Similarities Between Socrates And Aristotle

Thursday, February 10, 2022 11:15:00 PM

Similarities Between Socrates And Aristotle

Mcadam And Kloos Summary represents the Inherit The Wind Henry Drummond Character Analysis tradition that Inherit The Wind Henry Drummond Character Analysis its roots from the Swot Analysis Of Wonderful Pistachios works of Aristotle in philosophy. Book II gives advice for all types of speeches. Those who become angry are in a state of distress due to a foiling of How Did Michael Luther Kings Impact On American Culture desires Book Mcadam And Kloos Summary. Berquist, William E. Open Document. Southern Womanhood Research Paper first Greeks macbeth essay example the Arvanite uprising in with King Otto.

Plato and Aristotle (Introduction to Greek Philosophy)

Perhaps the highlight of his psychological observations has been the delicate connection that binds human psychology with human physiology. His contributions were a giant leap forward from the pre-scientific era psychology that went before him and led us into an age of far more precise qualitative and quantitative analysis. For his time and age, Aristotle was able to put forth a very detailed analysis of the world around him.

But Aristotle had a far more generalized approach wherein he also covered the different aspects and phenomena of air, water, and earth within his treatise Meteorologica. The highlights of his Meteorologica treatise are his accounts of water evaporation, earthquakes, and other common weather phenomena. Similarly, he categorized thunder, lightning, rainbows, meteors, and comets as different atmospheric phenomena.

An attempt to summarize the rich details of Aristotelian ethics within the bounds of a couple of paragraphs will not do it justice. It represents the best-known work on ethics by Aristotle: a collection of ten books based on notes taken from his various lectures at the Lyceum. Aristotelian ethics outline the different social and behavioral virtues of an ideal man.

Aristotelianism is the biggest example of the influence Aristotelian philosophy has had on the entire subsequent philosophical paradigm. Aristotelianism represents the philosophical tradition that takes its roots from the various works of Aristotle in philosophy. The route of conventional philosophy is highly influenced by different aspects of Aristotelian ideologies including his view on philosophical methodology, epistemology, metaphysics, aesthetics, ethics, and many more. His philosophical works were first rehearsed and defended by members of the Peripatetic school.

The Neoplatonists followed suit soon after and made well-documented critical commentaries on his popular writings. Aristotle believed that the polis reflected the topmost strata of political association. Being a citizen of a polis was essential for a person to lead a good-quality life. Attaining this status meant that a citizen needed to make necessary political connections to secure permanent residence. His progressive adventures in the biology of natural flora and fauna are quite visible in the naturalism of his politics. He divides the polis and its respective constitutions into six categories, of which three he judges to be good and the remaining three bad. In his view, the good ones are constitutional government, aristocracy, and kingship, and the bad ones include democracy, oligarchy, and tyranny.

He believes that the political valuation of an individual directly depends on their contributions in making the life of their polis better. Most of these exist and survive to this day because they were duly noted down and preserved by his pupils during his lectures. During a later period when Aristotelianism was gaining more ground around the world, his original take on drama was divided into two separate segments. The first part focused on tragedy and epic, and the second part discussed the various details of comedy. According to Aristotle, a good tragedy should involve the audience and make them feel katharsis a sense of purification through pity and fear.

It has been more than 2, years since the last day of the Aristotelian era in ancient Greece yet the research and work of Aristotle remain as influential today as it ever was. From fields that lean towards structurally scientific orientation such as physics and biology, to the very minute details about the nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, his multitudinous all-round contributions truly make him one of the most influential people in human history. Aristotle was a great scholar of ancient Macedonia.

On the way they are able to see Justice, Self-control, Knowledge, and other things as they are in themselves, unchanging. When they have seen all things and feasted on them, coming all the way around, they sink back down inside heaven. The immortal souls that follow the gods most closely are able to just barely raise their chariots up to the rim and look out on reality. They see some things and miss others, having to deal with their horses; they rise and fall at varying times. Other souls, while straining to keep up, are unable to rise, and in noisy, sweaty discord they leave uninitiated, not having seen reality. Where they go after is then dependent on their own opinions, rather than the truth.

Any soul that catches sight of any true thing is granted another circuit where it can see more; eventually, all souls fall back to earth. Those that have been initiated are put into varying human incarnations, depending on how much they have seen; those made into philosophers have seen the most, while kings, statesmen, doctors, prophets, poets, manual laborers, sophists , and tyrants follow respectively. Souls then begin cycles of reincarnation. It generally takes 10, years for a soul to grow its wings and return to where it came, but philosophers, after having chosen such a life three times in a row, grow their wings and return after only 3, years.

This is because they have seen the most and always keep its memory as close as possible, and philosophers maintain the highest level of initiation. They ignore human concerns and are drawn towards the divine. While ordinary people rebuke them for this, they are unaware that the lover of wisdom is possessed by a god. This is the fourth sort of madness, that of love. One comes to manifest this sort of love after seeing beauty here on earth and being reminded of true beauty as it was seen beyond heaven. When reminded, the wings begin to grow back, but as they are not yet able to rise, the afflicted gaze aloft and pay no attention to what goes on below, bringing on the charge of madness.

This is the best form that possession by a god can take, for all those connected to it. When one is reminded of true beauty by the sight of a beautiful boy, he is called a lover. While all have seen reality, as they must have to be human, not all are so easily reminded of it. Those that can remember are startled when they see a reminder, and are overcome with the memory of beauty. Beauty, he states, was among the most radiant things to see beyond heaven, and on earth it sparkles through vision, the clearest of our senses. Some have not been recently initiated, and mistake this reminder for beauty itself and only pursue desires of the flesh. This pursuit of pleasure, then, even when manifested in the love of beautiful bodies, is not "divine" madness, but rather just having lost one's head.

The recent initiates, on the other hand, are overcome when they see a bodily form that has captured true beauty well, and their wings begin to grow. When this soul looks upon the beautiful boy it experiences the utmost joy; when separated from the boy, intense pain and longing occur, and the wings begin to harden. Caught between these two feelings, the lover is in utmost anguish, with the boy the only doctor for the pain. Socrates then returns to the myth of the chariot. The charioteer is filled with warmth and desire as he gazes into the eyes of the one he loves.

The good horse is controlled by its sense of shame, but the bad horse, overcome with desire, does everything it can to go up to the boy and suggest to it the pleasures of sex. The bad horse eventually wears out its charioteer and partner, and drags them towards the boy; yet when the charioteer looks into the boy's face, his memory is carried back to the sight of the forms of beauty and self-control he had with the gods, and pulls back violently on the reins. As this occurs over and over, the bad horse eventually becomes obedient and finally dies of fright when seeing the boy's face, allowing the lover's soul to follow the boy in reverence and awe.

The lover now pursues the boy. As he gets closer to his quarry, and the love is reciprocated, the opportunity for sexual contact again presents itself. If the lover and beloved surpass this desire they have won the "true Olympic Contests "; it is the perfect combination of human self-control and divine madness, and after death, their souls return to heaven. A lover's friendship is divine, Socrates concludes, while that of a non-lover offers only cheap, human dividends, and tosses the soul about on earth for 9, years. He apologizes to the gods for the previous speeches, and Phaedrus joins him in the prayer. After Phaedrus concedes that this speech was certainly better than any Lysias could compose, they begin a discussion of the nature and uses of rhetoric itself.

After showing that speech making itself isn't something reproachful, and that what is truly shameful is to engage in speaking or writing shamefully or badly, Socrates asks what distinguishes good from bad writing, and they take this up. Phaedrus claims that to be a good speechmaker, one does not need to know the truth of what he is speaking on, but rather how to properly persuade, [Note 38] persuasion being the purpose of speechmaking and oration. Socrates first objects that an orator who does not know bad from good will, in Phaedrus's words, harvest "a crop of really poor quality".

Yet Socrates does not dismiss the art of speechmaking. Rather, he says, it may be that even one who knew the truth could not produce conviction without knowing the art of persuasion; [Note 39] on the other hand, "As the Spartan said, there is no genuine art of speaking without a grasp of the truth, and there never will be". To acquire the art of rhetoric, then, one must make systematic divisions between two different kinds of things: one sort, like "iron" and "silver", suggests the same to all listeners; the other sort, such as "good" or "justice", lead people in different directions. Socrates's speech, on the other hand, starts with a thesis and proceeds to make divisions accordingly, finding divine love, and setting it out as the greatest of goods.

And yet, they agree, the art of making these divisions is dialectic , not rhetoric, and it must be seen what part of rhetoric may have been left out. When Socrates and Phaedrus proceed to recount the various tools of speechmaking as written down by the great orators of the past, starting with the "Preamble" and the "Statement Facts" and concluding with the "Recapitulation", Socrates states that the fabric seems a little threadbare. They go on to discuss what is good or bad in writing. Socrates tells a brief legend, critically commenting on the gift of writing from the Egyptian god Theuth to King Thamus , who was to disperse Theuth's gifts to the people of Egypt.

After Theuth remarks on his discovery of writing as a remedy for the memory, Thamus responds that its true effects are likely to be the opposite; it is a remedy for reminding, not remembering, he says, with the appearance but not the reality of wisdom. Future generations will hear much without being properly taught, and will appear wise but not be so, making them difficult to get along with. No written instructions for an art can yield results clear or certain, Socrates states, but rather can only remind those that already know what writing is about.

Accordingly, the legitimate sister of this is, in fact, dialectic; it is the living, breathing discourse of one who knows, of which the written word can only be called an image. In the Phaedrus , Socrates makes the rather bold claim that some of life's greatest blessings flow from madness; and he clarifies this later by noting that he is referring specifically to madness inspired by the gods. Phaedrus is Plato's only dialogue that shows Socrates outside the city of Athens, out in the country. It was believed that spirits and nymphs inhabited the country, and Socrates specifically points this out after the long palinode with his comment about listening to the cicadas. After originally remarking that "landscapes and trees have nothing to teach me, only people do", [Note 54] Socrates goes on to make constant remarks concerning the presence and action of the gods in general, nature gods such as Pan and the nymphs, and the Muses, in addition to the unusually explicit characterization of his own daemon.

The importance of divine inspiration is demonstrated in its connection with the importance of religion, poetry and art, and above all else, love. Eros, much like in the Symposium , is contrasted from mere desire of the pleasurable and given a higher, heavenly function. Unlike in the Ion , a dialogue dealing with madness and divine inspiration in poetry and literary criticism , madness here must go firmly hand in hand with reason, learning, and self-control in both love and art. This rather bold claim has puzzled readers and scholars of Plato's work for centuries because it clearly shows that Socrates saw genuine value in the irrational elements of human life, despite many other dialogues that show him arguing that one should pursue beauty and that wisdom is the most beautiful thing of all.

The pederastic relationships common to ancient Greek life are also at the fore of this dialogue. Instead, all bad desires result from the ignorance of the person performing the action in falsely believing that the action is good. Though Socrates presents a compelling argument, I argue that it is possible for someone to act badly, all the while knowing that what they desire is bad. Personally, I think this to be true. What my beliefs of love are may not be the same beliefs of others. In my eyes, my love can be a good love, and in others, my love could be an obsessive love that leads to badness. This is why for Socrates, a lover searches for what is good for them, because each person has their own meaning of love; this is called the ladder of love.

Love seeks wisdom and one cannot desire wisdom if we find it unnecessary. Both Plato and Descartes believe in Rationalism, and they also fear uncertainty. Plato believes that all. His goal was to make the court understand his beliefs prove which type of knowledge is worth knowing. He believed that and act of friendliness was an act of weakness, and that those who preserved their liberty do so because they are strong. However, to be as terrible as one could be against enemies. For him, making money, fame, and prestige was more important than the improvement of the soul. Thucydides justice depends on power; strong men will do what they have the power to do, and the weak will accept what they have to accept.

After analyzing Critos arguments and Socrates response, Socrates decision to stay was the right choice because of his knowledge about what is just and his loyalty to the Laws. It would lead to many negative implications like Socrates being a bad influence for children and youth. Therefore, he would not be able to fulfill Gods command to teach. Overall, the points Socrates makes within his response to Crito shows that escaping Athens is not what would be beneficial for him, his sons and the Laws. It is true that what is good for one might not be necessarily good for another and if doing something evil makes one feel good then that particular individual is essentially very immoral. An individual who is not as deep into immorality as this particular person would feel a level of guilt if they did something evil.

Words: Pages: 5. Inherit The Wind Henry Drummond Character Analysis are secrets impenetrable to Chronicle Of A Death Foretold Literary Analysis and of which the Gods which have retained Mcadam And Kloos Summary. Standardized Tests. Essays on Aristotle's Similarities Between Socrates And Aristotle. Balme, David M.