Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ancient greek and roman education
Aristotle's role in education
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ancient greek and roman education
Aristotle's Reform of Paideia
ABSTRACT: Ancient Greek education featured the pedagogical exercise of dialectic, in which a student defended a thesis against rigorous questioning by an instructor. Aristophanes’ Clouds, as well as Plato and Aristotle, criticize the practice for promoting intellectual skepticism, moral cynicism, and an eristic spirit - the desire to win in argument rather than seek the truth. I suggest Aristotle’s logic is meant to reform the practice of dialectic. In the first part of my paper, I defend the thesis that Aristotle’s syllogistic is an art of substantive reasoning against the contemporary view that it is a science of abstract argument forms. First, I show that Aristotle’s exclusive distinction between art and science makes syllogistic a techne for the higher forms of knowledge, science and practical wisdom. Then I argue that Aristotle’s treatment of demonstrative and dialectical syllogisms provides rigorous standards for reasoning in science and public debate. In particular I discuss a) the requirement that a demonstration use verifiable premises whose middle term points out a cause for the predicate applying to the conclusion; b) how his analysis of valid syllogisms with a "wholly or partly false" universal premise applies to dialectical syllogisms.
Aristotle’s logic is a major achievement of Greek paideia, valued and preserved continuously even in dark ages following its commitment to writing. Here I look at its role in reforming Greek education. The mission of Greek paideia, Aristotle argues in the Politics, is to enable members of a community to discuss with each other serious matters of common interest requiring joint decisionmaking and action. A political organization requires "a method of deciding what is demanded by the public interest and what is just in men’s private dealings" (Politics 1328b2ff).(1) He also stresses the essential function of education to promote the intellectual excellence of the student. A distinctive feature of Greek education in Plato’s Academy and Aristotle’s Lyceum was dialectic – an intellectual exercise in which a student took a position on an issue and defended it against rigorous questioning from an instructor or another student. The origin of dialectic is Socrates elenctic mode of inquiry. Socrates asked a willing or unwilling citizen to put forward a definition of an ethical notion, such as justice, then engaged in a cunning and often baffling conversation with him. By a circuitous route the colloquy ended with the student making an admission inconsistent with his original postulate.
The Theaetetus is composed of three main parts, each part being allotted to a different definition of what constitutes as knowledge. While the Theaetetus is focused primarily on how to define knowledge, the arguments faced by Socrates and Theaetetus greatly resemble arguments made by different later theories of knowledge and justification. I will argue in this essay that due to the failure faced by Socrates and Theaetetus in their attempt at defining knowledge, the conclusion that would be best fit for their analysis would be that of skepticism. In doing this I will review the three main theses, the arguments within their exploration that resemble more modern theories of knowledge and justification, and how the reason for the failure of the theories presented in the Theaetetus are strikingly similar to those that cause later theories of epistemology to fail.
Aristotle is undoubtedly a great philosopher whose contributions in many fields, including rhetoric, constitute a foundation of our modern education and research. However, many scholars suggested that his theory was an evolution of a preliminary sophistic rhetoric that developed through the years by a group of travelling teachers who formed this art and played a major role in reinforcing democracy in Greece.
Isocrates was parallel to sophists in a sense they both sold their intellectual prowess for a fee. Comparable to the Sophists, Isocrates assumed that arête could be taught. Isocrates did not see the Sophists use of rhetoric completely Unwarranted. Isocrates viewed the processes of deception as the necessary tool in the deliberative development in Greece society’s academies. During Isocrates lifetime he did not always side with the Sophists views of teaching. Unlike sophists, Isocrates was not a public speaker; Isocrates was seen more as an educator. Isocrates states, “ better afterwards and at the end”. Unlike the Sophists, Isocrates wanted to teach his students rhetoric and ethics so that he could produce more ethical leaders for the future of Greece. Isocrates
Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies. Translated by John Cottingham. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 1996.
ABSTRACT: ‘Paideia’ connotes the handing down and preservation of tradition and culture, even civilization, through education. Plato’s education of philosophers in the Academy is inimical to such an essentially conservative notion. His dialectical method is inherently dynamic and open-ended: not only are such conclusions as are reached in the dialogues subject to further criticism, so are the assumptions on which those conclusions are based. In these and other ways explored in this paper, Plato demonstrates that paideia has no harbor within philosophy.
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for themselves by looking to new divinities.
Dillon, Matthew, and Lynda Garland. Ancient Greece: Social and Historical Documents from Archaic Times to the Death of Socrates. London: Routledge, 1994. No. 7.42, p. 209.
The. The "Aristotle". Home Page English 112 VCCS Litonline. Web. The Web.
In the ancient Greek city-state, a life of contemplation was considered to be the highest form of living. Philosophers were of more importance in the social hierarchy tha...
ABSTRACT: In his writings during the 60s and 70s, Derrida situates his doctrine of différance in the context of a radical critique of the Western philosophical tradition. This critique rests on a scathing criticism of the tradition as logocentric/phallogocentric. Often speaking in a postured, Übermenschean manner, Derrida claimed that his 'new' aporetic philosophy of différance would help bring about the clôture of the Western legacy of logocentrism and phallogocentrism. Although in recent writings he appears to have settled into a more pietistic attitude towards the traditionally Judeo-Christian sense of the sacred and a stronger declamatory acknowledgment of his solidarity with the critical project of the Greek thinkers, many of his readers are still left with a sour taste in their mouths due to the denunciatory and self-ingratiating tone of his earlier writings. In this paper, I address these concerns, arguing that the earlier phallogocentric paradigm underlying Derrida's critique of classical Greek philosophical paideia can be troped as a postmodern, Franco-Euro form of 'Occidentalism'-a 'metanarrative' very similar in intent to the Orientalism critiqued by Said. In Derrida’s earlier writings, it is indeed very difficult to untangle this Occidental metanarrative from the aporetic metaphysics of différance.
The Civil War has been viewed as the unavoidable eruption of a conflict that had been simmering for decades between the industrial North and the agricultural South. Roark et al. (p. 507) speak of the two regions’ respective “labor systems,” which in the eyes of both contemporaries were the most salient evidence of two irreconcilable worldviews. Yet the economies of the two regions were complementary to some extent, in terms of the exchange of goods and capital; the Civil War did not arise because of economic competition between the North and South over markets, for instance. The collision course that led to the Civil War did not have its basis in pure economics as much as in the perceptions of Northerners and Southerners of the economies of the respective regions in political and social terms. The first lens for this was what I call the nation’s ‘charter’—the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the documents spelling out the nation’s core ideology. Despite their inconsistencies, they provided a standard against which the treatment and experience of any or all groups of people residing within the United States could be evaluated (Native Americans, however, did not count). Secondly, these documents had installed a form of government that to a significant degree promised representation of each individual citizen. It was understood that this only possible through aggregation, and so population would be a major source of political power in the United States. This is where economics intersected with politics: the economic system of the North encouraged (albeit for the purposes of exploitation) immigration, whereas that of the South did not. Another layer of the influence of economics in politics was that the prosperity of ...
The majority of the population is unaware of the severe consequences of sleep deprivation, but sleep deprivation is an important issue among adolescent students that parents, students, and school authorities need to be educated on. Schools changing the start time to 8:30 a.m. or later would allow students to more easily obtain the required amount of sleep, combating sleep deprivation and its physical, mental, and academic
In Meditation on First Philosophy, Rene Descartes argues the existence of God and the dualism of the mind and body. There are several conclusions that Descartes makes throughout his Meditations, one being the existence of corporeal things. To reach this conclusion, Descartes must address many issues which overshadow and doubt his knowledge. In his Meditations, Descartes illustrates the origin of his doubts and how God plays a major role in it. He addresses his issues by using a system of logical reasoning which leads him to the conclusion of the existence of corporeal things.
The concept of written laws and their place in government is one of the key points of discussion in the Platonic dialog the Statesman. In this philosophical work, a dialog on the nature of the statesmanship is discussed in order to determine what it is that defines the true statesman from all of those who may lay claim to this title. This dialog employs different methods of dialectic as Plato begins to depart from the Socratic method of argumentation. In this dialog Socrates is replaced as the leader of the discussion by the stranger who engages the young Socrates in a discussion about the statesman. Among the different argumentative methods that are used by Plato in this dialog division and myth play a central role in the development of the arguments put forth by the stranger as he leads the young Socrates along the dialectic path toward the nature of the statesman. The statesman is compared to a shepherd or caretaker of the human “flock.” The conclusion that comes from division says that the statesman is one who: Issues commands (with a science) of his own intellect over the human race. This is the first conclusion that the dialog arrives at via the method of division. The dialog, however, does not end here as the stranger suggests that their definition is still wanting of clarity because there are still some (physicians, farmers, merchants, etc…) who would lay claim to the title of shepherds of humanity. For this reason a new approach to the argument must be undertaken: “then we must begin by a new starting-point and travel by a different road” (Statesman 268 D.)