Plato’s definition of good is not the same as the good we define. By good, Plato means what someone most wants, the purpose of everything and what makes you good and want to be good. Plato believed everything exists for a purpose – that is its good. For Plato, good is eudaimonia and this is what we should be aiming for. It contains virtue, freedom, philosophy, happiness, beauty and courage.
The ultimate goal for Descartes in the meditations is to prove the existence of the external world. Descartes assumes that God exists and is not a deceiver. This being granted can Descartes explain the existence of a world outside of Descartes' mind? Descartes talks about the idea of a triangle being perceived by the mind and how it relates to the outside world even without the knowledge of it. Another point that Descartes makes to further defend the idea of an external world is the concept of a one thousand sided figure.
‘the good life’. Whether an action is deemed to be right or otherwise depends on its net contribution to the attainment of this state of being. The processes in question here include being a just person and fulfilling obligations to those we have relationships with, where doing actions of justice as well as fulfilling one’s obligations to others may or may not lead one closer to the ideal human state depending on the teachings of each philosopher. The three philosophers have different interpretations and different values they place on these virtues. For Socrates, upholding justice leads to this state, while for Epictetus, it is about being in accord with nature.
Plato’s Theory Strengths | Weaknesses | Forms or ideas can possess a more profound and reaching reality than material objects that we can touch or see. | He says “our argument shows that the power and capacity of learning exists in the soul already…” I believe he is mistaken. It is an allegory, a hypothetical situation, an illustration at best. While this illustration might give evidence for what he is talking about, it is by no means a solid argument that an entire metaphysical and epistemological view of the world should be based off of. | We all have innate knowledge of justice e.g everyone seems to have an idea of justice inside them, even if it is not exactly the same for everyone, but this shows it must have come from somewhere plato says with his forms and how our souls remember roughly what the forms are like.
Picard defends Data well by breaking down Dualism into physical and mental properties and then showing the court how these properties were as present in Data as they would be in any sentient being. Picard also demonstrates this by asking Maddox the definition of a sentient being, and after establishing the definition Picard asks Data what he is doing currently and what is at stake. When Data replies we see that he uses the words “I am” and “My”. With this Picard concludes that Data must be self-aware because he referred to himself in his statement. Self-awareness is a mental property which links to Dualism.
Kant wanted to put good will at the very centre of ethics in which he formed the equation GOOD WILL + DUTY = A MORAL ACTION. Good will is the motive that produces our determination to be good people and our practical reason helps us get there ‘good will, then, like a jewel, will shine by its own light, a thing which has its whole value in itself’. Kant’s moral theory looks at evidence and tells you what ought to be done. Reason is universal. However to act morally then we must be capable of exercising freedom or the autonomy of the will .The opposite of this is what Kant did not believe in and this is heteronomy and that is something is right because its satisfies some desire, emotion, goal or obligation.
Opposition also exists within man and his self, separating the mind and the body. Plato believed the world existed as a “reflection of an ideal world existing on some other plane”. On the other hand, Plato and Lao-Tze agreed on several different aspects. For one, both thinkers believed leaders should be picked based on their knowledge, i.e., the greatest minds present. Thus, leaders should be enlightened philosophically.
The Cosmological Argument The cosmological argument purses to prove the existence of God. This is on the bounds that the universe has not always been in existence, and in order for it to have been created, then it must have been created by an external cause. This external cause is viewed as being God. This argument is a posteriori argument, as well as giving knowledge, the argument gives inductive explanations and gives conclusions, in which are given on experiences. The cosmological argument was voiced by Aquinas; however he was influenced by Aristotle.
Plato’s view of Knowledge In his dialogue “What is Knowledge” from The Meno, Plato’s main goal is to distinguish between true opinion and actual knowledge. These are two concepts that are very close to each other but are very different also. By exploring Plato’s works, this paper will discuss how true opinion and knowledge can be equally good, but why one should prefer knowledge to true opinion when true opinion will also get similar results. In addition, this paper will also discuss Plato’s theory on how knowledge is different than true opinion in the sense that it requires an extra step to become knowledge from merely a true opinion, and how this theory is connected with Daedalus and his statues of the running man. In “The Meno” the character of Socrates mentions, “correct opinion is no less useful than knowledge” (pg.
He says “a just man won’t differ at all from a just city in respect to the form of justice; rather he’ll be like the city” (435 b). Socrates believes in the forms, pre-existing metaphysical concepts which all earthly concepts are modelled. In Idos, the metaphysical plane on which the forms exist, there is a form for Justice. Because he believes in the existence of clearly defined justice, it is easy for Socrates to make the assumption that a man and a city imbued with the same form are alike. From a modern perspective, this assumption is absurd.