by Socrates and his delay to go into banish. As they speak, Socrates utilizes talk to demonstrate his inward difficulties and discover which way is the correct approach.
First, many of the dialogue's characters state that rhetoric is an art. Thus, Socrates proves through his questioning that one "…should fulfill only those desires which make a man better… and suppose this to be an art. "1 As Callicles agrees, rhetoric seems to be consistent with this definition of an art. However, no one is able to effectively oppose Socrates' point that "…one who is going to be a true rhetorician must first be a just man himself and conversant with the principles of justice…" Plato, p. 83 They are also unable to disprove that Athenian rhetoricians do not need knowledge in order to achieve their aims. In fact, most of the men admit that an art requires inquiry into and knowledge of a field, and that rhetoricians have no need for this in order to be effective.
In addition, the virtue of Plato’s view on the worldly existence is that it is very optimistic. He stresses the importance of education (of the soul), which is a good thing. Also, he wants people to live in harmony with each other. Nevertheless, I’m afraid that people aren’t capable of having so much solidarity by sharing their knowledge with others, after they have escaped the cave. I think that it would result in a group of elite, who have more knowledge than others, and instead of sharing their knowledge, they would keep it to themselves, and inequality will
Just like this, we form and follow the right life principles for ourselves. Apart from moral and intellectual virtues there are also ones we can’t really achieve. Happiness means living in accordance with virtue, so the highest happiness, the best life would mean living in accordance to the highest virtue, the divine one. “But we must not follow those who advise us, being men, to think of human things, and, being mortal, of mortal things, but most, so far as we can make ourselves immortal, and strain every nerve to live in accordance with the best thing in us...”(book 10, chapter 7) Here Aristotle means that the only way to live a best live is to live it like gods do, to seek immortality (not the physical one). Best life can’t be human like, as it is the perfect state, only divine things are worth seeking
Goodness plays a huge role in society and, therefore, attracts a lot of attention of various philosophers and other thinkers. Plato is not an exception; his dialogue “Euthyphro” is concentrated all around this theme. It raises the question whether goodness exists at all; but at the same time, it leaves a reader with no answer. However, through Socrates it could be understood that, whatever can be defined precisely is real, that is why he tries to get an exact definition of goodness from Euthyphro in order to know if goodness is real or it is something impermanent, which is merely claimed by human society. Euthyphro made three attempts to give the definition and prove his religious knowledge.
Among a group of friends Socrates asked the question “What is Justice”. Everyone had their own meaning of what justice truly was. As everyone spoke, Socrates listened but never stated his true meaning of justice. Cephalus definitions of justice mean living up to your legal obligations and being honest () Socrates explained the justice is more than honoring legal obligations. Socrates gave different explanations as to why this statement is not true.
He is portrayed as a honor loving man, who seek knowledge, and by extension, Socrates, not because it will bring him toward the true beauty, but because of the power and the prestige it could bring him. Unsurprisingly, a very large chunk of Alcibiades´s speech about Socrates touch upon how difficult it is for Alcibiades to approach Socrates and force him to open up, By pointing out
Then you might spend the rest of your lives asleep, unless the god, in his compassion for you, were to send you someone else,” (Plato, 46). Socrates claims to know that it is his duty to open the minds of society and incite debates over virtue and the best way to live. If he is taken from the people of Athens, they will suffer in that they will never be awake to the ideologies of what actions make a virtuous person and how to live their lives in ways that are fulfilling and just. Socrates knows that he will not be easy to replace and though some find his teachings to be irritating, with him, the state will be more productive. If he is sentenced to death, he is hopeful that the gods will send another like him to awaken the minds on man and is sure that others, like Plato, will step out of their silence and continue his
Emotionales vs. Rationales We all have our own way of understanding ethics. Socrates and Confucious also had their own way of looking at ethics. Socrates thought that rational knowledge was the decisive factor of human life, which was "acquired through a faculty of reasoning". On the other hand, Confucious thought that kinship love was the decisive factor of human life without leaving out the importance of knowledge and thinking out. They both are very alike but also have their differences with very good reasonings to support their understanding of the decisive factor of human life, although they might lean toward one thing in the end to actually define the deciding factor of human life.
This is particularly clear in the case of Nicias, who is very conscious of his position as someone familiar with Socrates' methods and aims, and quite effectively takes on the 'Socratic role' in the later and more developed arguments in the second main elenchos section of the dialogue, successfully (defecting spirited but ill-directed attacks by Laches). Yet his intellectual self-confidence is not matched by his personal attitude:while recognizing that conversations with Socrates will involve not just answering questions but 'giving an account of how one lives and has lived one's life', (he claims to correct a naive Lysimachus on this point), he goes on to betray his lack of real involvement by describing the process as one he finds 'not pleasant' and one to which he has 'no objection'- an attitude not born out by his later reaction to personal intellectual failure in the final elenchos. Laches, likewise, not only reacts abusively to Nicias' condescending handling of the 'Socrates role', but also displays his own failure to personify endurance in his own behaviour by his rather choleric 'resignations' from the discussion, when the going gets