The “good life” to Socrates is being able to ask questions and acquire knowledge, based on the understanding that he “knows nothing.” Socrates advices Crito to only listen to the opinions of those who understand the difference between “just” and “unjust” because only then will he understand why it would be wrong of Socrates to escape or “willingly do wrong”. Although Socrates was prosecuted unjustly, Socrates must abide by his beliefs and face his punishment, in doing so, he would be doing something “good and
As for Voltaire, the best way to achieve happiness is to follow your heart. Both Voltaire and Socrates agree upon the fact that knowledge brings wisdom and success. But Voltaire suggested that knowledge brings unhappiness, whereas Socrates thinks that knowledge is everything and that knowledge is the key to everything. As for me my view about philosophy is that knowledge is important if it is true knowledge. Philosophy is fascinating as there is only a certain much that we know about things that it is hard to what is true and what is
In The Republic, Socrates has some interesting views on the idea of what it means to be just and what a perfect and just society would look like. To me, some of his ideas made sense, while others seemed ridiculous. Despite some of Socrates’s faulty ideas, the way he uses reasoning and examples to justify his thoughts is noteworthy. Socrates seems to place wisdom, justice, and goodness above all other virtues, and he repeatedly comes back to these themes when he describes the perfect state and people who should live in it. First of all, I appreciated the way Plato wrote down Socrates’s words and thoughts.
I believe that Socrates may be guilty of trying to corrupt the young people because he did encourage them to ask questions and not follow others’ blindly. Socrates did not overtly challenge the gods and their word, however he did encourage people, especially young people, to make their own opinions based on various information, and, in the end, follow their own thoughts. I feel as though the types of questions Socrates was asking were not harmful because he was only testing Euthyphros on how he knew all of his facts, and wanted proof of his opinions. Therefore, I believe people should question, should analyze information, and should form their own judgments rather than listening to someone else’s opinion and blindly following that
When a rhetorician abuses the power of rhetoric, his teacher should not be blamed because he teaches the knowledge to be used correctly. When Gorgias is finished, Socrates asks him whether he wants to continue. He does this because he feels Gorgias has made some claims that are not
The world we live in is filled with crime, evil, and injustice, but do people have the desire to do bad things knowing that they are bad, or do they do them thinking that they are good? In this essay, I examine Socrates argument, found in Plato’s Meno, that no one knowingly desires bad things. If Socrates were right, it would mean that it is impossible for someone to perform a bad action based on their desire for that bad thing. Instead, all bad desires result from the ignorance of the person performing the action in falsely believing that the action is good. Though Socrates presents a compelling argument, I argue that it is possible for someone to act badly, all the while knowing that what they desire is bad.
Personally, I think this to be true. What my beliefs of love are may not be the same beliefs of others. In my eyes, my love can be a good love, and in others, my love could be an obsessive love that leads to badness. This is why for Socrates, a lover searches for what is good for them, because each person has their own meaning of love; this is called the ladder of love. Love seeks wisdom and one cannot desire wisdom if we find it unnecessary.
Both Plato and Descartes believe in Rationalism, and they also fear uncertainty. These two philosophers want to answer the same basic question, “What is the difference between opinion and certainty” (Palmer 39). Plato believes that all
However, Socrates’ goal was not to gather evidence to make it seem as if he was putting all his efforts in saving his life. His goal was to make the court understand his beliefs prove which type of knowledge is worth knowing. When talking about the wise man he examined, Socrates said, “Neither of us actually knows what Beauty and Goodness are, but he thinks he knows, even though he doesn’t; whereas I neither know nor think I know.” This shows that Socrates proved he was more wise than the titled wise man because instead of faking the knowledge, that wasn’t too important, he accepted that he did not know which would result in him then seeking for
He believed that and act of friendliness was an act of weakness, and that those who preserved their liberty do so because they are strong. Thucydides did not believe in excellence and virtue, he was in contrast with Plato’s views; therefore, his ethical way of thinking was in accordance to that of the gods, “Our opinion of the gods and our knowledge of men lead us to conclude that it is general and necessary law of nature to rule wherever we can” () Anyhow, because of the constant danger that he had to endure during the war, his idea of the good human life was to survive by being able to control one’s mind in all circumstances, to protect oneself and loved ones, and to be generous with friends. However, to be as terrible as one could be against enemies. For him, making money, fame, and prestige was more important than the improvement of the soul. Thucydides justice depends on power; strong men will do what they have the power to do, and the weak will accept what they have to accept.
After analyzing Critos arguments and Socrates response, Socrates decision to stay was the right choice because of his knowledge about what is just and his loyalty to the Laws. Though Crito’s attempt at persuading Socrates to escape to another country was solid, it would not have had a beneficial outcome for Socrates life. It would lead to many negative implications like Socrates being a bad influence for children and youth. Therefore, he would not be able to fulfill Gods command to teach. Overall, the points Socrates makes within his response to Crito shows that escaping Athens is not what would be beneficial for him, his sons and the Laws.
Aristotle, according to me, has a rather satisfactory counter-argument to Glaucon’s opinions in the Ring of Gyges Story. It is true that what is good for one might not be necessarily good for another and if doing something evil makes one feel good then that particular individual is essentially very immoral. An individual who is not as deep into immorality as this particular person would feel a level of guilt if they did something evil. Glaucon’s proposal that good people lack the good things evil behavior brings is, therefore, nullified. Secondly, it makes a lot of sense to think of ethics in relation to character as compared to actions or even intentions.
The Pre-Socratics used rational thought to explain their world; if nature causes it, nature can cure it. They tried to explain natural occurrences without the use of religion. The Sophists suspected that Absolute Truths and Ideals are relative to the individual; they are not set by a higher power, but we decide them ourselves with our own human ideas and experiences. This idea seems to put a lot of power in our hands. Socrates, the father of philosophy, used the Socratic Method to teach; he asked questions, allowing students to use their own prior knowledge to form answers, looking within to find the truth.
Each one has expressed the importance of Aristotle’s view of leadership and opposing the way man has been conditioned to accept knowledge through science and reasoning. Levine and Boaks state that “the broadly Aristotelian account… demonstrates that leadership can and should be conceived of as a master virtue that, correctly understood, serves human flourishing” (2013). Keeping in mind that Aristotle’s Responsibility and the Primary Virtues of Character (Sachs, 2002) and Lewis’ The Abolition of Man (1944), in order to be a leader one must be ethically just, or what you will come to find as moral development. This is the concern of goodness and goodwill for your companions and leading because it is a beautiful, chosen virtue (Ethics, III, 1117a, 10). This courageous leadership translates to Lewis’ preservation of Man, not because you are conditioning man, but because you will make sacrifices in order for man to survive.