The power of Socrates' technique is that it forces him to investigate many of his centrally held beliefs simultaneously with the person he is communicating; any questions that arise from his audience, or possible objections to his line of reasoning, must be addressed. This capacity is necessarily lacking when it is placed upon paper because any questions or objections that might be evoked in the reader inevitably go unanswered. For example, when Socrates argues, "So one may say this about everything; all other human activities depend on the soul, and those of the soul itself depend on wisdom if they are to be good. According to this argument the beneficial would be wisdom, and we say that virtue is beneficial?" Meno merely replies, "Certainly." (Meno, 89a). The issue here is that readers, viewing this line of reasoning from a differing perspective, could easily raise a number of questions that Socrates, in his discussion with Meno, is not forced to consider. First, Socrates' reliance upon the soul to lead into the discussion of virtue could be attacked upon the assertion that insufficient evidence exists to contend that there are such things as souls. Plato believes that souls must exist because they explain the competing inclinations people can possess; Socrates' base desires may indicate to him that drinking the hemlock is undesirable, but the higher capacities of his soul direct him otherwise. Meno and Crito fail to sufficiently question this line of reasoning, but a reader might ask Socrates...
Second, a reader could also take a different point-of-view regarding the elevated status of wisdom and knowledge. A Christian might contend that virtue is singularly based upon faith in God, and that any further investigations into the workings of the world are fundamentally irrelevant. However, Socrates is necessarily unable to account for these ideas because he has been bound by Plato to static logic.
He points out that Filmer's essay had been written before Cromwell's victory over Charles I, and that the attitude towards government in general and the monarchy specifically had greatly changed. The way he describes the unique circumstance in England, too, especially in regards to the situation of religion, makes it clear that Locke's thoughts could really only have been possible in a given environment. This notion seems initially repugnant
Our key clue in this passage is the reference to Dionysia, the festival in honor of Dionysus, God of Wine and Pleasure. Instead of philosophical study, this festival is held in the Spring for 6 days of plays, tragedies, feats, and wine. Dionysus, as the inspirer of madness and ecstasy, is hardly a recommendation for a true philosopher/king' instead, the preoccupation focuses on the sensualist who, in their own type
Many have underlined the importance of the various techniques that he used, mixing painting with writing, collage and adding elements which apparently had nothing in common with the rest of the composition. I believe that the technique itself is extremely important for the construction of meaning. In Basquiat's works, the meaning is to be found hiding behind various layers. Although the scenes are often realistic (familiar street imagery), the message
Philosophy While there is plenty to criticize in the work of Descartes, Locke, and Hume, one cannot justifiably claim that Jose Vasconcelos criticisms of traditional Western views on the nature of knowledge apply to these theorists if only because Vasconcelos' criticisms do not really apply to anything, as his criticisms are largely based on straw men. This is not to say that traditional Western views on the nature of knowledge should
Berkley stated that because the senses were potentially faulty, everyone's sense perceptions and thus everyone's 'truth' was unique and variable. However, most empiricists like Locke believed that some (few) things could be known with certainty, like shape and color, even if other properties of things could not be known. The empiricists come from the Aristotelian rather than the Platonic tradition of philosophy, and had rigorous standards of truth based upon
Yet rather than understand this revelation as something which is freeing, Sartre experienced it as something fearful. He speaks of this freedom as being a form of damnation: Man is condemned to be free... condemned because he has not created himself - and is nevertheless free. Because having once been hurled into the world, he is responsible for everything he does..." (Gaarder, 379-380) If one is free, then one has not
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now