Their aim was to create statues as human-like as possible to be examples of perfection. One such statue is the Riace Warrior. Created by an unknown sculptor, the Riace Warrior is the personification of Athenian culture. The Athenians were unique in their preference for humanism over imperialism. Unfortunately this excluded equality of race or sex.
In a way, it might even be seen as a sort of relativist perspective because the gods could develop their own beliefs and commands and change them accordingly and they must always be right. This is what makes Socrates’ claim so essential, it calls into question the Divine Command Theory and questions the real origin of morality. Human civilizations have been going to the gods for their guidance since the beginning of time, but Socrates’ brings insight that stumps the “smart” Euthyphro. In a certain way, this one question can poke a hole in an individual’s view and traditions of religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It is the spring board for disciplines and studies into religious apologetics, because this question that might seem innocuous at first proves to be incredibly powerful.
These two questions were the main idea of the discussion between Socrates and his friends: Glaucon, Adeimantus, Polemarchus, Cephalus… Socrates asks the question of the definition of justice, each one of the interlocutors answers the question in his own way that, according to Socrates, reflects his own personality. One of the important definitions given was that given by Thrasymachus: he defines justice as the advantage of the stronger. “Now listen, I say that the just is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger. Well why don’t you praise me? But you won’t be willing”.
The art and architecture of the Parthenon and Pantheon were stellar symbols of their countries’ superior status in the world. While both had governments that allowed citizens to vote, the real power in Rome was in the hands of the emperor. That the emperor was considered a god is reflected in the celestial aspects of the Pantheon. However, Greek society was a democracy and the Parthenon’s frieze indicated that all citizens would participate in the governance of their country. Although the two buildings have features in common, the Parthenon was the result of the culture expressing their democratic ideals, while the Pantheon illuminates the ideals of the republic of the Roman Empire.
This becomes evident in “ Apology” written by Plato, where Socrates was brought in charges for corrupting the minds of the youth and not believing in the Gods. Socrates claims that he did not consciously corrupt the youth of Athens, and he gives many reasons why he is not at fault for these actions. In his defense to the jury, he tells them that by looking at the facts, they will see Meletus is accusing him of something that is not true. The way Socrates defends himself is well-thought out and logical. He ask Meletus a serious of questions and Meletus answers, Socrates then moves on to the next question to support his claim.
Aristotle and Locke however, have differing views on how a person accomplishes this. For Aristotle, citizens accomplish this by leaving the state of nature to pursue the chief goods in life. Whereas, for Locke, this is accomplished by creating and watching over a government to ensure protection. Aristotle believed that a citizen can contribute positively to the collective community in a variety of ways. He asserted that the greatest contribution a citizen can make is serving in deliberative and judicial office.
As a conceptual object, there is no real physical form for love. You can’t touch or sense love directly, but you may feel it through an indicator or cognition. Before we have an acute definition for love, intelligent philosophers, thinker, and writers have separate explanations on love itself based on different situations. Socrates, one of the significant philosophers who emphasizes rationalism, uses deductive reasoning to explain that the telos of love is one’s desire. The purpose of loving is to produce good or beauty, the ideal objects that highly promote one’s morality.
Looking at the history of reflection on free will, it can be noticed that such concept was not known in the Ancient Greece. Albeit, Aristotle has shyly discussed about a concept of ‘’choice’’ (proairesis), however it is poorly connected with actual acts, let alone the power of free will. It can be argued that the Greek stoics somehow recognised the possible existence of free will, since they greatly attributed the necessity of defending our inner beliefs and morals, so that the human shall not inherently delve into seeking desires, not worry about them, as well as ignore the circumstances that are not dependant on us. Thus, stoicism attributed to the individual the necessity of being free from all external influences and defending their personal inner sentiments. The development of the concept of free will can be directly attributed and traced back to the late Roman stoicism, especially during the time of Epictetus, whose philosophical teachings and views were written down by one of his students.
In “The Apology,” Socrates talks of his journey to find and discern what wisdom really is. Socrates had an unconventional idea of what wisdom was, compared to today’s definition of wisdom. Socrates also had different views of knowledge than what society believes today. Throughout his journey in “The Apology,” Socrates comes to the conclusion that wisdom is realizing that one knows nothing. In Plato’s “The Apology,” Socrates recounts how he searched and found wisdom.
Even the greatest philosophers like Rousseau and Plato developed their systems of education, which are not perfect. They also can be criticized. Concerning to Plato’s system of education I can say that it is not an appropriate method for raising a child. Plato’s system of education will raise an ideal citizen, but human should be educated for himself. Education is acknowledging ourselves and by acknowledging ourselves we try to understand why exist in this life.