More handpicked essays just for you.
How social media impacts communication
The impact of social media on human communication
The effects of social media on communication
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A lot of things have changed since the days of Athens in more ways than one. The laws, the way we travel, prepare our food, even speak! You name it, it's changed. In today's society a philosopher might be a little more well received considering that intellectual thinking isn't as rigid as it once was. Society has changed drastically since the early years of its beginnings in Athens. Social media has changed the way people interact and share ideas with one another as well. Although not all people are open-minded to new ways of thinking, I am positive there are tons more that would be willing to listen now than they were during Socrates life back in the past years during his time in athens. Socrates came from a very rigid place back in Athens. It would be easy for him to approach someone and to have them get highly offended by the information he was sharing and searching for with others. In today’s world that is just as likely to happen, but it could also be a complete turn around to a certain degree. The odds of Socrates coming across someone who was truly interested in his ideas are very high if he were to aim towards the right crowd …show more content…
In today’s world people express their opinion way too easily, but it is not always an intellectual one. I think he would enjoy the new world a lot more, because it would be easier for him to find more open minded souls to have conversations with an gain lots of different knowledge from lots of different people. If society was ran today how it once was people would be getting executed left from right for voicing what they think; rather than having a good argument where one person walks away with more information than they previously had. For once, Socrates would finally be able to go about his day in a manner where he truly does receive the information he was searching for without worry about the
One would expect Socrates to win against his non-philosophical interlocutors. However, this is not the case. The more the conversations proceed, the more they are infiltrated by anger and misunderstanding, the more one is under the impression that Socrates may well silence his interlocutors but he hardly persuades them. His last interlocutor, Callicles, not only is not persuaded by him, but at one point even refuses to talk to Socrates and leaves him with the choice between abandoning the discussion altogether and performing a monologue.
Throughout all the years, he never could find anyone as wise as himself, and all he did was make enemies searching. These enemies are now his accusers, and they accuse him of spreading evil doctrines, corrupting the youth, and not believing in the Gods. Throughout the speech, Socrates continues to shoot down every accuser and it is evident that he has done no wrong. Eventually, one of his accusers states that he must be doing something strange and that he wouldnt be that famous if he were like other men. Socrates did not live a very public life unlike most people at that time. His thoughts of being virteous had more to do with examining yourself and becoming a better person and in that way, you benifit society. He did not believe Athens to be virtuos at all, and that they relied on materail things and reputation rather than finding happiness by searching for it deep within
Socrates spent his life wandering the streets of Athens questioning the citizens he encountered about their ideas and ideals. Because he questioned the ideas of the elders, and because some of his acquaintances had warred against Athens he was not liked by city powers, who brought him to trial"
This quote can be used to argue what kind things he would say to our society by providing an example of what his beliefs are. He is saying that once we can only become philosophers we will be able to stop indulging ourselves with our senses and only use them when necessary. Socrates point view of philosophy is when one wants to acquire prudence and irrefutable truth, which was discussed in a classroom community among classmates, simply when wants continuously want to learn and can never be satisfied with what they know. By learning, what Socrates means is our soul 's recollecting knowledge that body hinders the soul from remembering. This is seen in Meno where Socrates shows Meno how a boy figuring out the answers to a question is actually recollecting the knowledge instead of learning something new. He would make a statement about our education system and what we currently see as knowledge what was we should see as knowledge. The way we should learn by his definition would be to have classroom discussions sessions as agreed upon by critical think by my classmates and myself in a philosophy course. Socrates would tell us how we would need to focus on recollecting and focus on feeding our soul instead of our bodies, how we would need to make major changes such as our use of technology for only necessary uses and not merely for mindless entertainment much like how we all use laptops, phones, and the
Socrates lived such a private life that it lead to the most important revelation of his entire life. He would go about his life doing nothing but self-examination. In examining his life so strenuously others would come to him to be taught, or to have their children be taught by Socrates. They would offer him money and he would refuse. They would do whatever they could to learn anything Socrates had to teach. What they did not know is that Socrates was not teaching anyone he was simply going about his usual life and people just happened to learn from it. This was also why Socrates was put on trial. He was brought up on two charges, one of impiety and the other of corrupting the youth. These two charges set the course for the last month of his life.
Socrates was philosophizing in order to make people recognize this. Maybe they did not want to be challenged, but Socrates persisted and this persistence caused him to become beloved to some, yet hated by others. His contribution to Athens was to evoke thought, and although he did this well, it would become his poison, quite literally. Regardless, the story of the Euthyphro is one of the classic examples of how Socrates was making his name and awakening people’s minds to the thoughts that they did not think to have. Euthyphro’s conversation with Socrates was only one of many and I believe it is safe to say that the frustration on the subject’s behalf was not an isolated
I totally agree that Socrates found it important to research about life’s morality and not just think the same way others do. That is a way of proving the knowledge of men. Ones sitting quiet in the corner usually have more knowledge than others that talk so much about what they know. Many men with a high position in life do not always have the most knowledge.
When I think of a philosopher, I think of something that gets people to ask questions and think. This is exactly what Socrates did for the people of Athens. He is accused of doing wrong when he is just trying to help advance society. Another thing that makes him a great philosopher is the fact that he sticks to his morals throughout. He has the ability to escape prison, but he knows that would go against all of his teachings.
He went about doing that by questioning people. Socrates realized that he truly knew nothing, of importance. So he tried to seek the truth. To be able to do this he had an open mind, and told his followers they should also have open minds. This is why Socrates was falsely accused of a culture that was both strict and hypocritical.
Socrates was a revolutionary thinker. He brought new ideas and processes of thought to Athenian society and his work still has its place in the world today. However during his time, his ideas were not always thought of as a good thing. Many viewed him as a corrupting influence on other people and accused him of forcing his ideas upon others. Perhaps most frequently the center of controversy was his thoughts on theocracy and piety as seen in the Plato’s Euthyphro. Socrates also appears at the butt end of Aristophanes’ comedy Clouds, where he is satirically ridiculed and seemingly corrupting the youth of Athens in his school, the Thinkery. Although virtually completely seen as a positive influence now, in ancient times, Socrates may have done more harm than good for his society.
Socrates was the first of the three great philosophers. Before devoting his life to his teachings and philosophies, he was a stonemason and also served as a soldier of some distinction during the Peloponnesian war. He never wrote any of his teachings down, and he preferred to speak about his beliefs and philosophies. He also involved himself with the political workings of Athens. He spent most of his life in discussion with young aristocratic men, unrelentingly questioning their blind confidence in popular opinion, but he never offered them any outlined abstract teaching. He merely conversed and questioned their beliefs. Also, unlike other Sophists of the time, he refused to accept pay for his teachings.
Throughout the readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito I have found that Socrates was not a normal philosopher. It is the philosopher's intention to question everything, but Socrates' approach was different then most other philosophers. From one side of the road, Socrates can be seen as an insensitive, arrogant man. He did indeed undermine the laws so they fit his ideals, leave his family, and disregard the people's values. On the other side he can be seen as an ingenious man who questioned what many thought was the unquestionable. As he can be criticized for disregarding the many's ideals he can also be applauded for rising above the daily ways of popular thought. He questioned the laws that he thought were wrong and, to his death, never backed down in what he believed in. People may see that as stupidity or as heroism, the beauty of it is that either way people saw it, Socrates wouldn't care.
It takes one person to begin expanding a thought, eventually dilating over a city, gaining power through perceived power. This is why Socrates would be able to eventually benefit everyone, those indifferent to philosophy, criminals, and even those who do not like him. Socrates, through his knowledge of self, was able to understand others. He was emotionally intelligent, and this enabled him to live as a “gadfly,” speaking out of curiosity and asking honest questions. For someone who possesses this emotional intelligence, a conversation with Socrates should not have been an issue-people such as Crito, Nicostratus, and Plato who he calls out during his speech.
Socrates was a Greek philosopher who lived from 469-399 B.C.E. Socrates believed that Philosophy was primarily a social activity, which in fact he made use of quite often. He would find himself roaming the streets of Athens questioning the youth or just anyone who would give him the chance to talk to them. Furthermore, Socrates questions drove people absolutely insane, until the point of absolute consternation if you will. He tried proving a point which is quoted “Look, here we are, two ignorant men, yet two, men who desire to know. I am willing to pursue the question seriously if you are” (Palmer, 31).Ultimately, this meant that the person Socrates was questioning actually didn’t know anything at all, just as well as Socrates himself, so which for the both of them would remain in search of the truth.
Socrates was an insightful philosopher who had an opinion on all the basic fundamental questions. He had very strong beliefs that he willed others into believing through questioning and proving ignorance in others beliefs. He has particular views on every fundamental question and particular views on how people should live their lives. He says God has spoken to him about philosophy and says that it is his destiny and it is his calling in life. Through philosophy he searches for answers to the fundamental questions and gains wisdom and knowledge. The fundamental question of condition is the question of what, if anything, has gone wrong with the world? The question of solution is what can fix the problem? Then there is Death which asks what happens