DUE THR 3/22 - Prep for Seminar

Prepare for Socratic Seminar by writing at least one-half page on at least one of the following prompts, or create your own prompt. If you create your own prompt remember it must be an interpretive question, meaning there is more than one possible answer (but you only have to provide one answer in your response).

1) In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

I think that you do have the right to harm someone. Say that someone did something really bad to you that inflicted pain and you want a way to get back at them. I think that you have the right to hit them back. They deserve it, I really think so. Thats what I would do. But getting back to the point. You would want to hurt them back to show that you can defend yourself. Its not about just hurting them, its about showing that you not afraid of them.

You should hit them back, but if they didn't do anything that bad like just steal something from you, ya I would take something of theres of the most value. They would never see it again. But thats just me, not to be mean, but to give them what it is like to have something valuable to them.

DUE WED 3/21 Republic Assignment

Write your reaction to the following statement: Whether or not an action is right or wrong is less important than wheter or not it benefits the interests of the agent.

I think that this is morally wrong. An honest person with some kind of moral center would never put himself before deciding whether an action is right or wrong. an honest man would always consider his actions, choose his words carefully, and in the end, make others and himself happy. So really, this statement is directly linked to a person's happiness and ability to stay within what is right by the standards of the law of their governing body. Some might say that the governing body is the agent in many cases, but a government who actually cares about its people would always put itself and its own prosperity after that of their people. There has never been a government truly like this, and that is why we have war, pain, and suffering being caused by many governments around the world. That includes ours.

Due Tuesday, 3/20 Republic Assignment

In your opinion, is Polemarchus definition of justice, derived from the poet Simonedes, an improvement from his father’s definition?

Well, that is really difficult to decide because of how he revered both. However, I definitely lean more towards it deriving from Simonedes.

What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?

Simonedes says that justice is to help your friends and hurt your enemies. That is really how Polemarchus interpreted him, and it was correct I believe.

What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?

Well, he sees that man is generally incorrect about things, and that they base their decisions on their likes and dislikes, so a friend might not be actually good and an enemy might not be bad. But that doesn't stop the person from helping the friends and harming the enemy, which is the reverse of what Simonedes meant. It is not an accurate definition of justice because it is based on emotion.

What lesson do you think Socrates/Plato is trying to prove by having Polemarchus give in to Socrates when his father (Cephalus) would not?

I'm not sure if there really is an underlying meaning. The only thing it could do is cause a rift between father and son, or show that the inexperienced are more likely to change their mind than the experienced.E) Whose argument do you find more convincing, Polemarchus or Socrates? Why? (This should be a longer response, short paragraph, about 5 sentences).When you think about it, Socrates really doesn't have an arguement! All he is trying to say is that Polemarchus is wrong, not putting forward an arguement. Nonetheless, he completely dis-assembled Polemarchus' arguement, and in doing so, took away all credibility from it.

DUE FRI, 3/16 Republic Assignment

Answer the following questions – short answer (about a couple of sentences or more)

1) Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?

They are friends of Socrates, who he decided to see before he left. Cephalus is the father, and Polemarchus is one of his sons.

2) What is the profession of Cephalus?

A Business man.

3) What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?

He was preparing/taking part in the daily sacrifice.

4) According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?

You have already been down roads that the young have not yet traveled, roads of hardship, and are in turn more experienced and wise. The flip side, is that you know death is near, so many men are afraid that what they have heard in their many years about the afterlife (the horrors and the judgments) are true/false.

5) What are Cephalus’ view of justice?

He believes that justice is paying back your debts and not lying.

6) What is Socrates response?

His response is best described in his analogy, he proposes a situation where you have borrowed a weapon from a friend, but then that friend is deemed mad, at which point you shouldn't return the weapon (paying back the debt). So basically, there are situations where you have to lie or not pay back debts, all Socrates is doing is exposing a flaw in Cephalus' idea.

Write a one paragraph response to the following question

1) Do you agree with Cephalus or with Socrates? Why?

If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement, even if you think it is not "right" - and why? To be honest, I don't think that Socrates' knowledge and philosophical way of thinking can out-weigh years and years of experience. I believe that Cephalus is more in the right because of him having a lot of experience with life and because all Socrates has been shown to do so far is find holes in the ideas of others, and not really put forward an idea of his own.

He spends his time going against what others think, and frankly I am not sure of where he stands on justice yet. So, by default, I am siding with Cephalus. But, don't think its just automatically chosen completely, I truly believe that not lying and paying back your debts are a part of justice, just not the whole piece. His statement is only half-way in a sense. Try to give this a shot, if you can’t answer it that’s okay: What do you think Cephalus represents? What is particular or unique about his view of justice compared to the others you have discussed in class? Well, the main thing that Cephalus represents in my mind is experience. He is the one who has seen the most, lived through and dealt with the worst, and he truly has the backing for everything he is saying. Like an elder.

He could also be one of those prisoners who has had a glimpse of the light. He is partially enlightened and is trying to spread what he understands about the higher knowledge, though it may be limited compared to what Socrates has seen and understood. The main part of his idea of justice that is unique is that it completely coincides with what "justice" is defined as "doing the right thing".

DUE THUR, 3/15 Similie of the Cave Reading Questions

1Q) Compare and contrast what Socrates says in “The Simile of the Cave” with Fahrenheit 451. How are characters like Mildred similar to characters in “Simile of the Cave”?

1A) Well, they are exactly what Socrates speaks of. Those prisoners who are just chained up and don't question anything. They believe whatever is shown to them is real, and don't dare or don't care enough to really think about what is behind them. In F451, the society was controlled socially by the government, and brainwashed into believing that whatever the government said was real, and there was no need to question it because there wasn't any room for it to be wrong. They are prisoners who choose to be imprisoned. If you make a decision to be ignorant, like Mildred and many people used to do, then you are solidifying your belief that everything you are given by the governing body or belief is true, whether you really believe it or not. Its a conscious decision being made to not question anything, and often times, that is the sign of a weak mind. A mind that does not question will never discover anything of use. Those "drones", those "prisoners", they are the ones who make up the basis of any society, and that is what is the important similarity between F451 and "The Simile of the Cave". In both, there are far more "prisoners" than those who unshackle themselves and see the light, and truly find that higher knowledge. That is what links them, and in both cases, confines them.