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.
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
Thrasymachus continues to claim his position but in a modified form of his first argument, after Socrates commented. Being unjust, Thrasymachus thinks, is better than being just because it 's stronger and leads to a more happy life. As before he, he only takes into consideration only the advantages or disadvantages of being just, and he doesn 't discuss what 's justice or how it plays a role in people. Essentially, this definition is an extreme extension of the previous one. The example he gives that a tyrant gets happy through being unjust and controlling draws us back to his first argument saying that ‘ruling being the advantage of the stronger '.
And ultimately Dodds supports his views of Oedipus free will by stating, “The immediate cause of Oedipus’s ruin is not “Fate” of “the gods” – no oracle said that he must discover the truth – and still less does it lies in his own weakness: what causes his ruin is his own strength and courage, his loyalty to Thebes, and his loyalty to the truth. In all this we are to see him as a free agent” (224). What Dodds means is that Oedipus life troubles are not determined by a divine power, no statement confirmed that Oedipus was going to find out the mystery about his past. The devastating truth left Oedipus defenseless, provoking his ruin. According to Dodds, Oedipus’s character and loyalty caused his devastating
Success in its purest form cannot be forced to attain real prosperity, it holds deeper layers than are commonly visible from the surface, and even the best of successes have perils and negative effects. In all of its definitions and whims, success can never be forced, or the value of the achievement is lost. When forced, success can actually go in the reverse direction of the original intent, and human error proves itself a huge flaw in forced success. In Ayn Rand’s Anthem, the society is overall collectivist, made to extinguish any and all individualism by banning the word “I”. Instead, only “we” may be used to discuss self.
How Socrates (2000) mention above that wealth does not create a wise person, but a wisdom creates the good deeds for people. (p.10). Consequently, his meaning about excellence and wealth is correct because excellence is wisdom, justice, and virtue and these things can not be bought for money. Firstly, one of the different types of excellence is a wisdom. Wisdom is not only to have deep knowledge and rests at the experience but also not to realize wise oneself and not to commit amiss things.
This being is what we call “God”” (Leib slide 2). I believe that Ockham’s Razor cannot be pitted against this argument because the Razor already explains that the belief of one supreme being is a lot simpler than the belief of many. Anslem’s argument is trying to prove the existence of “one” supreme being, which already complies with Ockham’s Razor. Aquinas’s Cosmological Argument of God’s existence on the other hand is way too complex. He states that efficient causes are the reason for God’s existence.
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.
Nozick’s principal motivation in posing this question was to disprove the ideals of hedonism (cite). Hedonism is a philosophical term to describe that pleasure is the most important component of human life and should be sought after above all else. Nozick’s results found that most people would not hook up to the machine which acts as an agent in disproving the theories of hedonism. When you break it down, true value appears to be more highly coveted than attaining pleasure. If you spent the majority of your life being deceived by a machine it becomes apparent that your life is devoid of any value in regards to joining fellow humans in the fight to become successful and by doing so improving the lives of all.
According to Stirling (1999), Hume was also a great philosopher. From an epistemological point of view, he questioned the notions of identity that was personal and argued that that there is nothing as ‘self’ which was permanent and progressive. Hume dismissed the belief of casualty and argued that our concepts of case-effect concerns were based on thinking rather than in causal forces
Experience suggests that elements are more comprehensible than complexes. Conceivably, an account may just need to index the elements (like the hundred billion neurons that make up a brain), but knowing elements doesn 't avert miscalculation in their order (as in bad spelling). Socrates successfully exhibits that knowledge is required before one can achieve further knowledge. Socrates establishes the reasons why Theaetetus’ definitions of knowledge are incorrect. Knowledge is not perception because each individual man cannot be the objective measure of everything, and a constant flux contradicts the notion of relativism because one cannot measure something that is in constant flux.