From beginning to end, Aristotle’s captivating reading, Crito, is composed with of the three rhetorical devices: logos, pathos, and ethos. Consequentialy, one of the existent rhetorical devices is more robust than the others. Whilst logos and pathos spawn well-founded emotional and logical enticement, the most indisputable rhetorical device used throughout the story is ethos.Undoubtably, ethos is the utmost evident rhetorical device in the story, Crito, as Socrates honorably stood by his morals, even after Crito tried to prompt the man to abandon them; demonstrating his thickness of character, integrity, and honesty. For most, a wise conclusion would not end in welcoming death with the chance to escape an unjust conviction; yet, in Socrates case it did. By definition, logos is the use of documentation, facts, or inference to create a concrete argument; and it is present during each debate betwixt Crito and Socrates.
The theories presented seem to have already been established by Socrates long before the day of his death. The Argument from Opposites comes across as an acknowledgment of a natural balance in nature and does not prove we have a soul, only that humans have been living and dying for a very long time. The Theory of Recollection could easily be seen as proof of varying intelligence, which is why some people have a better natural grasp of certain concepts than others, they are just smarter. The Theory of Forms leaves one questioning each existences originality, I think humans are capable of achieving perfection in this
He stands by everything he has said. Pericles was respected and liked in Athenian society, and Socrates was neither respected nor liked. Socrates questioned everything about the way people lived their lives and their beliefs. Pericles believed that Athens was the best and the way that they lived was the right way and there should be no other way of life. With the way that Pericles and Socrates lived they would clearly have different views of life.
This is a recorded content going back to around the fourth century B.C. It is fundamentally an exchange recorded by Plato of a discussion between his coach, Socrates, and a man portrayed by Socrates as 'the shrewdest man alive ', Protagoras. The examination rotates for the most part on the most proficient method to characterize uprightness. This discussion happens at the place of Callias, who was facilitating Protagoras while he is in the city. Protagoras was a critic, an instructor of sorts, and was held in high respects by the Greek Philosophers ' general public.
Greek philosophers were generally involved in many areas, while modern scientist are known for developing specific entities in which they were specialized in, In Socrates’ and Pythagoras’ time, their society was not accepting of any views that diverged from the beliefs of the sophists and the belief in a polytheistic religious system. Socrates was condemned for his method mostly because he didn 't agree with the polytheistic views, but also because the method it didn 't align with the values and teachings already present, but yet it is still used today. Pythagoras complied with the religious values of his time, so his philosophies were generally accepted because they could be clearly justified by logic. In ancient times, there was generally much resistance towards new ideas. Philosophers ' ideas that did not conform to their standards were cast away, and even persecuted.
While Socrates never answered the former of these questions definitively, by focusing on the latter, Socrates hypothesized that virtue cannot be taught but is learned through divine inspiration and cannot be handed down. And although Plato’s final hypothesis on the definition of virtue, that virtue is the power of attaining goodness with justice, is true, it is not complete. In addition, his conclusion about the teachability of virtue is mistaken. In accordance with Plato’s definition, virtue is excellence, but in contrast to Plato’s view, virtue can be taught through the Scriptures. Although Socrates never stated his personal hypothesis on the definition of virtue, instead focusing more on whether virtue can be taught, he considered multiple definitions of virtue presented by Meno, all of which he derided as problematic.
The Gorgias did not centralize its purpose or validity around the construct of an afterlife. If Plato were to remove the concluding story entirely, it would not be the downfall of Socrates’ argument, nor with Plato keeping the section did it undermine his argument if an afterlife were not factual. Clearly by the topics discussed above, the idea of an afterlife was not a major concern for that of the argument. Throughout a majority of the dialogue this idea was not a blip on the radar of any of the men in the conversation. By the time Socrates makes his declaration of the afterlife, his initial argument has concluded.
It really proves the saying, “history repeats itself.” I find these readings to be of great fascination, as it shows me that humans of that time were no less morally conscience or intelligent than we are today. Furthermore, I always thought that dialectic discussion and debate came about during the Age of Enlightenment. Hopefully, there is a section in our textbook about the Age of Enlightenment philosophers because it would be interesting to know how much they were influenced by men like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. With my limited knowledge of the Age of Enlightenment philosophers, I would have to think that it was quite a lot considering how similar many of the ideas about morality and justice are when compared
Plato arranges value in the domain of being and sets up its embodiment without any relation to the presence of things in true-life. Nevertheless, as I already mentioned, social utopias tend to be despotic and totalitarian. In our days, only extreme groups of far-right and far-left character are prone in such autarchic regimes, which are accommodated by a unitarian character. If Plato is considered by most as the father of political philosophy in the West, he might be considered the father of coherent utopian thought in western philosophy as well. With Plato utopia takes its first form and is established in the field of philosophy.
In Plato’s Republic, the philosopher kings are arguably the most important element of Plato’s idea for a utopian society, Kallipolis Philosopher kings are the ruling class of Kallipolis, rising to power after years of intensive education in all fields of study, but specifically in philosophy and politics. These years of education and training to become philosopher kings results in a virtuous and selfless ruling class that is dedicated to protecting the happiness of the community as a whole. Philosopher kings value truth and knowledge above all else, making them free from the temptations that entice those of lesser moral character, and thus establishing the philosopher kings as the only ones who can be trusted to rule. The idea of a ruling class such as the philosopher kings gives insight as to the ideals valued by Greek society and its thoughts pertaining to leadership. Greek society placed high merit