Plato’s theory of forms is unconvincing discuss Plato was a duellist and thus believed that there are two worlds; the material world and the world of ideas/Forms. The world of ideas or Forms is the true reality and the world of appearances is just reflections of world of Forms. Plato believed that our knowledge of the Forms was a priori which means that our souls knew the Forms before it was inside us, therefore we have knowledge prior to experiencing the objects with our senses. Plato believes everyone is born with an intuitive but imperfect understanding of the Forms. He also believes the philosopher is able, through using his intellect, to achieve true knowledge of the abstract Forms without using his senses.
Dissoi Logoi contains opposing arguments that can be argued either way. Its relevance to Rhetoric is that it allows us as readers to see that no argument can be made both bad and good, just and unjust, seemly and shameless. In our own minds we know right versus wrong, but not everyone has the same vision of what is right and what is wrong. What is wrong to one can be right to another and vice versa which appeals to the logos aspect of rhetoric. These notion of contradiction within this writing are rhetoric.
A dream is defined as thoughts, events, and doings that occur during sleep. Reality is defined as the state to which something actually exists. Science has shown the distinction between the two, but I wouldn’t even need to go to science as my defense because the branch of metaphysics in philosophy explains reality as-well. Science has been leaned on so much because it can be actually be proven. Philosophy, much like science provides so many questions, but the only proofs that can be shown with philosophy are assumptions.
In Plato’s The Republic, there exists a struggle between the characters of Socrates and Thrasymachus to find the correct definition of what justice is. Thrasymachus, being a Sophist, expressed his views on justice in a manner of rash sequences whereby Socrates closely followed behind with his own counter-arguments. These counter-arguments effectively exposed weaknesses in Thrasymachus’s argument for justice, and further crippled it entirely. By outlining and explaining Thrasymachus’s views on justice, I will argue two things; first that the weakness in his argument comes from only himself in abandoning his method. Secondly, that justice may be our deep-rooted understanding and ability to identify good from evil.
Gatto compares school to a factory or prison which, generally speaking, are not fun places to be. This style of diction, with Gatto consistently projecting new words of the same connotation suggests his point of view on rejection of this prison-like system. The author appeals to anyone who has or has not questioned the usefulness of education. He appeals to our common sense by asking a simple question: why do we need this? Almost every student has thought the same thing at some point, but lacks the confidence needed to express these feelings to the public.
Socrates is supposed to be in a different | | |position since there is a jury to be convinced, and he believes he has a | | |strong argument since everyone present who is related to those who may have | | |been corrupted is there to defend, not accuse, him. | |Socrates says, “but either I do not corrupt them, or if I corrupt |Socrates admits that there is a chance that he is corrupting the youth, but | |them, I do it involuntarily, so that you are lying in both events.|that would only be if it is happening as an unintended effect. If, in asking | |But if I corrupt them involuntarily, for such involuntary errors |questions to seek out wisdom he has somehow corrupted the young men of | |the law is not to hale people into court, but to take them and |Athens, then he says he should have been told that what he was doing was
Camus’ philosophical beliefs are evident throughout his first work, The Stranger. Meursault, much like Camus, believes that many things in the world just exist, with no explanation or reason. The philosophy that our reality is nonsensical and illogical is a reoccurring motif through the story with Raymond Sintes one point exclaiming “It’s just that I’m here, and you are there and I’m shaking. I can’t help it.” (Camus 37). Meursault is also described as being very dismissive to the outside world, “Looking back on it, I wasn’t unhappy.
“Logos” describes a kind of truth that strives for objectivitythrought the use of critical reason, while “mythos” describes a truth whose purpose is to overcome our subjective sense of separateness from the world and other living beings. Though past societies understood the distinction betwwn the two, Armstrong contends that in our time both skeptics and religious people treat mythos as a set of objective claims. After reading “Homo Religiosus,” the concept of keeping mythos separate from logos is impossible to
Like Einstein said, “imagination is more important than knowledge.” When he was young, teaching in Germany was all done by drill. Questions and discussion in class were discouraged. Einstein realized that real learning for him would have to take place outside school through independent study. He studied geometry by himself and became skeptical of anything that couldn’t be proven with logic – including much of what he had been taught at school, by the German government, and in the Bible. The third reason I picked Albert Einstein was because he used his fame to do good for the world.
Bonsanti appears to be driven by basic humanity and a belief in general equality. While McDaniel’s response to the question is very specific and personally driven; he makes no reference to the basic counter argument or hardcore fact. After reading some of these authors’ other responses to other extremely controversial topics; I was able to see a pattern in their workings which support my conclusions. These authors have very different perceptions which are why I chose their articles. Bonsanti’s perception is very clear and genuinely supported by those who share a common ground.