Up@dawn 2.0

Friday, September 15, 2017

Quizzes Sep 18/19 & Sep 20/21

Democritus and the Sophists, DR 8-9. Add your quiz & discussion questions from the latter half of today's chapters

1. How was Democritus remembered after his death, and why?

2. Why did early Christians oppose atomism?

3. Name two other early atomists.

4. What idea did Democritus take over from Leucippus?

5. When did ancient atomism become a mature scientific view?

6. What ability was most valued in Periclean Athens?

7. For whom was the term sophistes, Sophists, reserved in the time of Protagoras, Gorgias, Hippias, et al, and what subjects did they teach?

8. What were Plato's & Aristotle's stated objections to the Sophists?

9. What playwright satirized Socrates and the Sophists indiscriminately?

10. Which Sophist embraced subjectivity and said "Man is the measure of all things"?



DQ
  • If everything is composed of atoms, does it follow that there is no life after death? (100)
  • Does atomism "liberate [us] from superstition, fear of death, and the tyranny of priests"?
  • If thought consists in the motion of mind-atoms, can we freely think our own thoughts? Or are we passive spectators of "our" minds?
  • What difference does it make, if particles are inseparable from forces and fields and bundles of energy and thus cannot be proved to be "unsplittable" (as the ancient atomists said)?
  • Is it "reasonable to suppose that every sort of world crop[s] up somewhere"? (109)
  • Comment on Dawkins' "selfish gene" statement about meaning and design. (110)
  • What do you think of Democritus's view of children (112)?
  • What do you think of Democritus's "preaching"? (112)
  • By Pericles' definition, do we have a democracy? (115)
  • Was Socrates a Sophist? 
  • Was Protagoras a relativist?
  • [Add yours]
==
Socrates and the Socratics, DR 10. Also recommended: LISTEN M.M. McCabe on Socratic Method

1. What was Socrates' "faith"?

2. How does Gottlieb account for Socrates' appeal to the "high society" of Athens, given his humble background and poverty?

3. What did Alcibiades see in Socrates?

4. with what request did Socrates typically commence a philosophical conversation? What was his method called?

5. Why were the defenders of Athenian democracy uneasy about Socrates?

6. In what way did the Oracle mean that Socrates was wise? Did Socrates accept the Oracle's authority at face value?

7. What was Socrates' basic motive for philosophizing?

8. Why did Socrates say it's unwise to fear death?

9. In what different ways were Socrates and Plato "unworldly"?

10. What form of life did Socrates say is not worth living? OR, Do the "authentically Socratic" dialogues usually settle on a final conclusion?

DQ

  • Do you agree with Socrates' conception of philosophy as "an intimate and collaborative activity" requiring "discussions among small groups of people"? (150) What part should reflecting and writing play in this activity?
  • Is devotion to reason accurately characterized as a form of faith? How do you define faith? Is it the same as belief?
  • How do you personally rank the importance of making money, having a comfortable home, achieving vocational or social status, helping others, ...?
  • Do you try to see beyond superficial qualities in friends and acquaintances, in assessing their attractiveness, or do you tend to judge by appearances? (If the latter, does that make you a shallow person?)
  • Must a good teacher always have some specific doctrine or factual content to teach?
  • Do you think Socrates really heard the voice of an inner "guardian spirit" or daimon? Or was he talking about what we might call the voice of conscience or reason?
  • Do you think you'd have found Socrates' arguments persuasive, if you'd been a member of his jury? (145)
  • Should everyone philosophize? Or are some just "called" to that vocation? How do Socrates and Plato differ on this point?
  • Socrates says "goodness brings wealth and every other blessing"... (148) What would he say about people who achieve wealth and success by behaving badly? (Tom Brady maybe, for instance?) What would he say about our society, and those who value money-making above all? Would he agree with Wm James regarding "success"? (See sidebar quote...)
  • How do you rank the virtues? (152)
  • What's your response to the Euthyphro question? (158)
  • What role do you think your early environment, including the music and stories you heard, played in the formation of your character? (161)
  • Was Diogenes "Socrates gone mad"? (169) Is it a mistake to accept and follow the conventions of your community? Should a philosopher flout convention and live like a dog (who's not been trained)?






...Socrates was not elitist in the normal sense. He didn’t believe that a narrow

few should only ever vote. He did, however, insist that only those who had thought about
issues rationally and deeply should be let near a vote. We have forgotten this distinction
between an intellectual democracy and a democracy by birthright. We have given the vote to all without connecting it to wisdom. And Socrates knew exactly where that would lead: to a system the Greeks feared above all, demagoguery.
Ancient Athens had painful experience of demagogues, for example, the louche figure of Alcibiades,a rich, charismatic, smooth-talking wealthy man who eroded basic freedoms and helped to push Athens to its disastrous military adventures in Sicily. Socrates knew how easily people seeking election could exploit our desire for easy answers. He asked us to imagine an election debate between two candidates, one who was like a doctor and the other who was like a sweet shop owner. The sweet shop owner would say of his rival: Look, this person here has worked many evils on you. He hurts you, gives you bitter potions and tells you not to eat and drink whatever you like. He’ll never serve you feasts of many and varied pleasant things like I will. Socrates asks us to consider the audience response: Do you think the doctor would be able to reply effectively? The true answer – ‘I cause you trouble, and go against you desires in order to help you’ would cause an uproar among the voters, don’t you think? We have forgotten all about Socrates’s salient warnings against democracy. We have preferred to think of democracy as an unambiguous good – rather than as something that is only ever as effective as the education system that surrounds it. As a result, we have elected many sweet shop owners, and very few doctors.
==
From Russell's History-
CHAPTER IX The Atomists THE founders of atomism were two, Leucippus and Democritus. It is difficult to disentangle them, because they are generally mentioned together, and apparently some of the works of Leucippus were subsequently attributed to Democritus. Leucippus, who seems to have flourished about 440 B.C., * came from Miletus, and carried on the scientific rationalist philosophy associated with that city. He was much influenced by Parmenides and Zeno. So little is known of him that Epicurus (a later follower of Democritus) was thought to have denied his existence altogether, and some moderns have revived this theory. There are, however, a number of allusions to him in Aristotle, and it seems incredible that these (which include textual quotations) would have occurred if he had been merely a myth. Democritus is a much more definite figure. He was a native of Abdera in Thrace; as for his date, he stated that he was young when Anaxagoras was old, say about 432 B.C., and he is taken to have flourished about 420 B.C. He travelled widely in southern and eastern lands in search of knowledge; he perhaps spent a considerable time in Egypt, and he certainly visited Persia. He then returned to Abdera, where he remained. Zeller calls him "superior to all earlier and contemporary philosophers in wealth of knowledge, and to most in acuteness and logical correctness of thinking." Democritus was a contemporary of Socrates and the Sophists, and should, on purely chronological grounds, be treated somewhat later in our history. The difficulty is that he is so hard to separate from Leucippus...

CHAPTER X Protagoras THE great pre-Socratic systems that we have been considering were confronted, in the latter half of the fifth century, by a sceptical movement, in which the most important figure was Protagoras, chief of the Sophists. The word "Sophist" had originally no bad connotation; it meant, as nearly as may be, what we mean by "professor." A Sophist was a man who made his living by teaching young men certain things that, it was thought, would be useful to them -73- in practical life. As there was no public provision for such education, the Sophists taught only those who had private means, or whose parents had. This tended to give them a certain class bias, which was increased by the political circumstances of the time. In Athens and many other cities, democracy was politically triumphant, but nothing had been done to diminish the wealth of those who belonged to the old aristocratic families. It was, in the main, the rich who embodied what appears to us as Hellenic culture: they had education and leisure, travel had taken the edge off their traditional prejudices, and the time that they spent in discussion sharpened their wits. What was called democracy did not touch the institution of slavery, which enabled the rich to enjoy their wealth without oppressing free citizens. In many cities, however, and especially in Athens, the poorer citizens had towards the rich a double hostility, that of envy, and that of traditionalism. The rich were supposed--often with justice--to be impious and immoral; they were subverting ancient beliefs, and probably trying to destroy democracy. It thus happened that political democracy was associated with cultural conservatism, while those who were cultural innovators tended to be political reactionaries. Somewhat the same situation exists in modern America, where Tammany, as a mainly Catholic organization, is engaged in defending traditional theological and ethical dogmas against the assaults of enlightenment. But the enlightened are politically weaker in America than they were in Athens, because they have failed to make common cause with the plutocracy. There is, however, one important and highly intellectual class which is concerned with the fence of the plutocracy, namely the class of corporation lawyers. In some respects, their functions are similar to those that were performed in Athens by the Sophists. Athenian democracy, though it had the grave limitation of not including slaves or women, was in some respects more democratic than any modern system. Judges and most executive officers were chosen by lot, and served for short periods; they were thus average citizens, like our jurymen, with the prejudices and lack of professionalism characteristic of average citizens. In general, there were a large number of judges to hear each case...

CHAPTER XI Socrates SOCRATES is a very difficult subject for the historian. There are many men concerning whom it is certain that very little is known, and other men concerning whom it is certain that a great deal is known; but in the case of Socrates the uncertainty is as to whether we know very little or a great deal. He was undoubtedly an Athenian citizen of moderate means, who spent his time in disputation, and taught philosophy to the young, but not for money, like the Sophists. He was certainly tried, condemned to death, and executed in 399 B. C., at about the age of seventy. He was unquestionably a well-known figure in Athens, since Aristophanes caricatured him in The Clouds. But beyond this point we become involved in controversy. Two of his pupils, Xenophon and Plato, wrote voluminously about him, but they said very different things. Even when they agree, it has been suggested by Burnet that Xenophon is copying Plato. Where they disagree, some believe the one, some the other, some neither. In such a dangerous dispute, I shall not venture to take sides, but I will set out briefly the various points of view. Let us begin with Xenophon, a military man, not very liberally endowed with brains, and on the whole conventional in his outlook. Xenophon is pained that Socrates should have been accused of impiety and of corrupting the youth; he contends that, on the contrary, Socrates was eminently pious and had a thoroughly wholesome effect upon those who came under his influence. His ideas, it appears, so -82- far from being subversive, were rather dull and commonplace. This defence goes too far, since it leaves the hostility to Socrates unexplained. As Burnet says ( Thales to Plato, p. 149): "Xenophon's defence of Socrates is too successful. He would never have been put to death if he had been like that." There has been a tendency to think that everything Xenophon says must be true, because he had not the wits to think of anything untrue. This is a very invalid line of argument. A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something that he can understand. I would rather be reported by my bitterest enemy among philosophers than by a friend innocent of philosophy. We cannot therefore accept what Xenophon says if it either involves any difficult point in philosophy or is part of an argument to prove that Socrates was unjustly condemned. Nevertheless, some of Xenophon's reminiscences are very convincing. He tells (as Plato also does) how Socrates was continually occupied with the problem of getting competent men into positions of power. He would ask such questions as: "If I wanted a shoe mended, whom should I employ?" To which some ingenuous youth would answer: "A shoemaker, O Socrates." He would go on to carpenters, coppersmiths, etc., and finally ask some such question as "who should mend the Ship of State?" When he fell into conflict with the Thirty Tyrants, Critias, their chief, who knew his ways from having studied under him, forbade him to continue teaching the young, and added: "You had better be done with your shoemakers, carpenters, and coppersmiths. These must be pretty well trodden out at heel by this time, considering the circulation you have given them" ( Xenophon, Memorabilia, Bk. I, Chap. II). This happened during the brief oligarchic government established by the Spartans at the end of the Peloponnesian War. But at most times Athens was democratic, so much so that even generals were elected or chosen by lot. Socrates came across a young man who wished to become a general, and persuaded him that it would be well to know something of the art of war. The young man accordingly went away and took a brief course in tactics. When he returned, Socrates, after some satirical praise, sent him back for further instruction (ib. Bk. III, Chap I). Another young man he set to learning the principles of -83- finance. He tried the same sort of plan on many people, including the war minister; but it was decided that it was easier to silence him by means of the hemlock than to cure the evils of which he complained. With Plato's account of Socrates, the difficulty is quite a different one from what it is in the case of Xenophon, namely, that it is very hard to judge how far Plato means to portray the historical Socrates, and how far he intends the person called "Socrates" in his dialogues to be merely the mouthpiece of his own opinions. Plato, in addition to being a philosopher, is an imaginative writer of great genius and charm. No one supposes, and he himself does not seriously pretend, that the conversations in his dialogues took place just as he records them. Nevertheless, at any rate in the earlier dialogues, the conversation is completely natural and the characters quite convincing. It is the excellence of Plato as a writer of fiction that throws doubt on him as a historian. His Socrates is a consistent and extraordinarily interesting character, far beyond the power of most men to invent; but I think Platocould have invented him. Whether he did so is of course another question... (continues)
==
==
An old post-

Socrates & Plato

Western philosophy began well before Socrates, but we'll leave the pre-Socratics to themselves for now and pretend that Socrates was indeed the first (western) philosopher. We'll also soft-pedal Bertrand Russell's judgment (later shared by Izzy Stone) that the Platonic Socrates is "dishonest and sophistical in argument... smug and unctuous... not scientific in his thinking... [guilty of] treachery to truth" and so on. If the esteemed Socrates-as-paragon and personification of intellectual integrity ("I'd rather die than give up my philosophy" etc.) didn't exist we'd have had to invent him. Perhaps Plato did.

In the southern part of Europe is a little country called Greece… the Greeks have lived in it for more than three thousand years. In olden times they believed that before they came to the land it was the home of the gods, and they used to tell wonderful stories


And then Socrates came along to challenge some of those stories. (There actually were some important pre-Socratics like Thales and Democritus already challenging what everybody knew, but we’re jumping ahead in our Little History.) And that’s why, from a western philosopher’s point of view, the Greeks matter.

The old Parthenon must have been lovely, but I think ours is prettier nowadays. And btw, our Parthenon's city ("The Athens of the South") is hot (as in cool) lately.

[There's a new theory about the old Parthenon, btw. "Horses and riders, youths and elders, men and women, animals being led to sacrifice: What is the Parthenon’s frieze telling us?"... more]

Socrates, from Alopece, near Athens, asked a lot of questions. Like Gilda Radner's Roseanne Roseannadanna. Like Bertrand Russell:

Bertrand Russell ‏@B_RussellQuotesJan 31
In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.

Did curiosity kill the philosopher? No, a narrow plurality of 500 jurors did. (His unrepentant attitude during sentencing didn't help, either.) They convicted him of "impiety" (atheism) and corrupting the youth of Athens. One more reason I'm lucky to live in the 21st century: I don't like hemlock. I'm like Woody Allen, that way. (But if shocking new allegations are true, hemlock may be too good for him.) Steve Martin (did I mention that he was a philosophy major?) had a go at it too. Here's a good Discussion Question: what would you do, in Socrates' cell?

He was “snub-nosed, podgy, shabby and a bit strange,” says our text. "He was ugly," says podcastee Mary McCabe. But brilliant and charismatic too, as gadflies go. Said he had nothing to teach, but those around him (including young Plato) said they learned plenty from him, especially how
to discuss with others in this open-minded, open-ended way that allows them to reflect on what they think and us to reflect on what we think, without dictating, without dogma, without insistence, and without imperative... to be true to themselves: to be sincere about their beliefs and to be honest... and to have some respect for their companion. If that's not good teaching, what is? 


The annotated and hyperlinked Last Days of Socrates is a gripping and inspiring tale, whether or not its hero was really as heroic through all the days of his life as Plato and his other admirers would have us believe. The honored pedestal version of this gadfly remains a worthy ideal for philosophy.

"Plato, they say, could stick it away..." -they being Monty Python. And the late great Hitch sang it too, sorta. But Plato was a serious and sober fellow, in Reality, usually capitalizing that word to distinguish it from mere appearance. The everyday world is not at all what it appears to be, he said. If you want Truth and Reality and the Good, get out of your cave and go behold the Forms. He seemed to think that’s what his hero Socrates had done. I’m not so sure. But read the relevant Platonic dialogues telling the tragic and inspiring story of the last days of Socrates and see what you think.

He also had interesting thoughts about love and eros, as expressed through his constant dialogue character "Socrates" (who may or may not have spoken faithfully for his martyred namesake) in Symposium. Angie Hobbs says Plato rejected Aristophanes' mythic notion that we all have one unique other "half," formerly parts of our hermaphroditic spherical selves, that would complete us and make us happy. But he defended a view some of us find equally implausible, the idea that the true and highest love spurns (or spins upward from) particular persons and embraces the Form of Beauty.

The Form of Beauty "is always going to be there for you," but on the other hand "it's never going to love you back." Unrequited affection is hardly what most of us think of as Perfect Love. There's a myth for you. This really was an early foreshadowing of the phenomenon recently deplored in the Stone, our modern turn to abstraction and virtual experience in lieu of immediacy and reality and touch. ("Losing Our Touch", nyt). Reminds me, too, of Rebecca Goldstein's Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away.

We romantics (as Angie Hobbs pronounces herself, and as I confess to being too) should know better than to seek a perfect match. We should know better than to think that any enduring relationship can be wholly free of "pain, fragility, and transience." Those are inevitable parts of the story and the glory of human (as against Ideal, Platonic, Perfect) love, no? Just ask Cecil the Butler about Sidney Poitier. 

123 comments:

  1. 8
    Alternative Quiz Questions
    1. Was Protagoras an impressive polymath?
    2.What did Protagoras even write a treaty on?
    3.What was Hippias prepared to teach about?
    4.Where did Plato say Hippias appeared?
    5.What did Plato say that Hippias made at the Olympic Games?
    6.Why did Hippias appear at the Olympic Games?
    7.What was Hippias prepared to do in public appearances?
    8.Did Plato say that Hippias learning was more deep or wide?
    9.What reasonably important thing did Hippias discover in geometry?
    10.What did Antiphons surviving words express?
    11.What were the subject of the handbooks that Gorgias wrote?
    12.Gorgias was a renowned what?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Yes he was.
      2. Wrote a treaty on wrestling.
      4. Olympic (Olympian) Games
      5. Cloaks, shoes, tunics, rings, and brushes
      6. To recite and share his poems with others
      5.

      Delete
  2. ** 8 **
    1. Yes.
    2. Wrestling.
    3. Practically anything at all.
    4. Olympian Games.
    5. He made his own shoes, cloak, tunic, girdle and rings, as well as a brush and oil-flask.
    6. To recite some of his poems.
    7. Both to deliver prepared orations and to take questions from all comers.
    8. It was much less deep than it was wide.
    9. A Curve.
    10. A weary pessimism.
    11. Rhetoric.
    12. He was a renowned orator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Heather Deal9:36 PM CST

    Section 9
    Alternative Quiz Questions
    1. What were the six primary qualities that Robert Boyle termed as tools to explain the phenomena of nature?
    2. What three ingredients are needed for a healthy society?
    3. Who wrote that the worst thing of all is indulgence in the schooling of the young?
    4. Who regarded Sophists as cynical tricksters who abused the art of intellectual argument?
    5. Who referred to Gladstone as 'a sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity'?
    6. Much of the impetus for modern relativism be traced to whom?
    7. What group of American philosophers tried to develop the idea that the important thing about beliefs is their general usefulness and the role they play in life?
    8. Who says that acting in accordance with the law may turn out to be against one's own best interests?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. section 8
      1. size, shape, order, texture, solidity and motion of particles
      2. stability, moderation, and orders
      3. Democritus
      4. Plato
      5. Disraeli
      6. Kant
      7.Pragmatists
      8. Antiphon

      Delete
    2. 1. Shape, Order, Texture, Size, Solidity, and motion of particles
      2. Stability, moderation, and orders
      3. Democritus
      4. Plato
      5. Disraeli
      6. Kant
      7. Pragmatists
      8. Antiphon

      Delete
  4. Maddy Russell
    10 DQ 7
    His view on children is a little distorted to say the least. He thinks that for a man to experience children he should go through friends, because if you have your own child you don't know what they will be like.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that if you're having kids for the right reason, it doesn't matter if you don't know what they're going to be like. Experiencing kids through friends is not the same as raising your own.

      Delete
  5. Discussion question responses:
    1. There is life after death for the atoms (if you could call it life) but the mind would not carry on in a way that you would ever know you were alive. Your energy would transfer into the earth just like when everything else dies.
    2. I wouldn't say it liberates us from fear of death. Fear from eternal pain (hell) possibly. But death, no. Because your life is still coming to an end and there really is no way of knowing if your mind and thoughts will somehow carry on.
    3. I would like to think (ha) that we can think our own thoughts, but it really wouldn't surprise me if we were just going along with a script already written for us and we are simply watching our minds think from the outside? There is something to say about the unconscious mind and how quickly we can think/assume something, yet other times we really evaluate and dissect what our thoughts are telling us.
    4. Does this mean that these particles were always here? How can you create something indestructible? If it is the smallest particle what is it made of and how did it come about? Energy cannot be created or destroyed???

    Alternate discussion question:
    1. Say we are not actually in control of our own thoughts and simply watching them play unfold, are we stuck within whatever mental capacity is given to us at birth? Is it possible to expand our own minds/thoughts if we do not necessarily control them?

    Alternative quiz question:
    1. Later in Plato's life he became extremely hostile towards the Sophists, he described them as cynical tricksters who abused the art of what?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dalis de la Mothe2:42 PM CST

      Alternative quiz question 1: Teaching.

      Delete
  6. 10

    1. atoms are not living things so when someone dies there atoms continue to persist, but there presence does not mean that someone is still living.

    2. atomism is what composes everything that we know of, but even with this in mind many people still continue to fear certain aspects of life and death.

    3. That comes down to as what do you define as free. Our mental processes are based off genetic contributions from our parents. Does that mean genetics restricts are ability to think freely? Our minds produce our thoughts, and our thoughts are based on how we perceive stimuli. People can choose how they feel about something so in that sense we have some freedom, but not complete freedom. More like privileges.

    4. It was not proved that atoms could be split, we would not have learned just how powerful it is and the concepts behind it to allow us to grow from.

    5. it is reasonable to think that there are other worlds out there with how many planets, and galaxies there are.

    6. His idea about the "selfish gene" seems like a rational possibility.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like how you explain the question! I can also agree that some of our freedoms are more similar to privileges. As for number four, we do more about space than we do our oceans so I also think its reasonable to believe there are other worlds.

      Delete
  7. 8 2/9 Alternative Quiz Questions
    1.What one thing led Plato to the mysterious Forms?
    2.What words were above Platos academy
    3.What did Aristotle complain about Platos followers?
    4.What struck Plato about the objects dealt with in mathematics?
    5.What is Euthyphro about to prosecute his own father for?
    6.Which two men meet outside the law courts?
    7.What does Socrates wonder about Euthyphro
    8.What does Socrates get Euthyphro to see?
    9.What question occurred to Socrates on page 159?
    10. Does Euthyphro understand Socrates question?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. his fascination with mathematics
      2. ‘No one ignorant of geometry admitted here’
      3. ‘Mathematics has come to be the whole of philosophy’
      4. they are ideal, eternal, unchanging and pleasingly independent of earthly, visible things
      5. causing the death of a slave who had himself murdered another slave

      Delete
  8. Clayton Thomas (10)2:21 PM CST

    2-7: DQ

    1. If everything is composed of atoms, then at the time of death those atoms will continue to persist in this world as a dead body; however, there is no 'person' occupying that body. Which brings up the question are the mind and body separate or one entity?

    2. Although atomism is only a set of beliefs about the how one can perceive the world, it does not liberate us from emotional connections to life experiences, such as death and superstition.

    3. I would say both to an extent. Why? Based solely on personal experience, sometimes i find myself sitting around with randomness floating around in my head when I'm not controlling my thoughts and other times it's very concrete, and straightforward what I am thinking when I am controlling my thoughts.

    4. Well as an atomist, if you cannot prove your own theory or at the least some inferential data to back up your theory, then how could you spread your ideas? Plus, if they did find proof it probably would've ended up pretty deadly so let's be glad that they couldn't prove it.

    5. It is reasonable, but it also depends on your definition of world. A world could be a garage to a car mechanic, or it could be a theme park for a thrill seeker. But, all of these worlds had to come from somewhere right?

    6. I feel like Dawkins' has a a good argument with sound logic, just that his argument is based on fallacies. Sure it's true that "If a group of atoms falls into a stable pattern it will tend to stay that way", but it still doesn't explain the answer why that happened? Chemically we can understand exactly why that happened, but in a holistic view it's hard to answer that question with an exact answer.

    7. I feel like there is truth in what he says, but also some moral conflictions. Sure, someone could just go pick out the perfect child from someone else, but then it's not really your child. It takes away from the bond that forms between parent and child and I personally think it will put this idea in the parents head that "their" child should be perfect because they were selected.

    8. I kind of agree with Democritus's "preaching" here. The non-religious moral idea that virtue is a matter of self-interest could lead to a path of amoral selfishness, always doing what's in their best interest to be virtuous, or non-virtuous, and just pushing everything else out of the way could lead to a self-destructive path amongst your community and within yourself.

    9. Pericles defines democracy as "[...] power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people. [...] what counts is not membership of a particular class, but the actual ability with which the man posses." Going by this definition, I could give one perfect example of why we do not have a democracy based on this definition is President Donald Trump, or the lady he wants to promote to be our Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos (whom has no qualifications whatsoever to be the Secretary of Education).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous3:33 PM CDT

      I enjoyed all of your responses because most of them had rhetorical questions and that it beneficial with learning, in my opinion. Response #2 is golden. You cant spread ideas without being able to prove your theory.

      Delete
  9. 10
    Alternative quiz questions
    Athenians' thought the sophist had opened what box?
    Who wrote "Selfish Gene"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dalis de la Mothe2:44 PM CST

      Who wrote "Selfish Gene"?
      *Richard Dawkins

      Delete
    2. -Athenians thought the sophists had opened a Pandora's box.
      -Richard Dawkins

      Delete
    3. Fonshae Knight8:49 PM CDT

      1. Pandora's box.
      2. Richard Dawkins

      Delete
  10. Dalis de la Mothe2:33 PM CST

    If everything is composed of atoms, does it follow that there is no life after death?
    *I don't think it matters, but I don't see how the two connect in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dalis de la Mothe2:35 PM CST

    Does atomism "liberate [us] from superstition, fear of death, and the tyranny of priests"?
    *Obviously not. Religion is still one of the strongest belief systems in our world. People are just going to believe what they want to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dalis de la Mothe2:39 PM CST

    If thought consists in the motion of mind-atoms, can we freely think our own thoughts? Or are we passive spectators of "our" minds?
    *I mean, I don't think so considering that it seems we each have free control of our thoughts. However, people with certain mental disorders do not as they experience, so one could argue that those specific people do not have complete control over their mental state. Then again who does, as we a re semi products of the environment we are placed in.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Section 8
    Quiz Questions
    1. While Socrates believed that unjust laws were meant to be disobeyed, what course of action did he believe in taking if caught?

    2. What, according to Plato, were one of Socrates’ reasons for not making an escape from Athens before his execution?

    3. How does Gottlieb describe Socrates’ attitude towards religion and morality?

    4. Why are we left to rely on the witness accounts of Plato, Xenophon, Aristophanes, and Aristotle to learn about Socrates?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Submitting to punishment

      2. He felt a moral obligation to the legitimate authority of the city and the due process of law; he also loved Athens and did not wish to live anywhere else

      3. ultra-democratic

      4. Because philosophy was and intimate and collaborative series of discussions for Socrates. He did not write anything down.

      Delete
  14. Section 8
    Discussion Questions

    5. I do think Socrates heard a voice, much like we all do, you can call it your conscience, the voice of reason, or a guardian angel. It's the private , and often real-est you, that no one else can hear, see or judge. It reminds me of the hypothesis from psychology - bicameralism - (yes, thanks Westworld). Bicameralism "argues that the human mind once assumed a state in which cognitive functions were divided between one part of the brain which appears to be "speaking", and a second part which listens and obeys—a bicameral mind."
    Julian Jaynes first coined the term in 1976 with his book The Origin of Consciousness in the Break Down of the Bicameral Mind.
    Check it out here: http://s-f-walker.org.uk/pubsebooks/pdfs/Julian_Jaynes_The_Origin_of_Consciousness.pdf

    6. I do think I would have found his arguments persuasive if I had been a member of the jury. I really enjoy logic problems, and I have enjoyed reading about some of his thoughts and ideas, and of course arguments, of logic. Really fascinating.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Alexus Uqdah 8

    DQ:

    I personally don't try to rank money or things of that nature higher than interaction with people and experiences. However, I do think that they are pretty important things in my life. In this society it is important to have things of that nature. I don't think any person would turn down a warm home and more money. I do know that I don't want to continue to work my whole life for those things and never just get to enjoy experiences, if that makes sense.


    ReplyDelete
  16. 10- D.Q.

    3.) Money is an important thing in life but is not higher than that of helping other around you. Money is not needed to live a good live and we see that with Socratese, although it can make your life more comfortable and easier at times. Socratese felt that he was obligated to teach through philosophizing and made it his only priority, aside from making money, being of high status, or living a comfortable life.

    4.) I tend to look at what is in a person rather than their physical attributes and appearances. A person's values and personality is who they truly are, that whats on the inside, good or bad, is far more superior than whats on the outside.

    5.) I don't believe a good teacher has to have a specific doctrine or factual content to teach well. A good teacher has the ability to teach well with what is available at hand.

    6.) I do not believe that Socratese actually heard an inner guardian spirit, that rather he was talking about the voice of his conscience in reasoning.

    7.)I really think I would have found Socratese argument persuasive due to his tactics in conversing. That he would ask for an enlightened definition an play off his counterpart's thoughts as he began to persuade using the definition given to defend his arguement with use of dialectic.

    8.) Some people seem to fit the philosopher status and calling far more than others due, with different ways going about it as well as we see in Socratese and Plato. Where Socratese believed it was his obligation, Plato was not as straight forward and always had an eye on what was further beyond, that he was ahead of everyone, that he seemed, to me, to be more for self satisfaction in intriguing matters.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 10

    DQ

    1. I don't think that you have to be in a small group to participate in the act of philosophizing.

    2. Faith is believing in something based on hope, not on actual supporting evidence.

    3. Achieving a reasonable goal seems to be the most important aspect of living a healthy life. Everyone has priorities that are wrapped around their goals in life. Some people are willing to sacrifice making money and having a comfortable life, because to them, going out of their way to achieve their goals makes these sacrifices worth it.

    4. I try to see beyond superficial qualities, because how a person looks doesn't really define their character.

    5. A teacher should be in the profession of educating. If you are giving teachings based only on your own beliefs and opinions. Then those students are not receiving a quality education.


    6. I would think that he was talking about his conscience.

    7. He sounded somewhat conceited when he was in the court. I do not find that to be a persuasive character trait. I would not condone him to punishment or death for it though because that's unreasonable.

    8. I think everyone should philosophize.

    12. A child's early environment is very influential to their mental and physical development. Therefore an early environment is influential on a child's character.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like your answer to question five.

      Delete
  18. Clayton Thomas (10)12:53 PM CST

    1. I think Socrates was on to something with this idea. For one, it's hard to process information in large groups with multiple people pitching their ideas and also the larger the group gets the harder a true discussion becomes, rather it would probably break into small conversations anyways. I think writing and reflecting should be the personal aspect of that, if you want to record everything on paper then that is your prerogative to do so.

    2. I would devotion in anything is showing some form of faith, in order to be considered true devotion someone would have to put in a lot of time and with that much time and effort put into something you have become faithful to that idea system. Now that's not to say you believe in something because someone could be devoted to disproving an idea. Thus, the are faithful in their idea that someone else's idea is wrong.

    3. Personally, my importance ranking is making in order to live a comfortable life, remaining true to who I am and retaining elf-worth, helping others, high social status.

    4. At first glance, I'm judging by appearances because I have no idea who this person is. However, after affirming the friendship it definitely matters who they are as a person. I could care what you look like as long as you are there to be a good friend then that's all that matters.

    5. A good teacher does not necessarily have to teach factual information (although that would be preferred to false or skewed information), in my eyes, a good teacher just has to be willing to connect with their students in some way or no one will be intrigued long enough to hear what they have to say.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Section 9
    DQ's
    1.yes i agree with Socrates in his idea of philosophy it is to be discussed and shared. After it is collaborated however i feel that those ideas should be reflected upon and written down.
    2.No, devotion to reason is faith. faith is like belief in something that you can't give hard evidence for.
    3.Making money and living comfortably would both probably be high up there with helping others being shortly under that. However social status i don't really care about.
    4.With friends i tend not to look at their physical attributes. Not so much with acquaintances,but i don't feel that makes me shallow that's just human nature.
    5.Some of the best teachers teach concepts or ideas so no i don't think that they always have to have factual content to teach
    6.I believe he was probably talking about his conscience.
    Socrates seems very persuasive so, most likely
    8.I believe everyone should philosophize, while some people are better at it than others everyone should.
    9.I feel that Socrates would be very happy with bad people succeeding as other people of this generation are that believe the same thing. However that's just how today's society works.
    10.justice,wisdom,moderation,courage,piety
    11.Something is holy because the gods deem it as holy
    12.yes what you grew up with definitely mold your character, and is very important
    13.Yes Diogenes was crazy. No, if you want to fit in with society you might want to accept most of common society laws. no to live like a dog is crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Dalis de la Mothe2:14 PM CST

    Is devotion to reason accurately characterized as a form of faith? How do you define faith? Is it the same as belief?
    *If said person considers it their faith then I'm not going to tell them that it's not. Faith is a state of believing that does not require any empirical evidence. A belief however is the state of acknowledging something as real and apparent. Beliefs and faiths intertwine but they are two different things. I believe that cats exist because they do.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 10
    Alternative Quiz Questions
    Who wrote "Apology"?
    What as the Thirty Tyrants?
    What impact did the Thirty Tyrants have on the trial of Socrates?
    What was the charges brought against Socrates?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fonshae Knight9:07 PM CDT

      1. Plato
      2. a replacement group of men for the Athenian democracy that only lasted one year due to too many murders.
      3.
      4. corrupted the young.

      Delete
  22. 10
    Alternative Quiz Questions
    Who were two en with Socrates when he dies?
    In "Apology", what is the most important thing in life?
    What did Socrates say about his own uncertainty and inquiries?

    ReplyDelete
  23. 10
    DQ 1 and 3
    1. I agree with Socrates that philosophizing works best in a group of people. When you ask questions it is better to ask other people not just yourself, and having discussions with people is more helpful than talking with yourself.
    3. I personally put helping others and having a comfortable life above having money and social status.

    ReplyDelete
  24. #10
    answers to alternative questions by chris ferran

    1. Yes
    2. nature of gods
    3. practically anything at all
    4. olympian games
    5. shoes, clothes, tunic, girdle and rings, brush and oil flask
    6. recite some of his poetry
    7. deliver prepared orations and take questions on them
    8. wide
    9. a curve
    10. a weary pessimism
    11. rhetoric
    12. orator

    ReplyDelete
  25. DQs 9-19-2017
    1. Atoms will continue to exist after death but the being inside the body will cease to exist. Now there being no life after death we can't be sure of.
    2.atomism is about how one views the world. It does not liberate us from fear or the unknowing.
    3.ummm. I would say a little of both. when you say freely think what do you mean? I feel like my thoughts are my own.
    5.yes, but what is every sort of world? It is a broad term.
    6.I think hmm. Im not sure. I think its not really answering anything.
    .

    Ill be back to answer more tomorrow

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like your response to question one

      Delete
  26. #9
    I dont think that atoms have anything to do with this because you have to know the definition of an atom. An atom is the smallest unit of matter.
    If thought consists in the motion of mind-atoms, can we freely think our own thoughts? Or are we passive spectators of "our" minds?
    I feel we already are in control of our own mind.
    Was Socrates a Sophist?
    He was.
    Was Protagoras a relativist?
    He was.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Merna Ghobrial5:24 PM CDT

    #6

    Creating Our Own Happiness
    http://thisibelieve.org/essay/24791/

    ReplyDelete
  28. Merna Ghobrial5:27 PM CDT

    #6

    Laughter in Unexpected Times
    http://thisibelieve.org/essay/97922/

    ReplyDelete
  29. Merna Ghobrial5:45 PM CDT

    #6

    Alternative Quiz Questions:
    1. Who devoted considerable effort to proving that atomism was mostly nonsense?
    2. Where does the word atom come from?
    3. Democritus once said that he would rather find a single genuine explanation than become what?
    4. Leucippus and Democritus were led to atoms not by evidence but by who?
    5. The average Athenian would have no time for what?
    6. Aristophanes did not trouble his audience with what?
    7. Some people hold that moral values are relative, so that what is morally right or wrong depends on what?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous3:25 PM CDT

    Atoms will never cease to exist as long as there are humans on this Earth, however, we are so unsure of this life after death phenomena that there is no real way to tell what happens as the human soul leaves the body.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous3:30 PM CDT

    I believe we can freely think our own thoughts, I wouldn't say the atoms in your mind control necessarily, however i find that particular question a bit vague.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous3:30 PM CDT

    When we think about change, we think about the evolution of time. The thing is about change is that it is the only thing that is consistent. We should be waking up every day with a drive to see and make change in the world around us. We wake up with the ability to change our own lives, every single day. We have 24 hours to change something about our life that we don’t like. The simple quote "the content of your character is your choice," I agree so much with this because we get to wake up every day and decide how we are going to act, we get the change if we are going to be different than yesterday. While change does not always happen overnight, we have to plant a spot in the same direction every day.
    “In change we find purpose,” really stood out to me as well because even if we don’t necessarily like change, there is a reason for it. There is reason change never stops occurring, that reason might not be clear to all of us now, but it benefits everyone for the future. Professor Oliver was talking about how change effects family hierarchy and whether it is true or not. I would find that it is very true, based on sexuality, gender, or race of significant others or children down the family line.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anonymous3:39 PM CDT

    “Life is a book. The fact that it was a short book doesn’t mean it wasn’t a good book. It was a very good book.”
    After reading about Virtue, meaning and a good life, i wanted to share this quote because nothing matters about your story as long as you enjoy the ride. We all aspire to live until we are one hundred, however, even if we cant, we have to make the most of the days we get.

    ReplyDelete
  34. #10 Alternative Quiz Questions
    1.) Who first rattled the bars of nature’s gates in the name of atomism?
    2.) From Democritus’ wide experience and interests, he was able to produce treatises on what subjects?
    3.) What was one of Democritus’ main passions?
    4.) Where was Democritus born?
    5.) What is the origin and meaning of the word “atom”?
    6.) Name two philosophers who made contributions to the “primary” and “secondary” qualities of things.
    7.) Who argued that "many features of our picture of the world are imposed by the human mind and that since all human minds are the same in crucial aspects, these truths are the same for everybody?"
    8.) Where are strains of relativist thinking nowadays found more often than in the pages of professional philosophers?
    9.) In the 19th century, what did American philosophers call themselves?
    10.) What idea did 19th century American philosophers try to develop?

    ReplyDelete
  35. DQ 1 - Yes, I believe that the search for truth must be conducted with an open mind and a spirit of exploration, rather than belligerence. Any large group of people who disagree will resort to something less than philosophizing: polemics at best, violence at worst. There just hasn't been much success holding such conversations with large numbers of people.

    DQ 2 - Undeniably, devotion to reason is faith - because one must have faith that reason 1) is a real and objective thing, 2) that people have the ability to utilize reason on demand, and 3) that relying upon man's ability to reason serves some important function. If any of these is believed to be untrue, then a devotion to reason cannot exist.

    DQ 3 - The importance of making money, attaining properties, and achieving professionally or socially are dependent upon the life and goals of the individual. If you tell me that you want to give your children all the opportunities that you never had, then all of those things are important, whereas if you tell me that you're going to help feed the homeless, none of those are necessarily important. Helping people, however, is always important - for its impact on your psyche, for the likelihood that sometimes it will come back to you, from the impact it makes on the societal atmosphere around us, and for the good it does your soul.

    DQ 4 - I attempt to surround myself with interesting people - not necessarily beautiful people - and this means I tend to be surrounded by people who disagree with me. Unfortunately, this also means they tend to disagree with each other less than they disagree with me, so I often appear contrary - though, in fact, had I agreed with them, they would have had a harder time being interesting to me.

    DQ 5 - No. The law is an excellent example of this, as it is in a constant state of extra-legislative change. A re-interpretation of an existing law can cause a law to be applied in a different (perhaps even opposite) manner, because the law in this country is not guided by any one doctrine, nor is it a factual, objective entity, at least in any meaningful sense. Rather, knowing the law means knowing the trending interpretations for that law, and having a nearly prescient sense of when and how that trend is going to change.


    DQ 6 - I don't know. It's entirely possible that Socrates was inspired by God, but that is indistinguishable from the voice of conscience or reason, to use your phrase. God does not speak to His people through any other means than he uses to speak to everyone else. We all hear the same divine whispers; for the sake of this argument, attribute them to whatever you want.

    DQ 7 - Quite probably. I'm not much of one for convicting people without quite damning evidence. I don't think his arguments would've mattered quite so much to me as attempting to define piety would have.

    DQ 8 - Everyone does philosophize, though not everyone realizes it, and it should remain that way. The search for truth, for purpose, and for understanding should not be artificial confined to a specific group of people. Plato disagrees with me, but that's because he was from an aristocratic family and was a gifted thinker; I forgive him.

    DQ 9 - I think he would acknowledge that the lack of goodness does not preclude the possibility of attaining wealth or other blessings. I suspect that, seeing our society, he would not find an inherent contradiction in the success of selfish and wicked people, but that he would focus on examples of people for whom "goodness" has, in fact, brought prosperity and other gifts. I hope he'd chastise us for assuming that the existence of something outside the scope of a line of reasoning must contradict that line of reasoning.

    DQ 10 - I must move outside the scope of your question to answer it! There are only two virtues: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as you love yourself. These two virtues are listed in proper order - the first in priority before the second.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay, so I did the DQs in inverse order, so here are the first set of DQs!

      DQ 1 - If everything is composed of atoms, can you tell me the chemical composition of the letter B? How about the color purple? The number 4? The sound of my voice? The chemical composition of selfish thoughts? Of hunger? Of happiness? Obviously, not -everything- is composed of atoms. Whatever the smallest component of matter is - if, in fact, there is any such thing - it cannot be matter. Thoughts, feelings, and ideas do not necessarily have a chemical composition - a material substance - to be so reduced. I am no dualist, but I do not pretend to believe that everything humans experience is reducible down to something so basic as matter. Life is more than matter - as physicists can tell you (energy is not matter, though matter may only be a configuration of energy - I'll leave that to physicists to prove or disprove).

      DQ 2 - Atomism, in and of itself, does nothing. If you become a slave of an idea, it does exclude the possibility of you benefitting from any other idea, but if you can see past the allure of the idea and accept its merits and its faults, then you will be remain free from it. The atomic model of the world, whether it is disproven or not, is useful in some contexts and useless in others. What is important is not so much that the atomic model must be correct, but that, in some endeavors, at least, the world functions as if it is.

      DQ 3 - If "mind atoms" were to exist, and all thoughts arose from their movements, then we would have an odd statistical anomaly: great thinkers tend to produce great thoughts, whereas the "mind atom motion" hypothesis would tend to produce a random dispersion of great thoughts, and often our thoughts would have to exceed the scope of our personal knowledge (after all, if movement of mind atoms produces thoughts, then only that motion matters, and we are incapable of knowing or of being ignorant, as all thoughts and knowledge would be distributed according to some principles beyond the control of humankind, which necessarily includes our ability to be knowledgeable or unknowledgeable about a topic).

      DQ 4 - This is likely the case, as I implied earlier, and I don't find this to be particularly troublesome. The naturalist fumes at the idea that he cannot know everything, but the theist, acknowledging all the wonder, complexity, and implausibility of Creation, can happily appreciate both the properties of that Creation and the impenetrability of the Creator.

      DQ 5 - I don't think it's reasonable to suppose any such thing, nor do I think it reasonable to suppose that such is not true. The scope and complexity of each and every imagined condition is likely too difficult for anything less than a team of experts to create a probability model that could be in any way meaningful, much less accurate. Until a compendium containing every possible imagined reality is made, and a model made to explain the requisite conditions and chronology, it is impossible to take this thought very seriously. Suffice it to say that there are things which we cannot imagine in this Creation; spend time imagining what you can, by all means, but don't get caught up in the details unprofitably.

      Delete
  36. Dakota Berrett2:51 AM CDT

    DQ 1- I don't think the fact that everything is composed of atoms gives any hints as to weather there is an afterlife or not.

    DQ 2- It would liberate from a lot of things: fear, sadness, responsibility, happiness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dakota Berrett11:27 PM CDT

      I think a teacher must always have something of importance to teach. Or else what is their purpose?

      I think Socrates was talking about a conscience. Rather than a supernatural voice.

      Delete
  37. What do you think of Democritus's view of children?
    Democritus’s belief in context is completely understanding, the idea that a population should gather itself around a supreme individual in society. This philosophy highlighted key figures and based its teachings and foundation of society to a few key figures to the extent of an oligarchy. So, to judge Democritus of being ignorant isn’t completely fair. His civilization was on a hot streak so to speak, Thrace kept an incredible amount of people out of having any sort of property and say in government, he had developed the first of the most influential proven theories in written history, and the Persian war was ongoing during most of his life so I’d imagine that was influential in what makes Democritus. He viewed children as something that needed to be shaped later by the key figures of society and believed that the worst thing is the indulgence of education in the youth, even though education was incredibly important to Democritus he just believed that children interfere with philosophy. Democritus is said to believe that if a father were to choose or want his friend’s child then it would be better not having any risk with the relationship such as the father wanting to stay with the child’s mother. It is evident that Democritus doesn’t believe in family values or raising a child, he is said to not have children. I believe that it is ignorant of Democritus to not believe the education of the youth is where you see the long-term growth of a society and that society should be based around certain individuals or “atoms”.
    Landon Eaves #9

    ReplyDelete
  38. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  39. #10
    1. Why was democritus remembered as the laughing philosopher?
    2. Who did Democritus derive his ideas from?
    3. What are the bastard senses?
    4. What did democritus say to account for smell,taste,and sight
    5. What did Robert Boyle say about the senses?
    6. How did democritus explain man's beginnings?
    7. What did plato think of the sophists?
    8. Where was the sophist movement located?
    9. Was protagoras a sophist>
    10. Why were the sophists regarded with disdain?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #10
      1.) Because he scoffed at the folly of mankind
      4.) Colors and flavors of everyday things were not objective properties of the outside world at all.

      Delete
  40. #10 DQ 9/18/17

    1.) If everything is composed of atoms, life and death would not exist since atoms are composed of physical characteristics and “afterlife” is just a thought that is hard to prove that it exists. So far, religion encourages life after death which creates motivation for people to live fully.

    2.) Atomism does liberate us from superstitions and tyranny of priests since it demonstrates how every physical thing is formed or structured. On the other hand, religion or theology encourages fear of death, superstitions, etc.

    3.) If thought consists in the motion of mind-atoms, we would be able to freely think our own thoughts. We would be able to attain these thoughts and express them to others with deeper meaning.

    4.) There is not much difference in proving particles to be “unsplittable,” depending on how the definition is used. To me, it seems like they are relating particles to the surrounding forces, fields, and energy. These characteristics are inseparable to particles since each play a role in functions of particles.

    5.) It is possible and reasonable in theory since different “worlds” can form as a result of dated events of collision and such.

    6.) Atomism reveals the truth of how physical things are formed, but it doesn’t relieve humans from pondering upon the meaning of life. Theology or religion exist to help promote meaning of life as well as morality, beliefs and values, etc. Without those aspects, we would be just like robots programmed to find ways to further develop and discover more about the world; if atomism took over as an answer to everything, we wouldn’t worry about death, others emotions, etc.

    7.) His view of children is rather odd and harsh because it seems like he finds children to be a burden. He says that one should choose another’s child than giving birth to one. He finds the responsibility of a parent to take care of the child to be a weight dragging the parent’s life. I dislike this viewpoint. Having a kid is critical to continue the family tree. Not only that, having to protect and nourish them creates a sense of meaning in life and can change the parent inside beneficially for some. Plus, it’s fun having a good time with the miniature version of you and teaching them as well.

    8.) He preaches that people should follow a virtuous behavior. I disagree on that because virtues differ among us. We have differing intentions of how we follow our virtues which can invoke malpractice. To reduce the chances of breaking or invading morals, we have to limit ourselves or set a threshold on our behavior.

    9.) I think that American democracy fits the Periclean definition. Power is on the hands of the people by voting for representatives who are capable of representing the people of the country. For the most part. Though class may seem to play a role in politics, politicians’ capabilities are crucial in the decision of the people whether they are fit to serve or not.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Class #9

    1. I do agree that it is a collaborative activity, but I do not think it has to be among small groups of people. Classrooms interact and engage in philosophical conversations and vibe from one topic to the next. Reflecting is usually among individuals who are thinking about a past time that shaped them or they can put their own thoughts into making a philosophy out of it. Writing down their thoughts is important and intimate.

    2. I believe faith is believing that something will happen. You have faith in passing your math test, because you studied all week. Devotion to reason is similar, but I would say it has more scientific logic behind it. I would also say it is almost the same as belief. Because with faith you are believing in something. And faith goes hand in hand with that.

    3. I would rank helping others as the most important, having a copmfortable home second. Making money and achieving social status would tie last for me. As these things are nice, we don't have enough time in life to solely worry about the money we make and the status we have. You can't take money with you when you die and social groups only last so long.

    4. I believe we as humans are all guilty of initally judging by appearance. If someone isn't physically attractive to us, we are less likely to engage with them. But I don't let this stop me from engaging, it just wains my decision at first. Once you talk to someone, even if they aren't your frist choice on the attractive scale, you learn a lot about them and usually end up with polar opposite thoughts than you once had in the beginning. I don't think this makes me shallow, because it's psychological. And as long as you're willing to give someone a chance, you should be fine.

    ReplyDelete
  42. #10
    DQ "If everything is composed of atoms, does it follow that there is no life after death?"

    I would say that with the line of thinking that everything is made of atoms, then it would follow that there is no life after death (or at least in the conventional sense). With the statement that everything is made of atoms it would also lead that our personality/consciousness are composed out of atoms interacting. After dying these functions would cease to continue and would therefore lead to the termination of our conscious.

    ReplyDelete
  43. #10- alternate quiz questions ch. 8 & 9
    1. What does the word atom come from?
    2. What does atomos mean?
    3. The mind is said to be a collection of what shape atoms?
    4. Who led Leucippus and Democritus to atoms?
    5. Democritus said in important matters men are the pupils of _____.
    6. What does Democritus say mans most valuable gift is?
    7. What separates Democritus from Sophists?
    8. At what age did Athenian boys start school; at what age did they finish?

    ReplyDelete
  44. If everything is composed of atoms, does it follow that there is no life after death?
    Yes and no. It is true that everything is made of atoms, however, where did atoms come from? That is one argument, another argument is that the soul is not made of atoms therefore the soul moves on after death. I personally don't believe this but most people do.

    ReplyDelete
  45. If thought consists in the motion of mind-atoms, can we freely think our own thoughts? Or are we passive spectators of "our" minds?

    Yes we can freely think on our own. The only thing, I believe, that can control how we think is our environment. For example no one is born hating another person for the color of their skin, however, if your parents and your surroundings are racist then you will too. If you're parents aren't racist then you aren't either. However, you still have the freedom to think for yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Does atomism "liberate [us] from superstition, fear of death, and the tyranny of priests"?

    If anything atomism grows the fear of death. If one believes that when they die they will go to heaven then they discover atomism and decide that everything is indeed made of atoms then they will feel as if there is no heaven and therefore they are in the realm of the unknown, the realm of fear.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Is the war on drugs wrong or right?

    Ever since Nixon’s presidency the war on drugs seems to be the “number one threat to America.” There are two sides to this war. One side, or Nixon’s side, is that drugs are a threat to the economy and to the people of America. People must be controlled and if they disobey with Nixon’s meaning of ethics then they must be locked up. The other side of the argument is all about race. The war on drugs is a war on race. The reason Nixon ever created it is so that he could gain access to African American homes without warrant. This led to the killing of the black panther party and many other black power organizations. The war on drugs continued on by Reagan. Reagan’s wife led a more subtle war on drugs. She focused on bringing the no drugs philosophy to elementary schools and so on. The war on drugs was then continued by Bill Clinton with his famous “three strikes you’re out” policy. The war on drugs was set to decrease the drug use on America. This did not succeed. Instead, America has a problem with mass incarceration. To summarize my point, the war on drugs did nothing but lock up a large amount of americans, specifically african americans. After slavery was made illegal the south still needed slaves to keep their economy. The solution was to enslave african americans, once again, for small charges like littering. If the war on drugs isn’t racial then why did crack cocaine cost life in jail when cocaine itself cost almost no time in jail? Why was marijuana, and other drugs that were popular in the African American communities, life in jail when drugs that were popular, and more dangerous, in white american communities less time? I think we all know why.

    ReplyDelete
  48. #6

    1. Just knowing the limitations (theoretically) of a physical world is insufficient to disprove some other spiritual world, as it were. The atomist principles are logically justified in claiming the world behaves in mechanical ways, as this can (and has been) proven. Claiming that a spiritual side cannot exist due to an apparent mechanical universe however, is a bit of a stretch. They simply have no empirical justification to make this claim.

    2. Again, I don't think atomism is justified in making the claim that there is no afterlife, and as such I'd have to disagree: the priests may keep their monopoly on souls. Superstition is more so a collection of beliefs without backing, but not necessarily religiously-driven (e.g. it's bad luck to open an unbrella indoors), so atomism doesn't really affect these beliefs. As far as the fear of death, Atomism doesn't offer immortality, and the underlying fear of death, I think, is nothingness, and for religious people, the fear that they're wrong, as otherwise why should they be afraid of paradise? In fact, Atomism claims that this nothingness is what death really is, which I would think would scare people more than any religious preachings.

    3. As Atomism's other tenets involve a mechanical universe and an utter lack of spirituality, I believe it would also hold that all our thoughts and actions are purely a function of the configuration of the atoms that compose us, thus eliminating free will.

    4. If particles cannot be proven to be unsplittable, they would of course not be atoms in the original sense of the word. Aside from that, particles being indistinguishable from forces, fields, and energy would wreak all kinds of havoc in the narrative they'd spun about a purely mechanical universe and the lack of an afterlife.

    5. In the sense of the unfathomable vastness of the cosmos, it is reasonable to suppose that many, many "worlds" have come into being, one of which we know to contain life. However, the universe is not infinite, not in space nor time, and as such, it is impossible to claim "every sort of world" has existed at some point.

    ReplyDelete
  49. #6

    6. Dawkins claims that the chaotic reordering of an atomic system will, over time, form stable structures, thus explaining the existence of planets, plants, animals, and especially mankind. He then goes on to claim that, because of this, people need not concern themselves with a purpose to life, as there is none: we're just a stable result of entropic refinement. I agree with this ideology, as I side with modern evolution, which is essentially just a more refined version of Dawkins' theories.

    7. In a sense, I agree. Logically, being able to pick out your children via adoption would be desirable, as it's clear what kind of child you'd be having to live with before making the decision. Additionally, there are many children who go through the adoption process having never been adopted. More people seeking orphaned children would (probably) be in these children's best interests'. However, it's in human nature to want to continue one's own lineage, which is the greatest contributor to the failure of the adoption system.

    8. I think the secular "preaching" is the way to go, especially as it translates much more cleanly across religious boundaries, and is thus more akin to human nature than to any one society or sect thereof. Additionally, I see religious preaching as sanctimonious and often irritating, making Democritus's preaching even more desirable.

    9. Pericles defines democracy in part as being equal to all parties in the litigation process (i.e. putting one person above another not due to class, but due to ability). In this sense, we do have a democracy. The most likely retaliation to this claim is that the wealthy are legally superior due to their lawyers, but my counterpoint is: the reason they usually win is because their lawyers are superior in ability, not simply because they have more money. How they got those lawyers is unrelated to the question of our democratic process.

    ReplyDelete
  50. #6 9/19/17

    DQ's:
    7. I can definitely see his logic behind his view. People definitely would see the appeal of choosing their children and making sure they're exactly what they want. However, the appeal of having children to a lot of people is to be able to make a baby that is a product of themselves and someone they've chosen.
    9. I think theoretically we have a democracy... but I think that power does rest in a minority here- the government holds the power, and as far as non-government people, the wealthy hold poor more than the poor. It's not quite as equal as he makes it out to be.

    Alternate Quiz Questions:
    1. How many remaining catalogued fragments of Democritus are there?
    2. What did Leucippus and Democratus say was wrong with Zeno's paradoxes?
    3. How is the atomist system slightly Pyhtagorean?
    4. What were the 'primary' and 'secondary' terms of matter than Robert Boyle described?
    5. Who said, "the art of the sophist is the semblance of wisdom without the reality, and the sophist is one who makes money from an apparent but unreal wisdom"?
    6. Why should Gorgias have been puzzled by his own puzzle?
    7. Who can most of the impetus for modern relativism be traced to?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Anonymous9:51 AM CDT

    #6
    1- scientsts believe that there is no life after death because they only rely on evidence and proofs.
    2- it does because it proves that there is no death after life, so it may lead the people to do whatever they want without fear from after life.
    3- We can think freely our own thoughts, we can either make wise or unwise decisions. Humans are free do everything the way they want, but at the same time they should know the consequences of their actions.
    4- It proves that we can't have control over our minds or our thoughts.
    5- Yes, it is possible if we believe that anything can form resulting of collisons just like our universe.
    6- humans are always desired to know more and they still want to know more about everything.
    7- He viewed children as a burden and a responsibility on the parent and he also said that choosing kids is better than giving birth to them.
    8- He wanted the people to be virtuous.
    9- Yes we do, we can vote for our presidents and have the rights and also the country protects our freedom.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Hayley Gray10:55 AM CDT

    #6
    1. The atoms which make up the body will still exist after death. That does not mean a soul cannot leave the body and live on in an afterlife.
    2. Atomism cannot liberate us from the fear of death. We cannot control emotions we feel about what happens after death.
    3. I think we can freely think our own thoughts but that sometimes thoughts seem clearer than others.
    4. If particles could not be proven unsplittable, then we would not know to the extent of how powerful a split particle can be.
    5.How else would we be here if our own world did not just crop up from somewhere?
    6. Dawkins has a point that something that begins simple can change into something more complex.
    7. Democritus feels as if having a child with a woman will trap him into having to stay with her.
    9. In the America we live in today, I do not feel we have a democracy because Donald Trump has appointed more than just one person unqualified for the job.

    ReplyDelete
  53. #6

    1. To think that everything is composed of atoms is shallow thinking and a narrow minded view of the universe and existence as a whole.

    2. No

    3. Free thought.

    4. A lot. The difference is that of connections and origins.

    5. No, because the same logic can be applied to the opposite thinking.

    6. Path of least resistance.

    7. Couldn't care less. It's his own view on kids. Maybe he knew he would inherently have bad kids.

    8. His own happiness. I guess.

    9. No

    10. Yes

    11. Yes

    ReplyDelete
  54. Jess Hudson1:33 PM CDT

    #6
    If everything is composed of atoms, does it follow that there is no life after death?

    I do believe that everything is made up of atoms, but I also believe in Heaven and Hell. Maybe I just believe that our souls are not made of atoms. Because that is what I believe goes to either Heaven or Hell. So I think there is not just nothing after you die, but I also do not think that you can come back as something else. Which that goes into reincarnation, but regardless your body does rot away into the Earth, then your soul leaves the body.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous7:30 PM CDT

    I was reading up about happiness of the other blog and this sentence really stood out to me: “Happiness really is an aspirational idea, something worth chasing no matter how elusive it may turn out to be.” This stood out to me so much because you can’t just expect happiness to be at your front door. Happiness isn’t something that is inherent, in my opinion. You find yourself working towards happiness, whether that be a new job, a lifestyle change or finding the love of your life.
    There is always a reason to strive for more happiness. While there are many times that happiness can fail a person, such as something doesn’t work out in their favor or you end up with a bad break up, that idea of happiness lasted up until it was over. Happiness is based off of what is happening in the moment, however long that moment lasts doesn’t matter, its really about how worth it that feeling of happiness was.
    Happiness isn’t something that you can wait for it to happen, you have to make it happy. We as a society tend to think that we don’t have to work for things, but working for things in your life that are important allow for greater satisfaction and a greater reward, causing immense amounts of happiness for a particular person.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Anonymous7:36 PM CDT

    I think everyone should philosophize because it is something that can open your mind to new ideas. Without that, you can't aways expand your horizons on knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Merna Ghobrial8:01 PM CDT

    #6

    Chapter 10 DQ:
    Do you try to see beyond superficial qualities in friends and acquaintances, in assessing their attractiveness, or do you tend to judge by appearances? (If the latter, does that make you a shallow person?)

    I tend to judge a person by appearance, but not by whether they are attractive or not, but rather by how nice "they look" or how smart "they seem to be".Of course that makes me somewhat shallow because I am judging a book by its cover, but that is how most first impressions are made, and that is why most first impressions can be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Merna Ghobrial8:07 PM CDT

    #6

    Living Life With ‘Grace And Elegant Treeness’

    http://thisibelieve.org/essay/9/

    ReplyDelete
  59. #6

    Rings of Hope

    http://thisibelieve.org/essay/141104/

    ReplyDelete
  60. #6

    Alternative Quiz Questions:

    1. Socrates was the saint and martyr of what?
    2. Socrates had what kind of military record?
    3. When did the trial of Socrates take place and how old was he?
    4. The 27 year war between Athens and Sparta ended with what?
    5. From a legal point of view, what did Socrates' speech seem like?
    6. What was the main theme of the "Apology"?

    ReplyDelete
  61. #9

    For me, earning a comfortable living is important. it's ironic because my desired field isn't known for is bug pay days, but having the ability to live comfortably is important. If I am blessed to earn a nice living I want to be able to put my money back into my passion (baseball) to help promote the game for young athletes.

    ReplyDelete
  62. #9

    In some aspect, everyone should "philosophize". Philosophy can lead you to an informed opinion about religion, science, or life in general. Having an established core of beliefs is vital to giving value to your life. Philosophy offers you the opportunity to improve your life in some aspects just by the study of it.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anonymous11:12 PM CDT

    I think that Faith and Belief are roughly the same thing because if you have a belief system, you have faith in that belief system. For example, if you believe in God, you have faith in that God.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Anonymous11:17 PM CDT

    I always enjoy seeing beyond physical attributes, a person is really based on who they are personally, their appearance doesn't make them any less kind or caring as the next.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous11:18 PM CDT

      if you look only at physical attributes, it doesn't make you shallow, it can just make you a very closed minded person for thinking that their looks determine personality.

      Delete
  65. Anonymous11:20 PM CDT

    To be a good teacher is not always necessarily based on content, as it is more based on how you teach the content. Yes, it should be factual, as it is something you should be able to apply to reality. However, anyone can state facts, it is about understanding the facts.

    ReplyDelete
  66. #10

    -Personally, I believe materialistic belongings are a distraction from what is most important in our lives. Making money, having a comfortable home, social status etc. can be important when considering life's essentials, however, they all mean little once our souls leave the earth. It is extremely important for all people to help others and strive for a life with meaning.

    -Appearance has no impact on my ability to develop a relationship with another person. That being said, some individuals appear to be more approachable than others. On the surface, it could be considered cold-hearted or judgmental but truthfully I believe many people would agree.

    - Everyone should attempt to philosophize at some point in life. Philosophy has shown to improve individuals' critical thinking as well as their understandings of logic. Without these skills, our world would lack any sort of development in the future.

    Additional reading based questions:
    -Why was Socrates on trial? When?
    -What is a daimonion?
    -What are Socrates 5 virtue?
    -What two men were with Socrates at the time of his death that became father-figures of schools of thought?
    -How did Antisthenes believe happiness was found?
    -Who is credited with the paradox known as Liar? ('This statement is false.')

    ReplyDelete
  67. Katie Bauer #9
    Discussion Questions

    2) Devotion to something is doing everything you can to please the person or thing you are devoted too and following the rules set forth by that person or thing. Faith is believing in something that could possibly happen. Belief and faith are the same thing, they both mean you believe in something happening.

    3) I would personally rank the importance of making money the most important thing. Without having a job and making money, you will not be able to have a comfortable home, or even a home. I would rank helping others next, because if you can financially take care of yourself, maybe you could afford to help someone else out as well.

    4) Yes, I do see beyond superficial qualities in my friends. It doesn't matter what your friend looks like, it only matters that that person is your best friend and obviously for good reason. Never judge a book by its cover.

    5) No, a teacher should not have a specific doctrine or factual content to teach. If the teacher has enough knowledge to well educate students, then that's a good teacher. Teachers do not have to be super smart human beings that know every thing when it comes to education. Really, all they have to educate students on, is their particular class. As long as the teachers students understand the material that is being discussed in class, that is all that matters when it comes to a teacher being a teacher.


    ReplyDelete
  68. #10
    Alternative quiz questions

    1. which one of Socrates friends challenged him to a beauty contest?
    2. which 27 year war ended in 404 BC with the defeat of Athens?
    3. what did Socrates call his guardian spirit that had been with him since childhood?
    4. what 'reward' did Socrates suggested he deserved instead of a punishment?
    5. who are the four main witnesses for the intimate thoughts of Socrates?
    6. Why does Gottlieb say Plato's work on Socrates is 'double trouble'?
    7. How can one find the 'Socratic remainder' from all of Plato's work?
    8. Why does Gottlieb call the 'four main sources for Socrates' a boon?
    9. What makes it possible to retrace Plato's steps on his intellectual journey?
    10. What were five conventionally held virtues Socrates was concerned with?
    11. What work of Plato purports to give Socrates' last words?
    12. what method of execution did Socrates chose?

    ReplyDelete
  69. Anonymous10:28 AM CDT

    Anna Morgan

    Do you agree with Socrates' conception of philosophy as "an intimate and collaborative activity" requiring "discussions among small groups of people"? (150) What part should reflecting and writing play in this activity?

    yes, because philosophy can drive someone mad or make them irrational if they think too long. it is necessary to collaborate to understand multiple viewpoints and the surrounding world to ensure the most accurate and logical conclusions to one's thoughts. reflecting on your own ideas and the ideas of others will cause the thinker to thoroughly analyze each thought. writing helps to analyze even more and solidify the final conclusion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:29 AM CDT

      Anna Morgan- im #9!!!! sorry lol

      Delete
  70. Katie Bauer #9
    Discussion Questions:

    6) Socrates did not hear the voice of an inner guardian spirit, he was talking about his conscience, the voice inside his head.

    9) He would say that you become wealthy by being successful. The more successful you are, the wealthier you will become.

    10) The environment in which you grew up in is vey dependent on your life and character today.

    11) No, most people follow the rules and conventions of their community so why shouldn't you?

    ReplyDelete
  71. #10
    Discussion Questions:

    "Do you agree with Socrates' conception of philosophy as "an intimate and collaborative activity" requiring "discussions among small groups of people"? (150) What part should reflecting and writing play in this activity?"
    I do believe that Socrates conception of philosophy as a collaborative activity. Without the viewpoints of other's criticizing or adding upon our own, it would be very difficult to have a full realization of our idea without fault.
    "Do you try to see beyond superficial qualities in friends and acquaintances, in assessing their attractiveness, or do you tend to judge by appearances? (If the latter, does that make you a shallow person?)"
    I tend to take both of these into account when assessing someone's attractiveness. Both inner beauty and outer beauty play a role in how I see someone. I don't think accounting for outer beauty would make someone shallow. Being attracted to someone physically is just in human nature for the most part.
    "Do you think you'd have found Socrates' arguments persuasive, if you'd been a member of his jury? (145)"
    I don't really believe I would have found Socrates argument very persuasive. He wasn't really getting at the heart of the issues he was refuting. He was just skirting around the issue.
    "Must a good teacher always have some specific doctrine or factual content to teach?"
    I don't really believe a good teacher would have to have a specific doctrine or factual content to teach. There are things we can be taught that are not factual but are skills necessary for us or give us clearer lines of thinking. A good teacher doesn't need to have a certain specific doctrine, especially if they are teaching on many broad subjects.
    "Do you think Socrates really heard the voice of an inner "guardian spirit" or daimon? Or was he talking about what we might call the voice of conscience or reason?"
    I would say that Socrates was most likely hearing the voice of conscience or reason. When it comes to deities there are a lot of questions about whether they do or don't exist, but the idea of a voice of conscience or reason is almost universally accepted.

    ReplyDelete
  72. #10 Quiz Q's

    1.What was socrates on trial for?
    2. What was plato's ladder to the higher forms?
    3. What did plato search for?
    4. Which idealology influenced plato's ideas?
    5.What did plato say is aquired before birth?
    6. Where was plato's focus on the topic of virtue and ethics?
    7. How did socrates view human emotion and action?
    8. What did plato think about the human soul?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. He refused to recognize the official gods of the state
      2. Philosophy
      3. definitions
      5. Knowledge of the Forms

      Delete
  73. Kierah Pruitt
    section: 9


    - Devotion and faith are relatively the same thing yet involving two different meanings to some greater extent. Faith is driven by that of the belief in or of someone and something. Commonly, you then have a strong belief or solid ground as which you are worshipping or applying your everyday life too. Devotion in reality, is just another word for dedication. What are your willing to do and how far will you go in doing it?

    - Money is important some extension, by all means don’t believe I don’t support it. Without the source of funds many advantages and opportunities would be almost nearly impossible to make happen. However, believing that money is the only important thing can (pardon my language)…bullshit your true meaning of happiness in the long run. One man can have it all as well as have nothing.

    - This results in judging a book by its cover, which I’m a firm believer that I am in no shape to judge anyone because everyone is imperfect. I definitely look above and beyond superficial qualities not only in my friends, but through everyday people.

    - Yes and no. If the instructor hold a certain amount or an solid background of firm knowledge of some sort, then that instructor is eligible t teach. Simply being that, one’s knowledge has the ability to feed wisdom to a million.

    ReplyDelete
  74. #9
    Is devotion to reason accurately characterized as a form of faith? How do you define faith? Is it the same as belief?
    -I don't think that devotion to reason is a form of faith. It is more of a way of life. Devotion to reason is the way a person carries themselves throughout his or her life. I define faith as something that pushes people to do certain things based on a belief system. Faith and belief are one in the same in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like how you explained the differences between the two.

      Delete
  75. #6

    1. Yes; I don't think any amount of self-reflection is really going to get one anywhere, as at its very best, it only pertains to one person. Real, effectual philosophy should be about all people, such as Socrates' debates of morality. Certainly, Socrates could not have come to the same conclusions had he been alone in some cave. Reflecting and writing should be to finalize one's opinions after the discussion and to publish for others to read.

    2. Personally, I wouldn't define reason and science as a form of faith, though I know of many who would. To me, faith is believing in something that has not and can not ever be justified with evidence (e.g. religion). It does not, for example, take faith to claim that if I release an apple from my hand it will fall to the ground. There is evidence of science where there is none of faith.

    3. First off, making money. Although many (poor) people claim happiness is more important, we live in a capitalistic world, not to mention that logic assumes money and happiness are mutually exclusive. Then, having a comfortable home (which I assume includes spousal harmony). Next, helping others. Although I legitimately do enjoy helping others, if I don't have my life together, I'm in no position to help anyone else. Lastly, vocational/social status. I greatly prefer anonymity in most things I do.

    4. In assessing attractiveness, I usually only consider physical qualities, as those are clearly visible in strangers. In people I know better however, I can look past those physical qualities. However, those who do make a choice based on physical qualities only are not shallow, as that would imply physical existence is meaningless. For instance, I could never fall in love with an AI with a "beautiful personality" built into a potato.

    5. Yes, in the sense that a teacher should know what they're teaching. I would think it gross misconduct for a teacher to teach falsehoods. Aside from that, while the teacher doesn't have to teach of just one specific doctrine, he should at least specify the general topic.

    ReplyDelete
  76. #6

    6. No; not any more than the other philosophers who claimed to have been visited by a goddess of wisdom. Even then, Socrates had a streak of questioning the nature of the divine anyway, at times even seeming to question their existence. So, I think he just meant a conscience.

    7. No; Socrates is one of the earliest examples of #humblebrag. Had I been in the jury, I would have found him annoying if nothing else (though not enough to kill him). Additionally, he sought to discredit slander against him that was in part true (e.g. he did "make a living" off of his teachings, thus making him a Sophist). And of course, he had the nerve to ask for free meals for life as an alternative to death (I wonder how long it took the jury to regain their composure from the laughing fit).

    8. Not everyone is suited to the art of philosophizing (e.g. the people of Athens even put Socrates to death for his "dangerous" ideas). For one, it takes someone who is willing to compromise: in philosophy, one cannot stand resolute on some abstract idea; then need to be open to discussion. Socrates believed that everyone should put some effort into philosophizing, famously stating "An unexamined life is not worth living". Plato at times made statements such as: "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." Though he did not always hold this attitude, this quote implies that some people just have nothing of importance to say.

    9. I do believe he would take issue with this (after all, he even made a fuss about people who wanted payment for teaching). On the other hand, he might also try to explain why these people were so successful, which would lead him to talk with these types of people. As far as money is concerned, he would probably criticize us for putting such an emphasis on finances rather than investigation and inquiry.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Anonymous12:39 PM CDT

    Landon Eaves #9
    If everything is composed of atoms, does it follow that there is no life after death?
    In the event that all life or things in the universe are made up of atoms or energy I believe there is no life after death. There maybe billions of possibilities and theories but until there is a proven account or observation that I know is real I won’t believe anything. I believe that history is about pushing the envelope and slowly advancing humanity instead of the exploits of one human. For example when we extend human kind at least a thousand more years our ideas or progressive improvements will be so distant it’ll either be forgotten or even be seen as too closed minded compared to the developments future generations.
    Another idea is that god isn’t affected by time, space, and matter and in the event this is true something as small as atoms would play no part in the being of a God. God is god because he is. Why would he be a god if he was affected by time, he would die? Everything else is applicable to these laws of the universe.
    Another idea is that the atoms or energy that make up the universe is all created ourselves and what we take is taken from others, such as if we have positive energy and have a positive outlook on life this is reciprocated on us while those who are negative with the outlook and energy will experience negativity until this is changed or they take the positivity from other or a spiritual being.

    ReplyDelete
  78. #9
    Peri Chapman

    How do you personally rank the importance of making money, having a comfortable home, achieving vocational or social status, helping others?


    If I were to rank the aspects of life, the most important would be achieving vocational, making money, having a home, helping others, and least important would be social status. Achieving vocational is success, having success is a way to have happiness in your life. Along with that, helping others can be achieved easier if you are a happy, stable person, with a stable income. It’s hard to help others when you don’t have money and can barely help yourself. And yes you can help others without money but almost everything revolves around money now, which is why making money is at the top of the list. Having a comfortable home is also up at the top of the list because not having a home makes life hard and uncomfortable. Having a home full of people you love is one of the best ways to live a happy life. Now social status is one of those things that everyone wants, but is not important to a happy life. That can also be debated because social status can also come along with your career, which would make it more of an important aspect in your life. Over all, this is how I would order these aspects of life but for different people, there can always be a different order of importance due to many differences in my life versus someone else’s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting why did you categorize these the way you did.

      Delete
  79. #9
    I don't think devotion is a form of faith. Faith is something you believe in.

    ReplyDelete
  80. #10 - Alternate quiz questions ch. 10

    1. Does Socrates manage to establish what piety is?
    2. What two things did Aristotle accuse Socrates of not being able to tell the difference between?
    3. In what terms did Socrates see human action and emotion?
    4. Socrates aimed to reshape people's moral _______.
    5. Who were the two men with Socrates when he died?
    6. Where were the two men from?
    7. The Cyrenaics were devoted to _______.
    8. Euclides shared Socrates' interest in two things; what were they?
    9. Euclides pupil, Eubulides, is credited with creating which famous riddle?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #10
      1.) No
      2.) practical and theoretical questions
      3.) In largely rational or intellectual terms
      4.) ideas

      Delete
  81. #10 DQ 9/20/17
    1.) I agree with Socrates’ concept of how philosophy is conducted. To me, philosophy is engaging a conversation with someone or a group about a topic and give opinions and provide reasons to support claims. Reflecting and writing play a part in philosophizing to further do in depth in our thoughts and share them with others.

    2.) Devotion to reason is accurately characterized by faith. Our faith comes from our strong confidence on someone or something. This makes us more devoted to reason because we rely on it to defend or reveal more about our own thoughts or ideas. Faith is not necessarily belief because the word belief involves our ideas that we think are right while faith is having a strong confidence.

    3.) I follow Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs when it comes to ranking importance of different aspects of life.

    4.) When assessing attractiveness, I make sure to see others’ superficial qualities, not only by appearances. Good-looking people can be jerks. Not so good-looking people can be very nice. Both inside and outside qualities matter; however, in first few encounters, appearance outweighs superficial qualities.

    5.) Nowadays, a good teacher needs factual contents to teach students in school. Otherwise, the student wouldn’t get much beneficial learning that could potentially be crucial on a profession later in life. I think it’s necessary for good teachers to have factual content to help students learn.

    6.) I think Socrates was talking about the voice of conscience or reason when he mentions the inner “guardian spirit.” The “guardian spirit” is just our own conscience that “speaks” to us when we interact with our brain.


    ReplyDelete
  82. #10 Discussion ?'s
    1) I agree with Socrates' concept of small group philosophical discussion. In order to fully participate in philosophy you must have discussions. Constructive and critical argument helps to not only form but strengthen opinions and ideas. When discussing with someone you must have a strongly formed opinion and support to back it up. By arguing you strengthen your stance based on the others' points.

    2) While being a good teacher does include having a strong doctrine and factual evidence, it is not the most vital component. In order to be a good teacher, someone must have the ability to make students WANT to learn. You could be a genius, but if students don't listen to you, you're not a good teacher.

    3) My early environment played an essential role in the formation of my character. I grew up with a parent who has completely different beliefs from me. My father and I agree on close to nothing when it comes to politics and social issues, but if it weren't from learning from him I wouldn't have those views. From him I learned to form my own opinions and believe in things. I learned to stand up for what I believe in and for other people. I saw his compassion and dedication to everything he does and that has built who I am along with my opinions.

    4/5) The concept of atomism does mean that there is no life after death. It has the ability to liberate us from the fear of life after death if we take it simply. We are born, we occupy space on earth for several years, and then we cease to exist. That can be either comforting or terrifying. For many people the idea itself of having life after death, eliminates the fear of dying. It gives them the comfort that their loved ones are not gone and that when they die they won't just no longer exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In regards to #2:
      As one of the quotes on the side of the page reads, "My best teachers were not the ones who had all the answers. They were the ones deeply excited by questions they couldn't answer."

      Delete
  83. #10
    Weekly Essay
    Discussion point based off of: Learning How to Die- Socrates

    Why does society need an answer to the question of what lies beyond death?

    The argument that death should not be feared is a concept explored widely in philosophy. The philosophy of death is in learning how to die. In the chapter titled, Learning How to Die, Socrates identifies the two possibilities of what lies after death: annihilation or the migration of the soul to a new place. He then goes onto explain the possibilities of each. The pleasantry of annihilation includes an infinite dreamless sleep and the theory of the migration of the soul provides the opportunity to meet up with old friends.

    Socrates does not claim to know what comes after death as he states that only God knows what is after life on earth but he does have the opinion that death should not be feared. The question is then brought up of which is actually preferable. Life? Or death. When faced with execution, Socrates says, "Which of us is to have the happier prospect is unknown to anyone but God."

    The need for an answer to the question of what lies beyond a human's last breath comes from fear of the unknown. There is comfort in believing that loved ones will be seen again. Saying a final goodbye is emotional and scary, the idea that they will be waiting when your time comes is a way to cope. There is also fear in the idea that you will at one point cease to exist. That basically your life is meaningless in the sense that, one day, all that will be left of you is a corpse in the ground.

    We need a sense of security in that there is something better than life here on earth waiting for us. The unknown is so strongly feared that we crave an answer. We want to know that our loved ones are still around and that we won't just stop existing one day. Infinity is scary but as Socrates' theory says, "Death is the cure for life."

    ReplyDelete
  84. Fonshae Knight9:37 PM CDT

    #6
    I would rank money making first, because I feel like that should be the number one thing that always stays on a person's mind. Next, would be having a comfortable house along with a nice and loving family. Then, helping others. I have no problem with lending a hand to others in need; I love helping people in any way I can, because I would want someone to do the same for me if I was in need. I feel as if God put me here on this earth to help others, no matter who is around or watching. Lastly, woudd be vocational and social status because although I like to go and hang out with friends at times, I mostly enjoy having my alone time and to be kind of "off the scene".

    ReplyDelete
  85. 9/21/2017
    DQs:
    1. From what I've learned in class maybe not so much but I think for a more intimate level of speaking then smaller groups sound better.
    2. Yes, maybe
    I'd say faith is believing in the unseen, the possible or even the impossible.
    3. 1:having a comfortable home
    2: making money
    3:helping others
    4: Achieving social status
    4. I look for what's inside a person. ex: their personality
    how kind they are to others, oh they talk about people, their moral compass. Someone's appearance is not important to me.
    5. I guess it depends on the student. People adjust to different forms of teaching. Not everyone learns the same just like not every teaches the same
    6. I'm going to lean towards the voice of conscience and reason.
    7. I am not sure but I want to say I would've said not guilty.
    8. I feel like in some way everyone philosophizes even if they don't know they do.
    10. I'd say society is a bit sideways when it comes to the way spreading or the way it disperses money. Happiness comes in many forms for many people. I cant speak for others but I have to make a living and money pays the bills and bills being paid makes me happy, well comfortable but my true happiness is with the ones I love.

    ReplyDelete
  86. -6 DQ
    How do you rank the virtues?
    1. piety- I put my God before anything
    2. wisdom- cant make the right decisions without wisdom
    3. justice- without the desire to do right courage is meaningless
    4. courage-
    5. moderation- moderation reflects courage

    ReplyDelete
  87. #6 9/21/2017

    Discussion Question Answers
    1. I think that philosophizing should mostly be a collaborative activity, but I think the size of the group can vary. I think one could theoretically philosophize with one other person or with 50 other people, and a variance on group size is good.
    2.I define faith as believing in something that cannot be seen. I do think that faith and belief are similar enough to be used interchangeably, with each one pretty much meaning believing in something that can't necessarily be proven or one thing is not the same for every person. This being said, I do think devotion to reason could be considered a form of faith.
    3. As much as I hate to say it, making money is really far up on my list of importance. Mainly because without money, the things you can do and accomplish are so so limited. Without money it's nearly impossible to do or have any of the other things listed for this question.
    4. I think I do tend to kind of judge based on appearances who I want to be friends with or associate myself with, but not necessarily just look, this includes how they act in public and how they carry themselves. I tend to want to associate with people who seem similar to me, not in looks but in actions and personality. However, I don't really think it's shallow to judge based on looks when it comes to who you want to be friends with. Sometimes it's okay to want to be around people you find attractive, and that's something that varies for everyone and doesn't mean that every one of someone's friends will look the same.

    Alternate Quiz Questions:
    1. When Gottlieb starts talking about Socrates' trial, he says Socrates was unpopular with some conservative Athenians, and popular with who?
    2. What happened in 404 BC, five years before Socrates' trial?
    3. Which of Socrates' associates were involved in the post-war tyranny?
    4. What does Socrates say his actions are influenced by?
    5. What did Socrates do that he thought was the 'greatest possible service' for the Athenians?
    6. Who was the 'devoted but dim' admirer that said that 'the hardest thing for him to bear was that Socrates was being put to death unjustly'?

    ReplyDelete
  88. Do you agree with Socrates' conception of philosophy as "an intimate and collaborative activity" requiring "discussions among small groups of people"? (150) What part should reflecting and writing play in this activity?

    I agree with Socrates' conception of philosophy. I think it's important to philosophize with other people so they can add to or question what your saying. Talking to others can help build your own argument when they mention something you haven't thought of but agree with. It can also cause you to change your beliefs if they make a point that is different from your own, but overall makes more sense to you. Talking to others will expand your own thoughts, and writing/reflecting on your new or improved thoughts will help you solidify your beliefs.

    ReplyDelete
  89. How do you personally rank the importance of making money, having a comfortable home, achieving vocational or social status, helping others, ...?
    Personally, I believe making enough money to where you are comfortable is important. I don't believe one needs to have excessive money to where they may blow it on silly things. Also helping others is very important as well. I believe there is a such thing as true altruism! Social status is less important. It still can be bc "it's all about who you know". It may help chances with jobs and whatnot so in that case it is important. But being "popular" or "cool" is less important in the grand scheme of things

    ReplyDelete
  90. Do you try to see beyond superficial qualities in friends and acquaintances, in assessing their attractiveness, or do you tend to judge by appearances? (If the latter, does that make you a shallow person?)
    I think possibly sometimes appearance may draw someone towards another but to me appearance is the least important thing about a person. Honestly, "more attractive " people are more intimidating and from my observation have tend to be more "shallow". So with my friends their looks have nothing to do with anything. What I care about in not only a friend but anyone is just a kind soul and super lax.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Hayley Gray11:24 AM CDT

    #6
    1. I agree that Socrates' conception of philosophy helps make ideas that are unclear, clear by small group discussions. reflecting and writing should be used to help remember your thoughts as well as others' thoughts on a particular topic.
    3. In order of importance, I would want to achieve vocational status in order to make money and live comfortably so I can have the means to be able to help others.
    4. I definitely try to see beyond superficial barriers when trying to make friends because I am looking for friends who have the same interests and similar aspirations as me. That has nothing to do with their looks. I am guilty of judging someone by their appearance when first meeting them, but that won't stop me from trying to get to know them.
    5. A teacher can be a good teacher without always having a specific doctrine or factual content to teach. As long as their methods are in the favor of the students and that they are trying to help them learn, then they are a good teacher.
    10. I rank the virtues in the order of wisdom, piety, justice, courage, and moderation.
    12. My early environment taught me to be respectful of those different than me, not to talk to strangers, and that cussing is not classy to name a few things.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Hayley Gray11:34 AM CDT

    #6 Chapter 10 Alternate DQ
    1. Who are the four witnesses for the intimate thoughts of Socrates?
    2. Socrates is the saint and martyr of what?
    3. What was Socrates too busy to pay much attention to?
    4. Critobulus once challenged Socrates to a what?
    5. Socrates says he is fulfilling the wishes of who when he goes about and argues with people?

    ReplyDelete
  93. Jess Hudson2:15 PM CDT

    #6
    How do you personally rank the importance of making money, having a comfortable home, achieving vocational or social status, helping others, ...?

    I know I put helping others first, and I always have. Having a comfortable home is second, this is because I want to raise a family in a safe home/neighborhood. Making money does tie into having a comfortable home. I'm not trying to become rich, but I want to make enough to live comfortably. Social status really does not matter to me.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Creativity of writer is purely impressive. It has touched to the level of expertise with his writing. Everything is up to the mark. Written perfectly and I can use such information for my coming assignment.
    Catalog design service montreal

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.