In this sense, the just man can be also considered as a thief. At that point, Polemarchus renounces of this idea of justice as being theft or craft, but he emphasizes on it as doing good to a friend and bad to an enemy. Socrates wouldn’t have asked for a better opportunity to raise the definition of a friend and an enemy. In trying to define these terms, Socrates introduces indirectly that there are circumstances that indicate wheter our actions are just or not, for example, lying can be in several circumstances just or
In Meno, Meno and Socrates are discussing Virtue and attempting to develop a definition of what Virtue is. At one point in the dialogue Meno states that Virtue is “desiring fine things and being able to acquire them” Baird and Kaufmann, 156). In their attempts to analyze this definition they discuss evil, what it is and whether or not it is ever desired by people. I will use this discussion to answer the beginning question from Plato’s perspective and show that, through Socrates and Meno, Plato demonstrates that evil is a form of ignorance, and as we know from Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, ignorance is one of the most damaging states a human can exist in. In On Free Will, Augustine comes to a very similar conclusion.
As related earlier, catharsis aims to elicit pity and fear in order to purge such emotions from the audience. As such, the tragic hero’s punishment must not be considered entirely deserved otherwise it would be seen as justice and the cathartic effect would not take place. Instead, the punishment must be somewhat excessive so that pities the tragic hero for his misfortune as well as fears for their own lives after seeing the world is not always fair. However, in order to confirm that Oedipus’ punishment exceeds his crime, both must be identified. Oedipus’ crime is quite simply his attempt to escape his own fate.
In each event, that what is wrong can be detected by how the outcomes of alleged wrong movements can be. If alleged wrong action has a harmful consequence on one’s life, the act should not be fulfilled. For instance, if someone punched you twice in the stomach, you must not punch him in exchange for this wrong action and you ought to enlighten him/her. Because punching is a wrong act due to the fact that it harms. Moreover, Socrates believes that he comes to an agreement with the city, that is, an implicit agreement or a social
This context also covers the topic of just and unjust, which happens in front of Pheidippides. In regards to the topic of just versus unjust, Socrates doesn’t necessarily say which side he picks, he just leaves it up to the students to decide which path they choose to follow. By doing this Aristophane showcases Socrates’ ability to establish a sense of aporia, which is a state of puzzlement or being puzzled. This is a consistent characteristic of Socrates because this is achieved in Euthyphro when he questions the
Therefore, since Athens has a part to play in corrupting Socrates’s life as well as his mistaken visual of the truth, Socrates must understand that by obeying the state, he has done injustice to his soul for it will not be in true harmony. Furthermore he will be doing an injustice to the state because Plato would have established that, objectively, Athens laws are unjust and even if Socrates thinks that they are just, it is only because Socrates has been corrupted by
Humiliation may have been deserved, as he humiliated his peers, ruined their fun, and treated them poorly on a regular basis. He did not deserve to be locked up and tricked to the extent that he was, he is rude and unkind but he is only human and most of his issues probably stem from a sense of insecurity at his lack of status and ability to get on with his peers. He has an inflated self worth but it seems as though it could be a façade. He deserves retribution for the way he treats the people around him but the trick played on him by the people he bothers is
Everyone has their own values, and is hoped that these values can be held when their integrity is challenged. In Shakespeare’s, Othello, characters experience self corruption and decay that ultimately alters their moral and logical values for the worse, which is due to their emotional responses, when troubling situations are presented. Characters, such as Othello and Desdemona, have allowed these emotions of jealousy and love to affect their own self perceptions of morality and logic. A depiction of moral decay or corruption can be seen through Othello’s confrontations throughout the story. He has allowed his feelings of jealousy to blind him so much, that he has come up with unnecessary justifications for killing the woman he loves.
Benjamin Franklin and Jonathan Edward were both philosopher and had similar views in terms of informing people the right way to live in order to be successful and get salvation by reforming their mind in their life. As Jonathan Edward says in the “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” “ Sin is the ruin and misery of the soul; it is destructive in its nature; and if God should leave it without restraints, there would need nothing else to make the soul perfectly miserable” (432). That implies, if
The hurt that Hindley feels is clearly understood, but sympathy for Hindley is only temporary because it is still his own fault for his predicaments. Hindley’s loss of Wuthering Heights to Heathcliff and his mysterious death reflect how revenge does not make anything better, only worse. The child, treated unfairly, can only bide its time, accumulating a store of vengeful fantasies and desires for retribution and justice as in the mind of Heathcliff and in