More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare And Contrast Plato And Socrates
Comparisons between plato and socrates
Comparisons between plato and socrates
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Compare And Contrast Plato And Socrates
Anish Yonjan Philosophy 1301-73426 Prof. Marcos Arandia Feb. 19, 2017 Explain and evaluate Socrates' claim in the Apology that "the unexamined life is not worth living for a human being," and briefly analyze and discuss the particular method he uses to discover the truth (i.e., dialectics or the Socratic Method), using at least two examples from Plato's Euthyphro and/or Apology. Do you agree that a human being cannot live a fully satisfying life if he or she remains ignorant, like the slavish prisoners in Plato's cave? Why or why not? In the Plato’s Apology, Socrates claims that the “unexamined life is not worth living for a human being”.
Socrates compares himself as a gadfly, because it represents him fulfilling Heraclitus 's challenge of not living one 's life as a sleepwalker. A sleepwalker is a person who is not stimulated to think critically or reflect upon life. Heraclitus warned "One ought not talk or act as if he were asleep" meaning Just doing day to day tasks is not enough for one 's intellectual development or to enrich one 's life. A gadfly is defined as an annoying, biting insect that attaches itself to a horse who needs arousing. Socrates wanted to arouse individuals to make the mind awake and alert.
In Plato’s, The Republic, Book I, Socrates tries to prove to Thrasymachus “whether just people also live better and are happier than unjust ones” (352d). He argues that everything has a predisposed proficiency at a function, and that this functions are performed well by the peculiar virtue and badly by means of its vice (353a-353d) . The point of this paper is to present Socrates argument and evaluate it to the best of my ability. This argument can be categorized as an inductive generalization. Socrates states that the function of anything is what it alone can do or what it does best.
(Modus Ponens) Socrates is like Jesus: both of them did not believe in gods of that time and both were just speaking to society, but in those speeches were hidden the great idea. Like Jesus, Socrates chose to die for his idea, not surrender norms of the society. Both men had their students, who recorded their words during their life or after death. (Analogy) Rejection of civic life in democratic
Socrates should remain in prison after evaluating Critos arguments although Socrates’s were stronger. I’ll begin with Crito’s argument and what makes them strong, and what doesn’t. Next, I’ll focus on Socrates arguments and what makes them good and what makes them weak, mainly his focus that living with a bad soul isn’t worth living when you have a bad soul. Crito gives Socrates three arguments.
To be just or to be served an injustice and obey, this is the very basis of the philosophical dialogue between Socrates and Crito. The Crito begins as one of Socrates’ wealthy friends, Crito, offers Socrates a path to freedom—to escape from Athens. Through the ensuing dialogue, Socrates examines, as a man who is bound by principles of justice, whether an unjust verdict should be responded to with injustice. In the dialogue between Socrates and Crito, Socrates outlines his main arguments and principles that prevent him from escaping under such circumstances. Socrates is under guard when Crito visits him, thus the plan to escape.
While Socrates is in jail, awaiting his execution (after being convicted for corrupting the youth and not believing in the Athenian gods), his friend Crito visits him in an attempt to convince Socrates to escape. Crito along with some friends and strangers are willing to bribe the right people to facilitate Socrates’ escape from prison; however, Socrates refuses, opting instead to face his fate since he believes escaping would be wrong. As a result, Crito accuses Socrates of being selfish for choosing to die, claiming that he would be robbing his children of a father, putting his friends’ reputations at risk, and choosing the easy way out. The definition of selfish is a person, action, or motive lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly
The passage written by Plato goes in to great detail of how Socrates defends his position and how Glaucon defends his position as well but then leaves the reader to formulate his own opinion. With both Socrates’ position and as well as Glaucons, it is clear to see that Glaucon has the more rational reasoning within the debate of who’s happier, the just or unjust person. In Plato’s writing, The Republic, Glaucon challenge Socrates to describe justice and to give reasoning to why acting justly should be believed to be in anyone's self-interest. Glaucon claims that all goods can be distributed into three classes:
On multiple occasions they require clarification or an elaboration from Socrates. It is not just on concepts they are unable understand, but they often disagree with him or require a whole additional metaphor in order to understand the comparison Socrates is attempting to make. In one instance Socrates makes a statement regarding courage in the city and it makes very little sense, so Glaucon informs Socrates that he did “not completely understand what [he] said” and asks if Socrates would “mind repeating it?” (429c). Of course, Socrates furthers the explanation for Glaucon, but it takes an additional thirty-seven lines and a metaphor about dying wool for Glaucon to understand and accept this definition.
Next, Socrates purposes the argument from recollection to prove the immortality of the soul. He states that firstly, we recognize that the equal things we perceive are not perfectly equal (Phaedo, 74b). In other words, things that appear to be equal may fact not to be. Therefore, we have in our minds an idea of perfect equality (Phaedo, 74c); equal things and Equal itself are not the same. Next, there is such a thing as the Equal itself (Phaedo, 74c).
Socrates is quoted as stating, “An unexamined life is a life not worth living” (38 a). Socrates was a founding figure of western philosophy, and a stable for many ideas. He lived in Athens, Greece teaching his students, like Plato, questioning politics, ethical choices, and many other things in Greek society. In the Trial and death of Socrates: Four Dialogues by Plato, it explores the abstract questioning Socrates had towards many of the normal social properties, which led to his trial, resulting in his death. The most important aspects discussed in the dialogues is the questioning of what is pious and impious, what it means to be wise, and good life.
Aristotle, on the other hand, had a much more positive outlook on the applicability of his political theory. In many ways, his ideal ideology would look much like Plato’s, although with a more guided and empirical approach. Aristotle, like Plato, argued that the state was not only necessary, but essential to the happiness of its people, because the state was the only means by which the city could achieve happiness. According to Aristotle, “the best good is apparently something complete” and likewise, that “happiness more than anything else seems complete without qualification” (Nicomachean Ethics, 205) and “everyone aims at living well and at happiness” (Politics, 315). Furthermore, he argued that “happiness is an activity of the soul expressing
This is a recorded content going back to around the fourth century B.C. It is fundamentally an exchange recorded by Plato of a discussion between his coach, Socrates, and a man portrayed by Socrates as 'the shrewdest man alive ', Protagoras. The examination rotates for the most part on the most proficient method to characterize uprightness. This discussion happens at the place of Callias, who was facilitating Protagoras while he is in the city. Protagoras was a critic, an instructor of sorts, and was held in high respects by the Greek Philosophers ' general public.
Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.
An insight Socrates offers about the self is that there is a conflict between the soul and the body. The soul, which aspires for goodness and pure knowledge, truth, and courage, is weighed down by the body, which is concerned with the less divine and pure pleasures of the earth. It desires objects of lust, sex, and greed, which are physical. These desires chain down the soul, and prevent it from moving towards ultimate goodness and truth after the death of the physical body. As the soul leaves the body, it moves on to another body.
