Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Philosophy of plato
Plato and his works analysis
Philosophy of plato
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Philosophy of plato
While freedom is a wonderful thing, there are other things in this world that can be more important than freedom. During the first third of Christianity and Culture in Dialogue, we read many stories about what other communities besides our own love and what binds them together.. While we have read several texts from many authors, the first author’s was the one that I found the most compelling when talking about what communities love. In Plato’s Crito, Socrates is in jail for corrupting the youth and for not believing in the proper gods. While he is there, his friend comes to offer him a plan of escape to avoid being executed. Everything was set, the life he would soon lead was planned, and the guards were already paid for his escape. However …show more content…
Socrates, counters with “Then should not the good ones be honored and not the bad ones?”(CR 41). In America’s sense of love and what binds them together, without justice everyone’s opinions and prerogatives would be acceptable and freedom would be king. If someone felt it was write to take something from another person because they wanted it, they would have the freedom to do so because that is there opinion. What would be considered right and wrong is a matter of opinion. With complete freedom and freedom alone, we could murder one another’s families, steal and pillage. Soon after, he argues “So then is the body livable for us after it is bad and ruined?” (CR 42). At the worst in this means collapse of society, we cannot truly live in a society after it is ruined and in dismay. With the chaos of complete freedom, it would be hard to imagine thriving or even existing. As is said before, in complete freedom, someone can take whatever they please from another, they can pillage and hurt others. If we see society as a body, if everyone is in dismay because their families have been stolen from or hurt, we could not possibly live in such a society. If we ruin one others things and qualities of living by breaking doors and windows of stores and homes, no one can survive there as it is “bad and ruined” (CR 42). In Socrates’ world, only the opinions and actions of the just would be honored. We would be free to go about whatever we please as long as it was just. Nothing just would include murder or crime, and society would be fine at the bear
In life, people are taught many different ways to do things. Based on their learning, they form diverse perspectives and make knowledgeable decisions with the information given at the time. Some of the decisions can be influenced by values, morals, beliefs, religion, experiences, families and the world in which one lives. All of these factors can support and influence an individual’s principles. In Plato’s Crito, a dialogue is captured between Crito and Socrates about his escape from prison. In his writings, Crito discusses his reasons and thoughts why Socrates should escape his fate. On the flip side, Socrates provides just as many reasons he should stay in prison even though it was unjust.
In his Plato’s Republic Socrates tries to find the values of an ideal city in order to rightly define justice. Although I agree with most of his ideals for the city, there are also many that I disagree with. Some of his ideas that I accept are that women should be able to share the same responsibilities as the men, having women and children in common, , the recognition of honor based on the self rather than heredity, that the best philosophers are useless to the multitudes, and the philosopher / king as a ruler. I disagree with his views on censorship, having assigned positions in society, his views on democracy, and that art cannot be a respectable occupation.
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.
Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship.
Truth be told there is no real justice in Socrates? ?just city?. Servitude of those within his city is crucial to its function. His citizens are, in every aspect, slaves to the functionality of a city that is not truly their own. True justice can not be achieved through slavery and servitude, that which appears to be justice (and all for the sake of appearances) is all that is achieved. Within Socrates? city there is no room for identity, individuality, equality, or freedom, which are the foundations justice was built upon. These foundations are upheld within a proper democracy. In fact, the closest one can experience justice, on a political level, is through democracy.
During the time period of The Republic, the problems and challenges that each community was faced with were all dealt with in a different way. In the world today, a lot of people care about themselves. For many people, the word justice can mean many different things, but because some only look out for themselves, many of these people do not think about everyone else’s role in the world of society. The struggle for justice is still demonstrated in contemporary culture today. One particular concept from Plato’s The Republic, which relates to contemporary culture is this concept of justice. In the beginning of The Republic, Socrates listeners, Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus, ask Socrates whether justice is stronger than injustice, and
In Plato’s Republic Book IV, Socrates sets out to convince Glaucon that a person acts with three different parts of the soul, rather than with the soul as a whole. He does this by presenting Glaucon with a variety of situations in which parts of the soul may conflict with one another, and therefore not acting together. Socrates describes the three parts of the soul as the rational part, or that which makes decisions, the appetitive part, or that which desires, and the spirited part, or that which gets angry (436a).
This paper highlights a few fallacies that surround Socrates’ ideas about acting against unjust government.
According to Crito, there are three major reasons as to why Socrates should escape from the prison. Notably, Crito offers lame self centered excuses for Socrates escape. Indeed, two of the reasons do not stand ground whereas the third concentrates on the victim’s responsibility to his offspring. Crito begins by proposing Socrates escape because failing to do so will doubly hurt him. Firstly, Crito enjoys a warm and cordial friendship with Socrates. Therefore, his execution would distraught and melancholy him. On the other hand, Crito says that the execution of Socrates will harm his reputation. People will tantalize, taunt and jeer him for valuing his monies more than the life of his friend. This is because Crito can bribe Socrates way out of prison. According to Crito, the population will be prejudicial to him un...
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
In this literature review I will discuss both Socrates and Jesus Christ (Jesus). I will compare and distinguish them, by their trial, misdeeds (through the view of society), law, justice and punishment. In addition, I will write about their influence in today’s society and what impact they have made through time. Both Socrates and Jesus had many things in common yet, they we’re different. Both had different religious beliefs. While, Socrates was polytheistic, believing in several gods. Jesus, in the other hand was monotheism, believed in only one God. Both were charged, tried, and executed for their “radical” behavior with society. Overall, both men sacrificed themselves for the possible chance of change.
Plato’s Republic introduces a multitude of important and interesting concepts, of topics ranging from music, to gender equality, to political regime. For this reason, many philosophers and scholars still look back to The Republic in spite of its age. Yet one part that stands out in particular is Plato’s discussion of the soul in the fourth book of the Republic. Not only is this section interesting, but it was also extremely important for all proceeding moral philosophy, as Plato’s definition has been used ever since as a standard since then. Plato’s confabulation on the soul contains three main portions: defining each of the three parts and explanation of their functions, description of the interaction of the parts, and then how the the parts and their interaction motivate action. This essay will investigate each segment, and seek to explain their importance.
In Plato’s “Crito”, Socrates argues that even if one does not agree with the political decision the government makes, it is not right of a citizen to disregard them. Simply, the role one has in its state and society includes following the laws set in place. For example, Socrates claims that he needs to respect the wishes of the government, though he may not see them as just. The justness of the conviction is not what he ponders on, but instead he asks whether or not “it good enough to say that one should not value all the opinions that people hold” (47a). Here he states that the “value” of an opinion does not come from liking it but from respecting it. He values the opinion of the government because they represent the majority of the population and their view points. Socrates explains his view point by suggesting that “if he disobeys the one man and disregards his opinion and commendations” he may experience “some bad effect” (47b). The
The Republic is an examination of the "Good Life"; the harmony reached by applying pure reason and justice. The ideas and arguments of Plato center on the social settings of an ideal republic - those that lead each person to the most perfect possible life for him. Socrates was Plato's early mentor in real life. As a tribute to his teacher, Plato uses Socrates in several of his works and dialogues. Socrates moderates the discussion throughout, as Plato's mouthpiece. Through Socrates' powerful and brilliant questions and explanations on a series of topics, the reader comes to understand what Plato's model society would look like. The basic plan of the Republic is to draw an analogy between the operation of society as a whole and the life of any individual human being. In this paper I will present Plato’s argument that the soul is divides into three parts. I will examine what these parts are, and I will also explain his arguments behind this conclusion. Finally, I will describe how Plato relates the three parts of the soul to a city the different social classes within that city.
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...