Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Moreover, according to this view, all those who practice justice do so unwillingly and out of fear of punishment, and the life of the unpunished unjust man is far more blessed than that of the just man. Glaucon would like Socrates to prove that justice is not only desirable for its consequences, but also for its own sake.
On Justice (Ancient Greek: Περὶ Δικαίου; Latin: De Justo [1]) is a Socratic dialogue that was once thought to be the work of Plato. [2] In the short dialogue, Socrates discusses with a friend questions about what is just and unjust. [3]
Crito (/ ˈ k r aɪ t oʊ / KRY-toh or / ˈ k r iː t oʊ / KREE-toh; Ancient Greek: Κρίτων) is a dialogue that was written by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato.It depicts a conversation between Socrates and his wealthy friend Crito of Alopece regarding justice (δικαιοσύνη), injustice (ἀδικία), and the appropriate response to injustice after Socrates's imprisonment ...
Socrates is known for proclaiming his total ignorance; he used to say that the only thing he was aware of was his ignorance, seeking to imply that the realization of one's ignorance is the first step in philosophizing. Socrates exerted a strong influence on philosophers in later antiquity and has continued to do so in the modern era.
In the Republic, Plato's Socrates raises a number of criticisms of democracy.He claims that democracy is a danger due to excessive freedom. He also argues that, in a system in which everyone has a right to rule, all sorts of selfish people who care nothing for the people but are only motivated by their own personal desires are able to attain power.
Though his answer to Glaucon's challenge is delayed, Socrates argues ultimately that justice does not derive from this social construct: the man who abused the power of the Ring of Gyges has in fact enslaved himself to his appetites, while the man who chose not to use it remains rationally in control of himself and is therefore happy (Republic ...
The Trial of Socrates (399 BC) was held to determine the philosopher's guilt of two charges: asebeia against the pantheon of Athens, and corruption of the youth of the city-state; the accusers cited two impious acts by Socrates: "failing to acknowledge the gods that the city acknowledges" and "introducing new deities".
Socrates posits that the rhetorician should accuse himself first, and then do his family and friends the favour of accusing them, so great is the curative power of justice (480c–e). Socrates maintains that, assuming the converse of the previous argument, if your enemy has done something awful, you should contrive every means to see that he ...