The Role of Dialouge
In The Ethics of Authenticity Charles Taylor makes a radical claim that we only become capable of understanding ourselves and defining our identity through dialogue. He says humans are fundamentally dialogical creatures (29) and cannot develop into individuals without interaction with others. Through dialogue we are able to exchange our ideas with others and construct our values and beliefs from bits and pieces we hear. This is how we become authentic humans. Authenticity is being true to yourself. It almost seems paradoxal; to discover your individuality you must converse with others. Charles Taylor also believes that some lives are better than others, based on how authentically a life is lived. In modern society, where soft relativism prevails, this view is often seen as unacceptable. Current thought seems to be that lives are all equal; in fact the choices we face have neither a right nor a wrong answer. Charles Taylor believes this causes people to become self absorbed, and can bring about a loss of meaning in their lives.
Socrates is also a believer in the value of dialogue. In fact all of his teachings are in the form of a conversation. Through dialogue Socrates can challenge the idea of those he talks to. The challenging of ideas is the most important part of dialogue because it forces you to defend your ideas, and therefore realize what exactly it is that you believe. If you approach a philosophical conversation with an open mind, conflict can either strengthen your belief, or cause you to modify your former beliefs to something that works better for you.
Oedipus is given ample opportunity to engage in dialogue. However, when Oedipus talks to others, he only listens to what he wants to hear. When Teiresias tries to tell him the truth, he becomes angry and says, "And who has taught you the truth? Not your profession surely." (25). Instead of trying to understand what Teiresias is saying, he immediately discards it because it does not fit into his plan to pull Thebes out of the plague. He is unwilling to engage in true dialogue, because he is afraid that it might cause him to question his own beliefs. Oedipus is not living his life authentically; he is not being true to himself. In his arrogance he believes himself greater than he really is, and this prevents him from truly seeking his own individuality.
Similarly to Oedipus’s response to Teiresias, Oedipus once again will not take the advice of those who know the truth. He ignores his wife who has this knew knowledge and his arrogance and pride lead him to push her commentary aside and pursue more information. This is a continuing pattern for Oedipus. He rejects any words that do not fit his
I believe that by Socrates complying with he sentence order by Athenians, he got his point across and he stood up for what he believe in and he never back down.
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.
"How dreadful knowledge of truth can be when there is no help in truth! I knew this well but did not act on it; else I should not have come" (Line 101). Tiresias admits his grief to Oedipus and tells him that it is his job to tell the truth. Although Oedipus cannot see past reality, Tiresias, who is literally blind, sees the truth in Oedipus’s life. "But I say you, with both eyes, are blind: you cannot see the wretchedness of your life..." (196). As Oedipus argues with Tiresias, he says in return, “You blame my temper but you do not see your own that lives within you; it is me you chide” (369-72).
Oedipus’s persistence is seen even from the beginning of Oedipus Rex. “The first instance in which [it] is revealed is when he first encounters Teiresias, a seer who refuses to divulge the truth he admits to knowing.” Teiresias begs to Oedipus, “let me go home” . “However, Oedipus doesn't want anything withheld from him, and he gradually becomes more heated in his wheedling…” Teiresias even plainly states Oedipus’s flaw, “Why persist in asking? You will not persuade me.” Despite this comment, eventually “the prophet spits out the truth in disgust, and, cursing, takes his leave.” This is the first case in which Oedipus’s persistence causes him trouble.
Oedipus was filled with hubris, and this angered the gods. He believed he was more than a man. These beliefs caused him to ignore the limits he had in being a man. Oedipus needed to look at Teiresias as a window to his future. Oedipus believed that he could take on the Sphinx and rid Thebes of the plague. The plague was the god’s example of the fault of human condition.
Oedipus had a very short temper. Oedipus did not want to hear what Tiresias had to say after he begged him to tell him all that he knew. "Am I to listen to such things from him! May you be damned! Get out of here at once! Turn around and go!" (Literature, Oedipus the King, Ln. 434-436, page 1085) Oedipus went into a rage when Tiresias told him about the evils that Oedipus was living with.
Imagine a person who goes to a job interview. The interviewer’s first question may be an easy one-- “what is your name?” The response to such a simple question is automatic, requiring no thought. Now imagine that the second question asked is “who are you, and how do you know?” The interviewee may grapple for the right words to say and sheepishly list a variety of personality traits, which he is supposedly endowed with because his friends “told him so.” A person is able to know who his true self is not by outward confirmation from others, but through self-observation, taking note of how he acts when he is alone, untainted by the influences of family members and friends. In a society which judges people harshly, it is unsurprising that people act differently alone than when in the company of others; thus, to be a genuine person is to act the way one feels inwardly despite external influences such as peer pressure, which causes one to act in a way which is not consistent with his or her values and beliefs. Being authentic is a special breed itself, as it requires courage to live by how one truly feels and not to live by the opinions of others. Through the changing of core beliefs and numbing of emotions, some people choose to live
Another quote that shows Oedipus’s arrogance and egotism is when he communicates sincere concern for his people and their circumstances, yet immediately turns their attention away from the gods and onto himself by proclaiming “Here I am myself—you all know me, the world knows my name: I am Oedipus.” The quote expresses the needy attention he wants and needs to seeks from the people of Thebes. The poet’s use of
First off, Teiresias is hinting at the fact that Oedipus’ relationship with Jocasta is a “sinful union” (Sophocles 36). Oedipus is unable to make the connection between what Teiresias is saying and his own prophecy. Oedipus does not want to acknowledge the fact that he has committed a sin and he avoids learning the truth by remaining ignorant of his true parentage. On top of this, when Teiresias outright tells Oedipus that “the killer [he is] seeking is [himself]” (Sophocles 36). Oedipus refuses to believe this and instead accuses Teiresias of lying and plotting against him. Oedipus, as a known intelligent character, should have listened to Teiresias, who is known for being a wise man; instead, Oedipus puts the blame on Teiresias. Teiresias then goes on to foreshadow that the “taunts” (Sophocles 36) Oedipus is throwing at him will “someday [be] cast at [him]” (Sophocles 36). Oedipus does not take the warning of Teiresias seriously instead he continues to insult Teiresias. Oedipus’ inability to face the truth will result in him being banned and blinding himself for his ignorance. Similarly, Jocasta attempts to prevent Oedipus from gaining knowledge by explaining that “[i]t makes no difference now” (Sophocles 55) and to “[f]orget” (Sophocles 55) what has been told to him. Jocasta not only tries to stop Oedipus from learning the truth, she also tries to stop herself from verifying the truth, this later results in her unfortunate suicide. Also, Jocasta’s ignorance and inability to discover Oedipus’ true past causes her to commit incest, a major sin. Jocasta and Oedipus committing this sin then result in the God’s punishing Thebes. Showing that, ignorance leads to
Throughout the play, Oedipus believes he sees the truth. When acting upon the prophecy, he is certain he is preventing its assertions. However, because his life has been shrouded in lies, his actions can only lead him in the opposite direction, towards his inevitable fate. When speaking to Teiresias, the blind seer, Oedipus accuses him of lying and not having the knowledge he claims to attain. “Night, endless night, holds you in her keeping, so that you can never hurt me or any man who sees the sun” (Sophocles, 122)....
To begin with, Oedipus is his own tragedy since his actions and decisions are the reasons why he was not able to thoroughly see his mistakes. Sir Tyrone Guthrie places Oedipus in the middle of the town to begin the interrogation of finding the murderer of King Laius so the city can be unwind of its plague. Sir Tyrone Guthrie does this on purpose so the audience and the servants around him can see the foolish mistakes their great King achieves. Tiresias, the blind prophet who can see the past, present, and future, speaks to Oedipus, since Tiresias has the ability to only see the truth. Even though the audience can see that Oedipus is not taking any consideration of the prophet’s words when Tiresias directly yells to him that Oedipus is the “murderer [he] [seeks],” the ignorant side of Oe...
Oedipus accuses Teiresias in each play of withholding critical information. Both characters make similar decisions to attempt to withdraw themselves from the situation. Their motives, however, are distinctly different. Understanding these motives points paradoxically toward the individual fundamental differences between characters as well as their eventual thematic similarities. Sophocles' Teiresias is a reluctant prophet. He is in awe of the truth because he is powerless to change it. Teiresias does not own the truth; it was never his to possess. Instead, he exists as a passive agent, an intermediary, between present and future, gods and humanity. Because the truth is brutal, cruel, and possibly sometimes excessive and unjust even...
Socrates accomplishes this through controlling the interlocutor through leading them to agree on a series of premises to demonstrate the contradiction within the interlocutors’ responses. He will almost always ask his interlocutor to define a term or virtue in question. This is followed by delving deeper into the logical consistency of the discussion. The interlocutor contributes to the flow and outcome by allowing Socrates to lead the conversation and use his method of investigation. In Laches, Lysimachus and Melesias wish to know who should educate their children and in what subject. Socrates quickly shifts the conversation from choosing whom to teach the children to considering the qualifications of Laches and Nicias. He requests Nicias and Laches to define courage and then finds flaws in their definition through a series of premises that lead to a contradiction in their statements. For instance, Nicias believes that courage is “knowledge of the grounds of fear and hope” and with that logic would agree that “a lion and a stag, a bull and a monkey are all equally courageous by nature” (Laches 196d-e). Nicias replies that, in reality, this is not the case, showing that Socrates has found an error in Nicias’ definition. By being the questioner, Socrates does not have to preach about his own doctrine but the focus is on refuting the other person. Socrates places the interlocutors in a position of defense as they have to protect their arguments against Socrates’ questioning. The interlocutors are rarely given an opportunity to ask Socrates questions or request an answer to the ones he
Philosophy can be defined as the pursuit of wisdom or the love of knowledge. Socrates, as one of the most well-known of the early philosophers, epitomizes the idea of a pursuer of wisdom as he travels about Athens searching for the true meaning of the word. Throughout Plato’s early writings, he and Socrates search for meanings of previously undefined concepts, such as truth, wisdom, and beauty. As Socrates is often used as a mouthpiece for Plato’s ideas about the world, one cannot be sure that they had the same agenda, but it seems as though they would both agree that dialogue was the best way to go about obtaining the definitions they sought. If two people begin on common ground in a conversation, as Socrates often tries to do, they are far more likely to be able to civilly come to a conclusion about a particular topic, or at least further their original concept.