Reverse Outline: Paragraph 1: Introduction -Plato believed relying on ones senses to view the world was far more inferior than the ideal world which he believed was a more spiritual realm. Paragraph 2: -How Plato thought people lived their lives, he thought we didn’t use all of our senses. Paragraph 3: -How one would feel as he freed his mind to knew controversial ideas Paragraph 4: -What the enlightened one wanted to share his new ideas what would people think of him. Paragraph 5: Conclusion -Plato says that men need to seek knowledge beyond their senses. Post Draft Analysis: 1.
For his entire life Socrates had done nothing other than examining his own life hence so he can improve himself as a human being and become wiser than he already was. Being not able to teach the entire city the knowledge which he possessed was what put Socrates to death. He helped others find meaning in their lives and pursue happiness. Never once was it his initial intension to “corrupt” anyone. It was Socrates being a good man and trying to reach out to others in making them succeed in life which is what cost Socrates own life in the long run.
He is only worried about the attainable future and ideals, while Plato is more focused about the enlightenment of man, and the understanding of knowledge. Machiavelli would indeed react poorly to Plato’s ideas in “The Allegory of the Cave” and would reject his “utopian” vision in favor of his own more “realist” vision. Plato, on the other hand would reject Machiavelli's viewpoints just as
Because of this, I believe Socrates was reserved to his fate and Prince Ajura reserved himself to battle. If we lived under the strict tenants of Socrates’ daimonion you could imagine that everything you did was on the “right” path until a divine feeling told you otherwise, while Krishna advises that when we give up our ego and materialism we can walk the realm of the divine. How one ultimately decides to live their lives is up to them, but these ancient figures were certainly believed they were moved by something
Part 2 Plato and Tradition and Belief Q.1) Socrates explains that Athenians lack wisdom, hence if asked that question they will laugh at him. To even 'think' the question amongst the Athenian is wisdom, and to know where it comes from, is another. Then Socrates explains that he is from amongst those unfortunate and incapable people who lack in understanding, they can't even 'think' the question, let alone have the answer. So he stands in no position to have an answer, for he does not know what 'virtue' itself is, therefore he knows nothing about it. Socrates teaches his student his notion on 'virtue' by discussing in drawing attention more to the definition, rather than the actual act itself.
Validity in the Charges of Impiety against Socrates Impiety is commonly defined as a lack of proper concern for the obligations owed to public religious observation. Plato’s Apology consists of a speech made by Socrates, a well-known philosopher, in defense of his life and conduct at his trail. Socrates was accused of being impious through accusations such as corrupting the youth of Athens, not recognizing the gods that are recognized by the state, as well as inventing new deities. The question then becomes, with these accusations in mind, are the charges of impiety against Socrates valid? This question is not easy to answer, and is in fact, quite complex.
First of all, his program does not call for elected leaders or dictators. It has philosophers taking up office as a stern necessity (Plato 457). A philosopher would make a better leader than a normal person because he is not blind to the truth. In his essay, Plato compared normal, unenlightened people to the men that were tied up in the cave (Plato 454). He compared philosophers to someone who had been set free, and could see the truth (Plato 455).
While Socrates arguments may be sound in his opinion, I'm not sure if I agree with them. Just because of the good laws of the state benefited Socrates and helped him in his upbringing, it doesn't mean that he has to remain completely loyal to them for his entire life. His main point about never returning an unjust act with another makes sense to a degree, but only if you agree with his view that the soul is the only thing that matters and not the body. While I understand that point, I don' think every unjust act ruins the soul. Some acts such as telling a white lie in some situations are
One famous philosopher is Socrates. He believed that all knowledge was found within (Document 1). “The unexamined life is not worth living.” By this quote he means if one reasons and learns she or she is more likely to have a better life and be more cautious with decisions. On the other hand, the Socrates Method was created by Socrates. In this method, it used a question-and-answer format to lead pupils to see things for themselves by using their own reasons.
Thucydides, Greek historian as well as a participant, writes of The Peloponnesian War and offers insight into the Athenians thoughts on why they feel it appropriate to ignore what others consider to be just or right. The Athenians believe that mere strength and power automatically grants them the authority to do as they wish and qualifies those actions as justice; and likewise those who are weaker are left no alternative than to endure what is dealt them (Newton). It is imperative to the Athenians that their subjects never think them weak, so when the Melians offered to maintain a neutral position, in order to avoid becoming involved in the ongoing dispute between the Athenian empire and the Spartan led Peloponnesian League; the Athenian’s response was an absolute no. Justice, in this case, was seen as something that was called for by the Melians, the weaker of two parties, only as a vehicle for self-preservation, and nothing more.