Unpopularity is a topic that has been initiated in Alain de Botton’s book, “The Consolations of Philosophy” many times. First and foremost, unpopularity is defined as “to not be liked by many people”, according to the Merriam Webster dictionary. The topic of unpopularity was mentioned well in the section of “Consolations of Unpopularity” of de Botton’s book. The story behind Socrates’ reason and why he did what he did prompts readers to believe that they can achieve their goals without fear of others. Alain de Botton commences the section by delineating the story of how Socrates became the figure he became. Socrates lived a lifestyle in which he did things that he thought were correct and did not worry much about approval from society. de Botton states, “every society has notions of what one should believe and how one should behave in order to avoid suspicion and unpopularity” (9). In other words, de Botton believes that society has placed views for people to know what is right and what is wrong. People will submit to conformity by behaving in ways that people will view as “acceptable”. …show more content…
Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of what is actually the right way? Whereas some are convinced that society has played a major roll in defining what is acceptable and what is not, others maintained that they should do what they believe is acceptable. de Botton asserts, “the book explained that the Greeks had believe in many gods, gods of love, hunting and war, gods with power over the harvest, fire and sea” (11). The essence of de Botton’s argument is that there are many perspectives and views of what is actually acceptable. There is clearly no right or wrong when it comes to what each individual believes
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.
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
These aspects of their culture have made a significant contribution to their quality of life. Moreover, these topics will be examined in relation to the twelve Olympian gods and their associates. The ancient Greeks practiced a religion that was, in effect, a building block to many ensuing pagan religions. This religion revolved around their reverence for the gods. Essentially, the Greeks worshipped numerous gods, making their religion polytheistic.
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.
In the Chapter Consolations for Unpopularity we learn about Socrates’ beliefs and determinations to show that the status quo isn’t always the right way of doing things. He says as long as a statement can be disproved we are right to doubt it, no matter how many people believe it or for how long they have done so. This made me start to think about how in today’s society people mostly follow what is seen as ‘acceptable.’ When reading I came across a line that read, “what should worry us is not the number of people who oppose us, but how good their reasons are for doing so. We should therefore divert our attention away from the presence of unpopularity to the explanations for it.” (Pg. 29) What this is saying is that the number of people who oppose our ...
Socrates, according to Plato challenged the norms of society by questioning life and having others question it as well. He was labeled of “corrupting the youth” and for not believing in the Athenians gods. “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the young, and of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (The Apology, pp 654) Although, he was cast by being “corrupt”, Socrates had many followers that saw him as a wise man. Socrates trial was made up of thirty jurors, who were later known as “The Thirty.” The “Thirty” really wanted was to silence Socrates, rather than taking his life. However, Socrates did not want to disobey the laws, he did not want to be violated of his right to freedom of speech, nor did he did he want to be undermine his moral position. (The Apology, pp. 647) He stood against injustice acts several times while he was in counsel. “I was the sort...
(37) The problem is that many of the citizens of Athens who wanted Socrates dead, lacked that emotional intelligence and thought highly of themselves. So of course they become defensive when Socrates sheds light on the idea that they may be wrong. As someone who cared most about the improvement of the soul, Socrates would have made a constructive role model to the criminals of Athens, as he would go on saying, “virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue comes money and every other good of man…”(35) Socrates was able to benefit everyone alike as he had human wisdom- something that all the Athenians could relate
... a criminal matter nor a strain on the Athenian society, but a challenge to an oppressive and aristocracy ruling class. Socrates became a symbol of true wisdom and knowledge, a symbol that needed to be disposed of for the elites to remain the power holders in society.
What made Socrates the exception to the rule? Was it because so many people listened to what he had to say? Or because he was so persistent, that even in the face of death he still refused to stop spreading his thought? Either way, if there were others, who showed more disrespect, and outright mockery towards the gods, why were they not punished, what made Socrates so dangerous to the Athenians?
Sophism and Socrates ideologies continue to influence the world today in many facets. Though there was repulsion in the application of thoughts of Sophists and Socrates, manipulation and unfairness seems to be the major born of contention among their views. Question of whether Socrates was a Sophist too have erupted in different platforms. Irrespective of all the analysis and speculations of Sophists’ and Socrates’ philosophies, it remains true that their philosophies not only continue to influence the world, but also span across many topics and portray many elements of both similarities and differences in opinions. This essay particularly narrows down to the Similarities in opinion and differences
Within the duration of this document, I will be discussing the charges laid against Socrates and how he attempted to refute the charges. One of the reasons why Socrates was arrested was because he was being accused of corrupting the minds of the students he taught. I personally feel that it is almost impossible for one person to corrupt the thoughts and feelings of a whole group of people. Improvement comes from the minority and corruption comes from the majority. Socrates is one man (minority).
Socrates is unable to remain silent about his thoughts because “the unexamined life is not worth living”. He even backed up this claim in with the following statement: “Men of Athens, I salute you and hold you dear, but I will obey the god rather than you, and so long as I take breath and am able, I will never cease philosophizing.” It is implied that people should reflect on their beliefs and debate about what they do and do not know, all while seeking out and upholding the values which create a meaningful and well lived
...he Apology he asks a question of his audience, he says that they are living in a society “which is the greatest and most famous in the world” and wonders “are you not ashamed that you give your attention to acquiring as much money as possible, and similarly with your reputation and honour, and give no attention or thought to truth and understanding and the perfection of your soul?” It is quite remarkable how much it sounds as though it is a direct address to American society, as it exists today. Socrates believed that the inner self or soul was of the utmost importance. He taught that the quest for money and honor leads people to forget the importance of their souls, which he said requires cultivation and care. His demand to take care of one’s inner self, and be not satisfied with anything less than the truth, remains as significant now, as it was when he was alive.
The ancient words of Socrates have laid the foundation for many modern-day ideals, laws, and forms of government. However, though he has many wise words to offer, there appear to be fundamental inconsistencies between some of his discussions and allegories. The words of Socrates in the Symposium and Republic were written by his mentee, Plato, who uses Socrates’ persona to reflect his own thoughts (though, not necessarily all of his proper beliefs). Therefore, the apparent inconsistencies between Plato’s works may be reconciled when the disposition of Socrates in these texts is considered: he is a character. Socrates and other characters are purely vehicles of Plato’s thought-provoking persuasion. In the Symposium, the interlocutors give praise to everything good about desire; the nature and purpose of love (eros) is explored and, in the end, a broader concept of desire is reached. In the Republic, however, justice (dikaiosune) and reason are the main objectives while desire appears to be something that should be suppressed in a just man. Both dialogues aim to discover the nature of these concepts, their link to Virtue, and man’s relationship to the good and the beautiful. I will argue that the attitudes of these characters may seem to vary between dialogues, but the overall message of the pieces remains consistent and, moreover, that they supplement one another.
When Socrates was brought to trial for the corruption of the city’s youth he knew he had done nothing wrong. He had lived his life as it should be lead, and did what he ne...