Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Gorgias (/ ˈ ɡ ɔːr ɡ i ə s /; [1] Greek: Γοργίας [ɡorɡíaːs]) is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 380 BC. The dialogue depicts a conversation between Socrates and a small group at a dinner gathering.
Callicles poses an immoralist argument that consists of four parts: “(1) a critique of conventional justice, (2) a positive account of ‘justice according to nature’, (3) a theory of the virtues, and (4) a hedonistic conception of the good.” [2] For the first aspect of the argument, Callicles supports the ruling of strong individuals and criticizes the weak for trying to undermine them.
Another similarity in language is found in both Plato's and Isocrates' discussions of the state of the mind or soul necessary for a good orator. Isocrates says of qualities of being a good orator, ""these things, I hold, require much study and are the task of a vigorous and imaginative mind" (sec. 17).
This aspect of rhetoric is one reason why Plato attacked what he saw as empty rhetoric on the part of sophist philosophers such as Gorgias. Aristotle, in his works on rhetoric, answered Plato's charges by arguing that reason and rhetoric are intertwined ("Rhetoric is the counterpart of Dialectic" is the first sentence of his Rhetoric). In ...
The Sophist (Greek: Σοφιστής; Latin: Sophista [1]) is a Platonic dialogue from the philosopher's late period, most likely written in 360 BC. In it the interlocutors, led by Eleatic Stranger employ the method of division in order to classify and define the sophist and describe his essential attributes and differentia vis a vis the philosopher and statesman.
Plato believed that we possess innate ideas that precede any knowledge that we gain through experience. As formulated by Noam Chomsky, accounting for this gap between knowledge and experience is "Plato's problem". The phrase has a specific linguistic context with regard to language acquisition but can also be used more generally.
While the body's perceptual faculties are deceptive, Plato also argues that the falsehoods that they communicate to the soul can be used to trigger or prompt recollection. [3] Secondly, Plato clarifies that genuine knowledge, as opposed to mere true belief ( doxa ), is distinguished by its content.
What cannot be denied is the confounding nature with which the Dissoi Logoi conveys its message. For instance, in the very first chapter, the author states "some say that what is good and what is bad are two different things, others that they are the same thing..I myself side with the latter group", yet by the end of this chapter, it has changed "I am trying rather to point out that it is not ...