“The Allegory of the Cave” and “Qualities of the Prince” (Authored by Plato and Machiavelli, respectively) have different viewpoints in contrast to one another. Looking at the texts, it seems that Machiavelli would be critical of the views Plato expressed in The Allegory of the Cave for a number of reasons. Plato states that people are inherently good, although good can be “seen only with an effort” (35). Machiavelli, on the flipped side, states that “for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good” (7), suggesting that most people are by nature not good, and that pursuing the act of being good, will only lead to disaster. Therefore, he would likely think that Plato’s ideology is too optimistic, if not ignorant, and that one must have a realist viewpoint to survive this world.
For Aristotle, Plato was a realist and Protagoras was a relativist. Essentially, he regards both theories as equally defective. J.D.G Evans attempts to analyze why Aristotle deems these theories inadequate and what position is left for Aristotle to take if both of the alternatives are defective. Repeatedly, Aristotle begins his accounts by criticizing the “answers of his predecessors” and, while there appears to be legitimate reasons to discredit them, he fails to provide an adequate alternate. The following passage from Eudemian Ethics (1235b 13-18) allows us to better comprehend Aristotle’s impression of philosophy, which in turn leads to a better understanding of how he reviews and resolves the aforementioned problem: We must adopt a line of argument which will both best explain to us the views held about these matters and will resolve the difficulties and contradictions; and we shall achieve this if we show that the conflicting views are held with good reason.
What is Wisdom, Really? In The Apology of Socrates, the way the Athenians sees “human wisdom” and the type of “wisdom” Socrates talks about, proves to be two completely different things, which becomes a problem. In fact, the type of “wisdom” that Socrates possesses is not the “wisdom”, that he has a reputation for by people of Athens. The reputation that Socrates has been given by the people is that he is a “wise man” that actually knows something. Actually, when Socrates talks about “human wisdom”, what he really means is recognizing and admitting one’s ignorance about not knowing, rather than one claiming to know.
The passage, 2c-3, explains in detail, what Socrates is charged for. It simply comes down to the competition of what the government wants younger men to know and what old wise men want the younger men to know. As Socrates and Euthyphro continue discussing, page 4 – d, I find that it’s OK to be laughed at as long as you do not teach your own ways to make people like yourself. Socrates feels that he is accused for making others like him because he wants to teach.
Secondly, Euthyphro suggests that “piety is what is dear to the gods, and impiety is that which is not dear to them” (Plato, 2008). Socrates feels this answer is closer to his expectation of what piety is. However, he points out that the gods often quarrel, so what is agreeable to one might not be agreeable to all. Euthpyro
. . for that which is hateful to the gods has been shown to be also pleasing and dear to them.” From here on, Euthyphro seems to become increasingly challenged to defend his concept of piety. Adler/Vasil suggest that Plato shows that Euthyphro is not as wise as he gives himself credit for, and therefore his reasoning is flawed. They say: “We shall argue that the bad reasoning that Plato attributes to Euthyphro in the eponymous dialogue is to be explained by defects in character.
It can be hard to believe something that you’re so new to. Why believe that knowledge when you’re already in your comfort zone. Being introduced to something new can be scary, “And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he not have a pain in his eyes which will make him turn away to take and take in the objects of vision which he can see, and which he will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which are now being shown to him?” (Platos, Page 2). This is a scary feeling what do you believe? Well of course most people would believe what their comfortable with.
In Plato’s Apology, Socrates is given the opportunity to defend himself against charges for corrupting the youth and impiety. He chooses to cross examine Meletus, an accuser of his, in order to display the absurdity of the court’s claims against him. Unfortunately, Meletus falls victim to Socrates’ dialectical inquiry and is unable to answer in a way that is beneficial to his argument. Meletus could have done a better job responding to Socrates’ questions if he were to unveil the fallacies prevalent in Socrates’ explanation for his wrongdoings. Socrates retorts Meletus’ statement that he corrupts the youth by first discrediting Meletus.
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.
David Tamrazi Professor Nichols English 104 23 April 2012 Arguments and Effectiveness The effectiveness of an essay is based on the reader’s willingness to believe it. Controversial essays, no matter how effective, fail to be effective when readers do not wish to believe it. The matter of effectiveness is based on opinion, and the standard idea of what should be an effective essay. Furthermore, the effectiveness of an essay is based on who writes the essay. Barack Obama can write an amateur essay, yet readers are more prone to believing it than if it were written by someone unknown.