Truth and Socrates Essay Example for Free

Truth and Socrates Essay ?Euthyphro is a dialogue between Socrates and a traveling cleric. The two men meet at court, where the cleric, Euthyphro, claims to have a clear definition of piety. Socrates exclaims that he wishes to know the definition of piety so that he may better defend himself in his upcoming trial. Euthyphro agrees to teach Socrates, and so they begin to discuss. Early on, Socrates makes clear his desire for a universal truth, or a definition of piety that will be true in every case. Euthyphro makes several attempts to define piety in a way that satisfies Socrates. The first attempt at a definition does not satisfy Socrates because it is merely an example. In trying to define piety, Euthyphro merely states that his current undertaking at court is pious. While Socrates does not disagree outright, he presses Euthyphro for a universal definition of piety that could be used in every situation. Euthyphro’s second definition, â€Å"what is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious,† pleases Socrates because it is a universal statement. This definition is general enough to be widely applicable, and seems to outline the defining characteristics of piety. Upon closer inspection, however, Socrates finds the definition unsatisfying. Because the gods disagree about so many things, and act in contradiction to each other, it would be foolish to assume they would all agree upon the definition of piety. Euthyphro points out in his defence that all the gods would agree that Euthyphro’s current action of bringing his father to trial is pious. Socrates dismisses this, as it is not a universal definition and is essentially just another example. Euthyphro attempts to satisfy Socrates by amending his definition slightly. Piety, says Euthyphro, is what all the gods love, and the impious is what all the gods hate. Socrates is not satisfied by this definition, either, and so he tries a different tack to extract a definition from Euthyphro. Socrates does this by asking: â€Å"Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods? † When Euthyphro seems unsure, Socrates simplifies his question with an analogy. He asks Euthyphro if something is â€Å"carried† because it is â€Å"a thing carried,† or if it is â€Å"carried† because something is carrying it. Both men agree that the action confers the state of being. That is, a thing loved is so because someone loves it, and the thing itself is not creating a state of â€Å"loving† within the people around it. Likewise, being loved is not a state inherent to the thing loved, but is the result of the love others bear for the thing. Moving from his analogy back to Euthyphro’s definition, Socrates shows the fallacy in Euthyphro’s statement. Being god-loved cannot confer piety, as it confers â€Å"god-loved-ness† instead. Therefore, in Euthyphro’s statement, all the gods loving something would make that thing universally god-loved, but in no way makes it pious. An act is loved by the gods because it is pious, and not the other way around. Socrates, presumably tired of Euthyphro’s poor definitions, takes a stab at defining piety himself. He muses to Euthyphro that piety is a species of the genus justice, and that perhaps starting there would help the two men to agree on pious qualities. Socrates uses a poem as an example: â€Å"You do not wish to name Zeus, who had done it, and who made all things grow, for where there is fear there is shame. † While surely, says Socrates, those who feel shame also feel fear for their reputation or good name, those who feel fear do not necessarily feel shame as well. Being fearful of disease or poverty is not shameful, and is quite understandable. Shame is a smaller part of fear, covering a smaller area, just as piety covers a smaller area than justice, although the two entirely overlap. With a newfound agreement on the properties of piety, Socrates again asks Euthyphro to define piety by what part of justice it constitutes. Euthyphro states that â€Å"the godly and pious is the part of the just that is concerned with the care of the gods, while that concerned with the care of men is the remaining part of justice. † Socrates seems pleased by this new definition, but has one area that must be further defined – namely, the term â€Å"care for. † Socrates points out that the term â€Å"care for† means to benefit the object of care. Caring for the gods would then benefit them and make them better, an impossible act of hubris that flies in the face of the religion of the day. Euthyphro quickly enhances his definition: it’s the kind of care that a slave gives to his master. Socrates continues to press Euthyphro and demands to know what goal the gods intend to achieve by way of human service. Euthyphro gives a long-winded answer that Socrates immediately reduces to two independent clauses. The first is that the gods achieve, by way of human servitude, piety on earth in their servants’ actions. The second is that piety is the knowledge of how to sacrifice and pray. Socrates points out that Euthyphro’s latest definition reduces piety to a sort of commerce between gods and men, where pious men are the best bargainers and most skillful traders. Euthyphro agrees, although he would prefer grander wording. Socrates then asks: If pious men are trading with the gods, and the gifts from gods to men are obvious, then what are the gifts from men to gods? Euthyphro answers that the gods desire from men pleasing attitudes such as honour and reverence. Socrates once again reduces Euthyphro’s statement to a simpler form: â€Å"The pious is once again what is dear to the gods. † The argument has come full circle, back to a point where an object is conferring an action upon actors, and logical analysis leads round and back again. Socrates points this out, eager to dive back into defining piety, but Euthyphro claims he is now in a hurry and must continue the conversation some other time. While Euthyphro is unable to define piety in a convincing way, Socrates himself takes up the challenge in The Apology. While he doesn’t come right out and say it in so many words, Socrates clearly details how a man should act throughout his life and care for his soul to ensure a pious existence. According to Socrates, a man who wishes to live a pious life, insofar as he wishes to take the greatest care of his soul and follow the purest pursuits on Earth, should seek the truth in any form, at any cost. This is most clearly expressed by the statement â€Å"The unexamined life is not worth living. † Socrates would presumably define piety as the pursuit of truth. Piety, in the religious world of Socrates, can be taken as a more all-encompassing trait than it might be in modern times. Because everyone in Socrates’s society participated in the same religion, piety was a universally positive trait. Good things came from the gods, and men who engaged in religious acts were generally also pillars of Athenian society. Today piety has a narrower definition. Because religion no longer holds the position it once did in the world, and because people follow so many different religions, piety has been relegated to a rather specific set of qualities, most of which involve devotion to the church. In Socrates’s time, goodness and godliness were so close as to be inseparable, and so to be pious was to be a multitude of positive adjectives that existed in the wide realm of goodness and godliness. Piety is a desirable trait in humans, spawning bravery, kindness, wisdom, and all manner of positive attributes in those who are considered to be pious. However, each of these positive attributes is directly connected with discovering truths. Bravery or courage, one of the most readily identifiable positive traits, is a special kind of knowledge (Plato, Laches 196. c). By understanding the risks and rewards of a particular action in a certain situation, brave people will risk themselves to a certain degree, presumably because they have calculated the rewards to be justifiably great. An equally courageous act, the admission of ignorance, would allow a general to withdraw his troops from a potentially compromising situation, probably to the disdain of his fellow generals. While scorn may be heaped on this general for â€Å"fleeing,† his courage and strength of character saves the lives of his soldiers to fight another day; a prouder or more ignorant general would foolishly stand his ground and lose. Prudence, it would seem in this situation, is part of bravery. The observance of the truth, that of the general’s previous ignorance of the current field of battle, allows the general to be courageous and brave. Truth is far more important than anything else. Truth is possessed by the gods, and occasionally discovered by man, perhaps by some design of the gods. When mathematics was discovered, and the objective truths of the hypotenuse and division were used, the gods were credited with the creation, or perhaps the release of, these intangible and indisputable truths. Men could not touch them, overturn them, or argue about them. They simply were. When the prophet at Delphi relayed a message from the gods, specifically that no man was wiser than Socrates, the truth of the matter was unquestioned by Socrates. Socrates, incredulous at this prophecy, began to pursue the meaning of the statement. Socrates refers to this as â€Å"my investigation in the service of god. † Wisdom, a desirable trait on its own, seems to be the knowledge of things. But how could Socrates be the wisest man? He had no knowledge of many things, such as politics, poetry, or craftsmanship. As he interviewed learned men in Greece, he began to realize an important difference. Many men in Greece had knowledge of things. They knew how to write, fight, or create, but these were not the truths Socrates sought. These were merely the men’s experiences, an amalgamation of experience. An objective truth, such as the use of a hypotenuse, was nowhere to be found. Socrates, in his staunch pursuit of truth, considered what he knew to be true in the same manner as geometry. He realized there was little he knew so well as his own ignorance – namely, the truth was that he did not know much at all. And so it became clear to Socrates that his wisdom was a by-product of the admission of his own ignorance, and that the pursuit of truth, no matter how damaging to the reputation of the seeker, was considered wise by the gods. Truth and piety became intermingled for Socrates, as he followed his divine mission in the pursuit of truth, no matter the cost to his reputation, or the danger it posed for him. Socrates’s willingness to die for the truth is an act of piety, as is his impoverished life and disregard for his reputation. When Socrates meets someone who thinks he is wise, Socrates believes he is coming to the assistance of the gods by showing that person his ignorance (Plato, Apology 23. b). Socrates devotes his whole life, and his death, to the pursuit of truth, no matter the cost. Because Socrates associates the notion of truth so closely with the gods, it could be said that his god is truth, and vice versa. When the notions of â€Å"god† and â€Å"truth† become synonymous, Socrates’s definition of piety becomes apparent. Bibliography Brickhouse, TC. and Smith, ND. (1990). Socrates on Trial. Oxford University Press. Grube, G. M. A. and John Cooper (2002). Five Dialogues. Hacket Publishing. Linder, Doug (2002). The Trial of Socrates. University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law. Retrieved November 11, 2013. Plato (400 BC). Apology. 17a-42a. Plato (400 BC). Euthyphro. 2a-16a. Plato (400 BC). Laches. 178a-201a. Plato (400 BC). Crito. 43a-54e.

Development During Adolescence: Questions Essay -- Child Psychology

Question 1: Discuss adolescence: a)The period of adolescence and the cultural aspect thereof Pinpointing the start of any developmental phase is difficult as different people view adolescence and who is classified as an adolescent in different ways. This is because of perspective as well as cultural differences of what an adolescent is. As a rule of thumb,we say that the onset of adolescence is when puberty starts. This is fairly easy to notice because of the physical changes. However, determining the end of adolescence is much harder. There are criteria from a social, legal, psychological and economic perspectives which determine the end of adolescence. In some cultures, youth are expected to go through an initiation of some sort or have to partake in a ritual in order to be accepted as an adult in the communities. Other cultures mark the start end of adolescence with a feast. As you can see,it is almost impossible to pinpoint the exact start and the exact finish of adolescence. As a norm though, we say that it starts between 11 and 13 and ends between the ages of 17 and 22. b)Educational implications of Physical Development Adolescents are trying to figure out who they are and who they are meant to be and they are trying to figure out what their place in the world is. Something that plays a huge role in these searching is the feeling of being accepted. Physical development doesn't occur on a certain day at a certain age with certain effects, each person starts developing at a different time and at a different speed. This can cause feelings of embarrassment and shame so as educators, it is important to be able to speak openly and frankly about the development that takes place including their sexual development. It is ... ... and supported and at the same time should have the freedom to deny assistance. They need to feel free to try different 'styles' and to attempt new 'ways of being' without feeling judged or rejected. Since adolescents are in a phase where they imitate other people in attempt to find their own identity whilst complying to the demands placed upon them by society and striving to become their ideal self, the example set is one of the strongest teaching methods. By handling myself well in confrontations and conflict and by applying myself in the things that I do, I show them how they could do it and how society rewards it. I think it is important to make them aware of what kinds of differences people their age have ( i.e. The different levels of cognitive thinking and the differences in physical development) so that the extent to which they feel inferior is minimized.

Mccarthy’s Novel the Road Is About Man’s Inherent Altruism in a World of Selfishness

The man in The Road is portrayed as a very religious individual, this is indisputable. One could deduce from this that therefore he is selfless in protecting his son and carrying on in the times in which he finds himself. This viewpoint contrasts with the one that the man is selfish with his actions, doing everything to survive and not helping anyone he meets on his journey. All the decisions the man makes throughout the novel can be used as examples to argue each point of view, and it may be that it is a mixture of both. Maybe the man acts in a selfless way due to selfish beliefs. The whole image of religious self-sacrifice by the man is probably what McCarthy intended, this can be seen through his determination to preserve his son’s life. An example of this is when he defends his son from the man from the truck. He risks everything by shooting the man as this leaves only one bullet in the chamber of the revolver, as he intends to use it in a life threatening situation to kill his son, it means that he will probably die while suffering. His whole determination to stay alive could be seen as to only keep the boy alive, this is seen as selfless as he only wishes to help the boy survive, not himself. This altruism is directly connected to the man’s solid belief in god and in what he is doing. Throughout the novel other people’s selfishness can be seen, the cannibalism and stealing juxtapose with the man’s proper behaviour; he tells his son that they would never eat someone and shows generosity towards the old man. Cannibalism is an indication of how people act immorally in the novel in order to stay alive in the novel, the man refuses to do this and is therefore portrayed as having a higher morality than anyone else. On the other hand one could identify the man’s behaviour as purely selfish, he has a fixed idea in his head, he is protecting his son for his own given mission to be complete. The man does not wish to help anyone other than himself, he only reluctantly helps the old man when his son insists, and happily takes the clothes off a defenceless man later on, returning them only again as a result of his son’s persistence. He acts immorally on several occasions, not offering assistance to the man who had been struck by lightning and locking the people in the basement again when he had discovered them instead of helping. It could be argued that everything an individual does is aimed at personal gain, selfishness, either physical or psychological. The man is certainly benefiting psychologically from keeping his son alive as he believes he is doing the right thing and fulfilling his purpose. Also his religious morality can be questioned, as he considers suicide even though this is not allowed according to the bible. The fact that he does not become a cannibal may be used to identify him as still retaining some kind of moral code, however, he does anything to keep him and the boy alive and it is not improbable that in a situation of severe starvation he would have turned to cannibalism had it been an option. From all of his actions in the novel, the reader can justifiably come to the conclusion that the man is just as selfish as the other people trying to survive in the post-apocalyptic world. The man can certainly be described as selfless as well as selfish, he aims towards a noble goal but does not let anything stop him, and he identifies other’s lives as less important than the boy’s. Even though he is not described as committing highly immoral actions such as cannibalism, it cannot be ruled out that from his actions we can deduce that this is what he would have turned to had the situation permitted it. On the other hand does acting immorally indicate acting selfishly, in the novel it certainly does but this may not actually be the case, it may be argued that the immoral actions by the man are done to help the boy survive. McCarthy links selfishness to immoral actions quite strongly in the book and so due to this the man is presented to the reader as selfless, this was the intention of the writer and the reader will most probably grasp this attitude while reading the book. Upon further thought however, it may be seen that the man is simply selfish and there is nothing more to him than that.

“A Worn Path” - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 827 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2017/09/20 Category Literature Essay Type Argumentative essay Did you like this example? â€Å"A Worn Path† Eudora Welty is a famous southern writer who started her career during the Great Depression. In many cases, aspects of an author’s stories usually come from their own experiences or are directly reflected by what is going on in the world at that time. It is evident in her short story â€Å"A Worn Path† that it is set during times of economic hardship. In this story the main character Phoenix Jackson, â€Å"Grandma†, goes on a journey that takes her through the dark pine shadows of the woods, through a withered cotton fields and fields of dead corn, down a ravine and through swampy meadows. Paragraphs 1, 17, 21, 31) This long, vigorous journey will be all worth it because Phoenix is traveling to the nearest city to obtain medication for her sick grandson. The determination of this elderly woman is inspiring in many ways. She is willing to endure the harsh winter weather and go the distance to try and help her grandson. In the stor y â€Å"A Worn Path† Phoenix Jackson is the sole main character. There are a few very minor characters in the story: including the Hunter, the Doctor and the doctor’s assistant. It is made very clear from the beginning of the story that Phoenix is an elderly black woman; the author describes her appearance in great detail. â€Å"Her eyes were blue with age. Her skin had a pattern all its own of numberless branching wrinkles and as though a whole little tree stood in the middle of her forehead, but a golden color ran underneath, and the two knobs of her cheeks were illuminated by a yellow burning under the dark. Under the rag her hair came down on her neck in the frailest of ringlets, still black, and with an odor like copper. (Paragraph 2) The author draws a clear picture of Phoenix Jackson’s appearance with this very descriptive paragraph. Not only are we able to tell that she is elderly by the author’s description of her appearance, we can also tell by how slowly she moves and the fact that she needs a cane. Another way it is apparent that she is elderly is the way that other characters in the story react to her; for example, when the Hunter sees her wandering through the woods he yells out â€Å"Well, Granny! What are you doing there? † (Paragraph 38) And a final example is when the doctor’s assistant refers to her as â€Å"Grandma† in paragraph 65. Throughout the story there are many clues that give away Phoenix’s economic status. The description of her clothing is one example. â€Å"She wore a dark striped dress reaching down to her shoe tops, and an equally long apron of bleached sugar sacks, with a full pocket: neat and tidy, but every time she took a step she might have fallen over her shoelaces, which dragged from her unlaced shoes. † (Paragraph 2) The fact that she has to use bleached sugar sacks as an apron proves that she did not have money to buy nice things or even buy a real a pron, she had to make her own. There could be two possible reasons that her shoes were not tied, one reason could be that she is too old to bend over and tie them, or the other could be that she just didn’t know how to tie her own shoes. One final example is the fact that she uses an umbrella as a cane. The dialogue in the story gives the impression that Phoenix was not formally educated. She has the ability to communicate with others, but her use of grammar is incorrect. While conversing with the Hunter, one of her responses is â€Å"No sir, I goin to town. † (Paragraph 45) This gives a clear example of her use of language and incorrect use of grammar. Although she may not always say the right thing, Phoenix is very observant of her surroundings. While talking to the Hunter, she notices that he drops a nickel. She quickly causes a distraction so that he would not notice what he had done. Once the Hunter continued on his path, she bends down to pick up the nickel and says â€Å"God watching me the whole time. I come to stealing. † (Paragraph 54) In her old age, she is still as sharp as a tack, and has enough sense to cause a distraction in order to get the nickel that the Hunter had unknowingly dropped. In many ways the â€Å"worn path† that Phoenix Jackson takes to the city so often is symbolic to her life. It is a long, difficult journey that she is very familiar with. She knows all of the twists and turns of the path, the ups and downs and she knows exactly where to go to reach her destination. The determination that this woman has throughout the whole story is remarkable. She endures so much, especially for her age. Phoenix Jackson is a fascinating and inspiring woman. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "â€Å"A Worn Path†" essay for you Create order