MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Location: file:///C:/CF3792EF/Plato.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"

 

Tue= sday, February 12, 2008

2:2= 9 PM

    Plato

  1. Socrates
    1. Socrates did not write any of his own speeches down, but Plato did.
    2. Perhaps the character = is only a mouthpiece for Plato in later works.
  2. The method of Dialectic= -
    1. Origins in the everyday- the Socratic Question, a problem posed
    2. Steps (Thesis-Antithes= is):
      1. Question
      2. Answer (Thesis)
      3. Objection (Counter example/Anti-thesis)
      4. Adjusted answer, pres= erve as much of last answer as possible.
      5. New objection<= /li>
      6. And so on, until, hopefully,  an unobjectable answer/thesis.
    1. Aims of the Dialectic
      1. An unobjectable answer/thesis.
    1. Limitations of the dialectic
      1. Limited to the skills and knowledge of those participating.
      2. Can only be applied to certain problem. (Is this black?)
  3. Euthyphro
    1. Background
      1. Socrates and titular character meet while on their= way to court (on different cases), get into conversation on what piety i= s.
      2. Euthyphro's first definition: What he is doing.
      3. Euthyphro postulates = that it is what is loved by the gods, Socrates calls him out on circular thinking.
      4. Possible thesis: Piet= y is not a fundamental (universal) notion, Socrates says it's a part of justice.
      5. Possible thesis: You = cannot simply derive ethics solely from religion.
  4. The Meno
    1. Meno's Question: Can virtue be taught?
    2. The fundamental questi= on: What is virtue?
    3. Meno's definitions and Socrates' response.
      1. Meno:  Vi= rtue is different for who someone  = is
        1. Man helps his friends, hurts his enemies, ensures= his own safety
        2. Woman obeys husband, manages household.
        3. And so on, for child= ren and old people and slaves.
      1. Socrates asks if there is some above-all virtue.
    1. The turning point: The paradox of inquiry
      1. If you don't know something, how do you know you've found it when you have? If you can't know you've found it, why bother asking?
    1. Socrates' attempt to resolve this paradox: the slav= e
      1. Knowledge by recollection (Philosophical truths are innately there, though not necessarily verbalized correctly, pos= its the possibility of a past life. You remember the facts that are ther= e.)
    1. But is virtue itself a form of knowledge?
      1. Virtue is not just a form of knowledge- You can kn= ow about virtue and being virtuous without actually being virtuous
    1. They go into “If virtue is knowledge, it could be taught. Are there teachers of virtue?”
      1. If virtue is something that could be taught, then virtuous people with children should have virtuous children. But the= re are good people with bad children.
      2. Then how are good peo= ple born from bad people?
      3. Decide that virtue is= not simply knowledge.
    1. So how does one become virtuous?
      1. Possibilities: Knowledge? Innate? God?
      2. Socrates gives the possibility of it being a gift or arbitrarily assigned, that one can= be good without being about to quite explain how, but admits this is all iffy, since they couldn't decide what virtue is in the first place.<= /span>
    1. Possible doctrines of the Meno: Divine dispensation, Knowledge by recollection, the pre-existence of the soul.
  5. The Apology
    1. Background
      1. People (Amytus, Meletus, someone else) angry at Socrates embarrassing people bring him to court to try to get him executed on trumped up charges.
      2. Charges: Heresy (poin= ting out inconsistencies in traditional religious belief, his claims to having 'divine voice' that keeps him from doing things). Corruption = of Athen's youth (one of his students was a traitor).
      3. Socrates has no legal representation
    1. Result
      1. Socrates is found guilty (close vote, around 30 vo= te difference), Amytus proposes death penalty.
      2. Socrates proposes free maintenance at the state's expense (jokes), proposes fee of one mina, then thirty mina.
      3. Jury has to choose be= tween these two punishments, so he basically forces them to put him to dea= th.
    1. The portrait of Socrates
  6. The Crito
    1. Background
      1. Socrates has been sentenced to death, Crito wants = to get him out of Athens to save him. Socrates wants to stay.
    1. Crito's argument
      1. You have a wife and kids
      2. Staying to die is a s= ort of approval of his enemies' actions.
      3. Crito is his friend, = and if Crito doesn't get him out of there, but lets him die instead, then it hurts Crito's reputation.
    1. Socrates response and the discussion of justice
      1. Socrates grew up in Athens, if he runs away, they can't live here.
      2. It's Athenian law, he= does not wish to leave.
  7. The Phaedo
    1. Background
      1. Plato not there, is writing this secondhand=
      2. Socrates dismisses wi= fe (who is crying) so he can philosophize.
    1. Death
      1. Tells a friend to follow as soon as possible (says= not to commit suicide, though). Means the philosopher should be ready to die.
      2. Restates part of the apology, says he is not afraid to die.
      3. Believes he will be i= n the company of good men, and thinks that death is merely the soul depart= ing the body.
      4. Physical pleasures are secondary to the mental ones. Separate yourself from the body in preparation.
      5. Do not contemplate beautiful things, but beauty itself.
      6. Rational thinking is = key. This comes from soul, and not body. Dying achieves true separation w= ith the soul, leaving him to contemplate the forms.
      7. Is there a reason for living, then?
    1. Immortality of the soul: Three arguments:
      1. The Cycle of Opposites (problems)
        1. Larger comes from the smaller, stronger comes from weak, better from worse, worse from better. Hotter comes from coole= r, and the other way around.
        2. Between any pair of opposites, there are two comings. You wake and go to sleep, to move between the opposites of the conscious and unconscious.
        3. So the dead come fro= m the living, and the living, the dead.
        4. Supposes that this m= eans that he may have existed before and will exist again.
        5. Counter example: opp= osites which don't 'become' each other.
      1. Argument from Recollection (problems)
        1. Same as from the Meno- you can lead someone to a conclusion by questions, without giving the answers beforehand- he 'learns' by remembering. But from what does he remember from? He's known it before, so it must be from a previous life. Not necessaril= y in a life in a body, but could be in a heaven.
        2. Argument: Pre-existe= nce does not entail future survival.
        3. Theory of the soul: Attunement, or harmony. The soul is the 'harmony' of bodily parts. = The soul is what happens when the parts work together in a certain way.= The soul is life-As the body goes, so does the soul.
        4. Socrates's counter: Harmony is a more-or-less thing. They accept a degree of wiggle roo= m. Souls do not. You can't have a more-or-less soul, or a 'kind-of' a soul. It's there or it isn't. If there is no harmony, there would s= till be a soul. Also, the soul can oppose the body, so it can't be the b= ody itself.
        5. Another soul bit: Ma= ybe the soul wears out?
      1. Exclusion of opposites (problems)
        1. The 'form' of something doesn't change, though th= ings with the forms itself may change. (Things can change from cool to w= arm, but coolness itself does not change.  An action can move from just to unjust, but justice itself i= s a constant.)
    1. The Theory of Forms in the above arguments
      1. The reality that you see is simply a reflection of= the forms, an indistinct thingie.
      2. Cave analogy
      3. Theory- A form is an = object of thought knowable, eternal, unchanging, independent universal.
      4. Being vs. Becoming
        1. Being is of the forms, and always is
        2. Becoming is of appearances, and changes.
  8. Excerpt from the Republ= ic: The Cave analogy and The Theory of Forms.
    1. People are in a cave, stuck so they can only see a wall.  Outside, there is a f= ire, and 'real' things.  The peop= le inside can only see the shadows they cast on the wall, and they take = this as reality.  The 'true' real= ity is beyond comprehension through simple explanation- if one were to be untied, and shown the real world.

 

Created with Microsoft Office OneNote 2007
One place for all your notes and information