After discrediting the arguments of Polemarchus and Thrasymachus, Plato instead defines justice as a virtue of both individuals and societies with descriptions of the just man and the just city. In order to accurately identify justice in the human soul, he first builds the just city, where this virtue acts the same except on a grander scale. The just city’s founding principle relies on each person performing his proper function in society, which is divided into three groups: the ruling guardians, the aspiring guardians, and the working class
By escaping from the prison, Socrates understands that he would be committing an evil act which would in no way remedy the wrong that was done to him. Ultimately, Socrates declares that evil must not be overcome with evil but with good. According to Socrates, there are no ways in which wrongdoing is considered “good and honorable.” Socrates lives his life based on the beliefs that to live a good and honorable life one must obey his morals. Escaping from the prison to Socrates represents a dishonorable act because he is going against his teachings and the Laws of Athens.
Jillson did not personally inspect the Property. Any testimony or opinion offered by Mr. Jillson will be based on the observations and opinions of Mr. Prieve; in other words, hearsay is the only basis for Mr. Jillson’s testimony and opinion. If it can show good cause, Defendant is free to use hearsay for the limited purpose of showing the basis for Mr. Jillson’s opinion; however, the observations and testimony from Mr. Prieve are not independently admissible. Therefore, if Defendant seeks to admit Mr. Prieve’s observations and testimony into evidence to support its arguments, then they cannot be introduced through Mr. Jillson.
Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.
The passage written by Plato goes in to great detail of how Socrates defends his position and how Glaucon defends his position as well but then leaves the reader to formulate his own opinion. With both Socrates’ position and as well as Glaucons, it is clear to see that Glaucon has the more rational reasoning within the debate of who’s happier, the just or unjust person. In Plato’s writing, The Republic, Glaucon challenge Socrates to describe justice and to give reasoning to why acting justly should be believed to be in anyone's self-interest. Glaucon claims that all goods can be distributed into three classes:
Perception and reality have a complex relationship. One’s perception is not necessarily ones reality. Roberto Bolaños once said, “People see what they want to see and what people want to see never has anything to do with the truth” (Bolaño). People see what they want to see, whether it is the reality or not. Perception determines one’s reality; paradoxically reality is not determined by perception.
The two philosophers believed strongly in the concept of eudaimonia, which is basic human well-being and goodness (Mastin, 2008). Much of Socrates’ ethics was built around this concept, which led to his ethical code becoming basically objective. Socrates’ ethics were based on something of a knowledge/ignorance dichotomy. He believed that people act immorally but they do not act this way intentionally. Like all animals, Socrates believed that we act in and seek out what is in our best interests.
Socrates in the dialogue Alcibiades written by Plato provides an argument as to why the self is the soul rather than the body. In this dialogue Alcibiades and Socrates get into a discussion on how to cultivate the self which they both mutually agree is the soul, and how to make the soul better by properly taking care of it. One way Socrates describes the relationship between the soul and the body is by analogy of user and instrument, the former being the entity which has the power to affect the latter. In this paper I will explain Socrates’ arguments on why the self is the soul and I will comment on what it means to cultivate it.
There is a reason why the title explicitly states “Ladies” and not women. The kingdom would only be open to ladies who have maintain a moral character. De Pizan clearly states that a women must be wise, moral, and show good behavior.
For instance, when you see a women who is gorgeous, but has a bad attitude you would not say she is ugly you would instead think she still has beauty. Yes, someone’s personality can change but the way you look cannot change the opinion of a person’s beauty. Someone’s beauty stays because a person have these features that cannot go away because that is something a person is born with.
Though he believes that the mind is not a physical entity like the body, he reasons that because the mind is connected to the body, physical actions conducted by the body are attributable to the mind (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/#MinBodHisDua). It seems Plato is indicating that whatever is true for the physical world, must also be true for the mind and therefore, by his logic, jumps the ‘gap’ between physical and mental [437b]. This approach is again reminiscent of the ‘affirming the consequent’ fallacy and gives no real proof as to why the ‘gap’ could have logically been
A true philosopher frees the soul from “association” with the body. The main point of philosophy is to “search for knowledge”. However, our physical senses are not precise enough to distinguish this true knowledge. It feeds us information, but it is the soul that grasps the truth. We our easily deceived by the senses because it prevents and distracts us from seeing “reality” (64e-66).
Overall, I can conclude that these two philosophers have a different perspective about life and ethics. Consequently, It is true that Plato make normative claims. However, his philosophy was not conclusive since continuously changes were made. It is also true that
Plato expresses his personal convictions and beliefs through the dialogues of his teacher, Socrates. Through the dialogue Phaedo, Plato presents four different arguments that he felt supported his idea of the soul being immortal, and that we will live on after the body no longer exists in the physical world. The four arguments that Plato lays out in the Phaedo are the argument of Opposites, Recollection, Affinity, and the final argument of The Forms. These arguments have been analyzed throughout the ages, receiving not only praise, but at times, criticism for seeming insufficient and weak. The strongest arguments for the immortality of the soul presented by Plato are the arguments of Affinity and The Forms.