Blog #99 _ What is Wrong with Socrates?

We read the articles by Emily Wilson with her alternative take on the life of Socrates. In "What's Wrong with Socrates?" in The Philosophers' Magazine, 2nd Qtr., 2008, she listed 10 things that conflicted with the myth/legend of Socrates that we have grown familiar with.

Among Socrates' perceived transgressions (in Dr. Wilson's eyes), he was:

1. An amateur and prided himself in not getting paid;

2. Irresponsible to leave his wife and two children behind;

3. A chatterbox (talk over action is valued);

4. Psychologically naive - with statements like "nobody does wrong willingly", Wilson tears him apart;

5. Felt that pain didn't matter - if you were good, though wrong/harm was done to you, the real harm is in the sinner or the wrongdoer;

6. Anti-political - he felt that few if any are smart enough to run a government properly, but could he do it? Could anyone? If not, why have gov't in the first place?

7. Parochial - there was little that Socrates believed could be learned outside of the walls of Athens;

8. Arrogant - when Dr. Wilson says arrogant, apparantly she means ill-mannered and inconsiderate among other things listed in the article;

9. Superstitious - sometimes, philosophers mean that someone who is religious is superstitious, but the way she wrote this passage, she made him sound a bit loony (eccentric if you want to put a good spin on it) for listening to the voice inside his head. Is that voice his conscience or was hearing voices like the math professor in A Beautiful Mind?

10. Rationalist - normally, you wouldn't think there's anything wrong with being rational, but Dr. Wilson finds that Socrates puts such a strong emphasis on being rational that he leaves no room for emotion in solving problems. He is devoid of emotion.

So, your job here is to pick 4 of these criticisms and discuss whether or not you agree or disagree with them. We heard from many of you in class, and here's your chance to refine or air out your ideas. 

300 words for your total response to these criticisms, due Friday night, March 25th, by midnight.   

Blog #77 - What in the World is Wrong with Socrates?

We read the articles by Emily Wilson with her alternative take on the life of Socrates. In "What's Wrong with Socrates?"in The Philosophers' Magazine, 2nd Qtr., 2008, she listed 10 things that conflicted with the myth/legend of Socrates that we have grown familiar with.

Among Socrates' perceived transgressions (in Dr. Wilson's eyes), he was:
1. An amateur and prided himself in not getting paid;

2. Irresponsible to leave his wife and two children behind;

3. A chatterbox (talk over action is valued);

4. Psychologically naive - with statements like "nobody does wrong willingly", Wilson tears him apart;

5. Felt that pain didn't matter - if you were good, though wrong/harm was done to you, the real harm is in the sinner or the wrongdoer;

6. Anti-political - he felt that few if any are smart enough to run a government properly, but could he do it? Could anyone? If not, why have gov't in the first place?

7. Parochial - there was little that Socrates believed could be learned outside of the walls of Athens;

8. Arrogant - when Dr. Wilson says arrogant, apparantly she means ill-mannered and inconsiderate among other things listed in the article;

9. Superstitious - sometimes, philosophers mean that someone who is religious is superstitious, but the way she wrote this passage, she made him sound a bit loony (eccentric if you want to put a good spin on it) for listening to the voice inside his head. Is that voice his conscience or was hearing voices like the math professor in A Beautiful Mind?

10. Rationalist - normally, you wouldn't think there's anything wrong with being rational, but Dr. Wilson finds that Socrates puts such a strong emphasis on being rational that he leaves no room for emotion in solving problems. He is devoid of emotion.

So, your job here is to pick 4 of these criticisms and discuss whether or not you agree or disagree with them and explain why for each of them. This would be a good place to refine your ideas about Socrates.

350 words minimum. Due Monday, Dec. 11 by class.  Please post your blog here and not on your blog. 

Blog #54 - Plato's Ideal State - Would it work today?

We've spent a little more time on Plato's ideal society this semester than I have in past semesters; maybe b/c this time around the world seems to be crumbling around us with roiling stock markets and the Big 3 impending collapse. Where better to look than the past when the future looks so bleak, right? Well, maybe we can learn something.

Several criticisms were brought up of this ideal society:

1. Where would the innovation come from if everyone be content? Doesn't innovation come from competition and competition come from peoples' desire to be better?

2. Why do they need soldiers if everyone is content? Is it just for protection from other city-states? Or, did Plato ever intend for this city to exist? If that is the case, why are the soldiers really there?

3. What kind of guarantee is there that the philosophers will rule in everyone's best interests? Is there an impeachment process? Can the peasants overthrow the rulers?

4. In the interests of specialization, what if you get bored with your job? What if you don't want that job? What if that job that you do best is NOT something you love doing? To use an example from 4th hour, I might do math really well, but that doesn't mean I want to be an accountant.

5. Is there no social mobility? What if we don't like the class that we're born into?

This link http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/2g.htm gives a good, brief synopsis of the first four books of the Republic in which this society is described. I have countered many of these arguments in a devil's advocate style by appealing to one of Socrates' universal questions - courage, justice, virtue, wisdom, moderation, beauty.

The question before you is: Can Plato's society be fixed to make it more ideal to fit a 21st century American audience? Why or why not?

Things to ponder while answering this question: Is Plato's society so incompatible with American ideals and tastes and traditions that it cannot be fixed?  Can Plato's society work for people of another country? What would you have to fix in order for it to work in America? Could it work on a national or state level or could it only work on a small scale? If it only works on a small scale, what's the use?

 - Also, are Americans too individualistic to give up some of our freedoms or luxuries for the greater good of society.  This will be a topic - the greater good vs. the desires of the individual - as we go on through the semester.  

250 word minimum response.  Due Thursday, Dec. 13 by class time.

Also, new philosophy books in our school media center:
      
       

     

Enjoy!

Blog #38 - How would our culture differ if we lived in Plato's Republic?

Watching the Great Books episode on Plato's Republic got me started thinking on how our culture would be different if suddenly its cultural requirements were imposed upon the United States.  For this blog, we'd have to suspend our disbelief about the probable mass confusion / rebellion that might explode across the nation while transitioning from freedom of expression and protected 1st Amendment rights to a society where poets and writers bow to reason (to borrow a phrase from the video). 

Bertrand Russell divides up Plato’s Republic into the three neat sections. You may find his simple outline helpful:

1.Books I-V: The definition of “justice” and the Utopian Republic
2.Books VI-VII: The definition of “philosopher” and Philosopher Kings as the ideal rulers
3.Books VIII-X: Discussion of the various forms of government (their pros and cons)

  - Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, Book I, part 2, ch. 14 (2)

I will quote Socrates in Book III of Plato's Republic as to why there needs to be censorship:

"Some tales are to be told, and others are not to be told to our disciples from their youth upwards, if we mean them to honour the gods and their parents, and to value friendship with one another...But if they are to be courageous, must they not learn other lessons besides these, and lessons of such a kind as will take away the fear of death? Can any man be courageous who has the fear of death in him?  And can he be fearless of death, or will he choose death in battle rather than defeat and slavery, who believes the world below to be real and terrible?

It sounds as if Socrates wants his warriors in the ideal society to not fear death but fear defeat and slavery instead.  Stories of myths, ghosts and the gods can somehow convince warriors that the underworld / Hades / afterlife is real and that if the warriors believe that from these "incorrect" stories, the Republic's warriors might be willing to accept death as an alternative to surrender. 

"Then we must assume a control over the narrators of this class of tales as well as over the others, and beg them not simply to but rather to commend the world below, intimating to them that their descriptions are untrue, and will do harm to our future warriors.  Then, I said, we shall have to obliterate many obnoxious passages, beginning with the verses...

"And we must beg Homer and the other poets not to be angry if we strike out these and similar passages, not because they are unpoetical, or unattractive to the popular ear, but because the greater the poetical charm of them, the less are they meet for the ears of boys and men who are meant to be free, and who should fear slavery more than death...

"Also we shall have to reject all the terrible and appalling names describe the world below--Cocytus and Styx, ghosts under the earth, and sapless shades, and any similar words of which the very mention causes a shudder to pass through the inmost soul of him who hears them. I do not say that these horrible stories may not have a use of some kind; but there is a danger that the nerves of our guardians may be rendered too excitable and effeminate by them...There is a real danger, he said.  Then we must have no more of them."

Ghost stories might make our leaders too nervous if they're exposed to them.  I guess it's time to stop the remakes of Friday the 13th and Halloween.  Because if the leaders are too scared, then the warriors / guardians might be as well.  But what happens if a warrior loses a friend in battle, is that warrior allowed to grieve?

"Reflect: our principle is that the good man will not consider death terrible to any other good man who is his comrade... And therefore he will not sorrow for his departed friend as though he had suffered anything terrible... Such an one, as we further maintain, is sufficient for himself and his own happiness, and therefore is least in need of other men...And for this reason the loss of a son or brother, or the deprivation of fortune, is to him of all men least terrible... And therefore he will be least likely to lament, and will bear with the greatest equanimity any misfortune of this sort which may befall him." 

In essence, when a warrior would lose a friend or family member, he/she wouldn't take a moment to grieve b/c in the whole scheme of things, that person was just one human.  But what about comedy? 

"Neither ought our guardians to be given to laughter. For a fit of laughter which has been indulged to excess almost always produces a violent reaction... Then persons of worth, even if only mortal men, must not be represented as overcome by laughter, and still less must such a representation of the gods be allowed..."

So, apparently no comedy.  Sad.  What about fiction, you ask?  I wondered the same thing myself.  Socrates equates fiction w/ lying and only reserves that "right" to doctors and the State:

"Again, truth should be highly valued; if, as we were saying, a lie is useless to the gods, and useful only as a medicine to men, then the use of such medicines should be restricted to physicians; private individuals have no business with them...Then if any one at all is to have the privilege of lying, the rulers of the State should be the persons; and they, in their dealings either with enemies or with their own citizens, may be allowed to lie for the public good.

But nobody else should meddle with anything of the kind; and although the rulers have this privilege, for a private man to lie to them in return is to be deemed a more heinous fault than for the patient or the pupil of a gymnasium not to speak the truth about his own bodily illnesses to the physician or to the trainer, or for a sailor not to tell the captain what is happening about the ship and the rest of the crew, and how things are going with himself or his fellow sailors."

For a leader to lie to the public, it must be "for the public good."  Well, I wonder, what the difference is between a politician's lie and a broken campaign promise.  If Obama said he would end President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy but then has gone back on his promise (like he has recently in a compromise to extend unemployment benefits), is that a lie?  And what is the public good?  Is keeping knowledge of the discovery of extra-terrestrial aliens a public good?  Or what about news of an asteroid hurtling towards the planet that could have a dramatic impact on our climate - is that in the interest of the public good? 

And in the interests of truth?  How does lying work in the best interests of truth?  I'm still not happy w/ Socrates' answers with this one. 

As for crime / mystery stories, I'm in agreement with him:

"Because, if I am not mistaken, we shall have to say that about men poets and story-tellers are guilty of making the gravest misstatements when they tell us that wicked men are often happy, and the good miserable; and that injustice is profitable when undetected, but that justice is a man's own loss and another's gain--these things we shall forbid them to utter, and command them to sing and say the opposite." 

In summary, Socrates explains why he wants his warrior / guardians to hear only positive things in his very specialized society:

"If then we adhere to our original notion and bear in mind that our guardians, setting aside every other business, are to dedicate themselves wholly to the maintenance of freedom in the State, making this their craft, and engaging in no work which does not bear on this end, they ought not to practise or imitate anything else; if they imitate at all, they should imitate from youth upward only those characters which are suitable to their profession-- the courageous, temperate, holy, free, and the like; but they should not depict or be skilful at imitating any kind of illiberality or baseness, lest from imitation they should come to be what they imitate."

In the end, my question is, how would our American culture change if Socrates had his way about the arts?  Provide specific examples by using points listed above and songs / TV shows / artists / movies from our culture today. 

Due Monday, December 13.  Minimum 200 words. 

Further reading:
1. Plato's contribution to society - specialization / division of labor - http://mises.org/daily/2490
2. http://philofbeing.com/2009/07/bertrand-russells-outline-of-platos-republic/
3.

Source: http://www.literaturepage.com/read/therepublic-93.html
Online books, Book III, Plato's The Republic.

Plus, a great quote from a cool movie:
"BILL MURRAY: “What did you study?”
SCARLETT JOHANSSON: “Philosophy.”
BILL MURRAY: “Yeah, there’s a good buck in that racket.”
SCARLETT JOHANSSON: “Well, so far it’s pro bono.”
Lost in Translation (2003)

Blog #35 - Do It Yourself - Ask the Nagging Question

This one will be a little bit easier for me and a little bit harder for you. I've got 6 pm rehearsals this week in Ypsilanti w/ 1.5 hr drives there and back. It's going to be a long week. But after Feb. 28, life should return back to normal.

I am asking you to pick a topic/concept from any time during the semester that still puzzles you, baffles or confounds you, or something that just doesn't satisfy you. It could be a new take / angle on something that we've already discussed (b/c I know sometimes when you get a chance to stop and think about things we've discussed, it might 2 or 3 days later). Maybe you saw a movie that had some philosophical concepts - share it. For instance, I saw the movies 9 and Moon over break. Both had some wide ranging themes that we've talked about - what is a soul?; Man vs. machine; the right type of government; what does it mean to be human? Also, if you get a chance to see Creation, discuss what you saw or ask a question about the movie.

Due Monday, March 1 - 200 words.

Pick one of the questions below and answer it. Please do not pick your own.

1. Is being a Sunday Christian morally wrong or unjust in any ways? - Armen


2. Is the world “all in our heads?” How do you know? Will anyone ever know? If you realized you were living in a dream, would you jump off a cliff to see if you could wake up? - Jake P.

3. If you were given a timeline/future history of your life to come would you ignore it or take it into consideration throughout the rest of your life mapped out? If you would ignore, why? If you take it in, would you try and change things throughout your life knowing what's coming? Or is the future inevitable and can't be changed? Why? - Marcus

4. From Emily Wilson's ten criticisms of Socrates, ranging from the "chatter-box" to the rationalist thinking, which do you think is the worst criticism he has brought on to himself? (what is the #1 thing wrong with Socrates) - Armen

5. Who do you believe is the evil genius is our society/world? - Bianca, Stefanos

6. When God created Adam and Eve, he gave them free will, allowing Adam (and Eve) to sin. In heaven, there is supposed to be no sin, pain, sadness - everything is supposed to be perfect. Does this mean that there is no freedom in heaven? - Jules

7. When we talk about evil/wrong/bad in class, we talk about murder or nuclear bombs or diseases, but I don't think we have ever talked about whether some things are only a little bad, or if one thing is more wrong than another. Is there more than one degree of evil/bad? Can something be percieved as only a little evil/bad? For example, some people believe that smoking marijuana is bad, just like killing someone is bad. Could "bad" have more than one definition? - Olivia

8. Is your generation going to be different than previous ones? Will your generation change the world? If yes (to either), how so? How will your upbringing play a role in your generation’s actions? Is the generation headed in the right direction? - Jake P.


9. How come religion was such an important part of people’s lives a few centuries ago and is now “less important”? Do people have more doubt? Or is there something else? - Laetitia


10. Is death the end of everything or is there a soul that continues to exist after death? If so, is the soul immortal? - Sam T., Ben

11. Technology and other scientifical advantages seem to further divide religion and science. One example is Darwinism/evolution. What is another example that we may or may not have studied? - Sammy V., Stephen

12. How can you be sure that you are real and the people around you are real, if you can't trust your senses? - Irina, Jake P., Stefanos, Raphy

13. If you argue that man has no soul, what makes man want to be kind and love others?; If you argue man has a soul, where in the body is it? Does it have a place in the heart or in the mind? Maybe in the foot...? - Dayna

14. Do you believe that history could truly be manipulated like it was in George Orwell's 1984? - Jules

15. Spinoza’s philosophy claims that our world is deus sive natura, or “either Nature or God”, but how can it possibly be a question of either? It seems to me that either both exist, or neither exists. If only God exists, then he is malevolent in making a false nature that we perceive, and if only nature exists, then how could it have been created? - Claire

16. If we do, in fact, come into this world with “tabula rasa” do you think that eventually everyone ends up with the same general concepts on their slate or is what ends up on the slate determined by the individual? - Jessie

17. Given the recent intentional plane crash of an angry man into an IRS building (that killed one IRS agent) in Austin, TX, should the definition of a terrorist be redefined? In your own words what is a terrorist? Do you think the definition of terrorist changed over time? And what separates a terrorist from a freedom fighter or a martyr? - Moose

18. Which era do you believe was most significant in coming up with discoveries and ideas? (Rationalism, Empiricism, Enlightenment, or Romanticism?) - Stefanos

19. At what point does life end? At what point does life begin? If we define life as ending when the heart stops, then should we define life as beginning when the heart begins to beat or when the child is born? If we define life as beginning with the first heartbeat, is it ridiculous to label the mother a murderer during a stillbirth or would that be total heresy? - Eric S.

20. Is philosophy a waste of time since the meaning of life cannot truly be found? - Dayna

21. What makes someone a “philosopher?” Is it a way of thinking? Does it require a certain level of intelligence or understanding? Or is it something anyone is capable of doing if they truly set their mind to it? - Jessie

22. How have movies, especially horror and mystery movies, influenced our perception of reality? Have movies sometimes made you question reality and made you think about whether things are real or not? - Richard

23. Is dialectic materialism a circle? Since I saw the timeline of cultures affected by each other on our Marxism notes I have wondered if the process is linear. There has to be a limited amount of ideas so they would have to repeat themselves once in a while, but perhaps the amount is so vast that that is not possible. Or does it have an end like Marx says at which Communism is the end point? - Claire

24. What makes us think we can trust our senses? Explain. - Richard, Jake T.

25. Why is Darwin being placed in a philosophy book with men that pondered where we came from and questions that can’t be answered while his theories are based off of data and facts? - Lisa

26. Have the philosophers discussed in class changed your views on life at all? How so? - Megan

27. Do you believe that each person has one true love that they are destined to find, or that there are multiple true loves for each person? - Sara D.

28. Do people need to have faith in a higher power, or anything for that matter, to be successful in life? - Amanda

29. Society has many laws, rules, regulations, and consequences for those who don't follow them. Do you think that people derive the sense of right and wrong from these laws, rules, regulations, and consequences, or sentiment and feelings that Hume suggest? - Raphy

30. Would you drink the cool-aide? If someone presented you with a drink that could make you meet the eternal god and, guarantee you passage into heaven, would you drink it? It’s like would you press the button for a million dollars? Can we believe what we hear, do we hear the truth, or do we inherently believe what we want to hear? - Eric S.

31. The author of Sophie’s World appears to have a fanatic obsession with romantic irony. The fact that he is constantly reminding us every chapter about how he is in fact simply writing a book about a man who is writing a book about characters that may actually exist in the fantasy world that he (the author) has created proves this statement. My question is, why has the author gone to such great lengths with his use of romantic irony? What does it achieve for the novel? - Tyler F.

32. Do you believe the theory of evolution disproves the existence of God or does God and Darwin's theory of evolution go hand in hand? - Stephen

33. Was G-d or a higher power created in man's image? Why or why not? - Amanda

34. Communism has never been achieved in any country. Do you think that it’s the actual process/idea of communism that is flawed or the nature of mankind that is flawed that prevents the idea from working? - Annie, Tyler F.

35. Can there be perfection outside of situations in which there is a clear definition of what it means to be perfect? i.e. Bowling the perfect game - 300! - Sam G.

36. Do you believe that the average American is intelligent? - Jake T.

37. Freud said that "we have unconscious drives that can affect our actions without us knowing about them." Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not? - Alesia

38. Can anything be infinite? (you have an infinite number of numbers between 1 and 2, and an infinite number of numbers between 2 and 4. are there twice as many numbers between 2 and 4 than there is between 1 and 2??) Why or why not? - it doesn't even have to apply to numbers. - Ben

39. If you assume that the universe is expanding, do you believe that it is expanding into something? Why or why not? - David M.

40. Does the idea of hell or a punishment seem reasonable with a just God? Why or why not? - Colin

41. As humans we are so needy, in this day and age technology is at all time high. Do you think people like Amish people have an advantage even though they are without, them being less depend it on the things we consider a necessity. Why or why not? - Alyssa T.

Blog #28 What is Wrong with Socrates?

We read the articles by Emily Wilson with her alternative take on the life of Socrates. In "What's Wrong with Socrates?"in The Philosophers' Magazine, 2nd Qtr., 2008, she listed 10 things that conflicted with the myth/legend of Socrates that we have grown familiar with.

Among Socrates' perceived transgressions (in Dr. Wilson's eyes), he was:
1. An amateur and prided himself in not getting paid;
2. Irresponsible to leave his wife and two children behind;
3. A chatterbox (talk over action is valued);
4. Psychologically naive - with statements like "nobody does wrong willingly", Wilson tears him apart;
5. Felt that pain didn't matter - if you were good, though wrong/harm was done to you, the real harm is in the sinner or the wrongdoer;
6. Anti-political - he felt that few if any are smart enough to run a government properly, but could he do it? Could anyone? If not, why have gov't in the first place?
7. Parochial - there was little that Socrates believed could be learned outside of the walls of Athens;
8. Arrogant - when Dr. Wilson says arrogant, apparantly she means ill-mannered and inconsiderate among other things listed in the article;
9. Superstitious - sometimes, philosophers mean that someone who is religious is superstitious, but the way she wrote this passage, she made him sound a bit loony (eccentric if you want to put a good spin on it) for listening to the voice inside his head. Is that voice his conscience or was hearing voices like the math professor in A Beautiful Mind?
10. Rationalist - normally, you wouldn't think there's anything wrong with being rational, but Dr. Wilson finds that Socrates puts such a strong emphasis on being rational that he leaves no room for emotion in solving problems. He is devoid of emotion.

So, your job here is to pick 4 of these criticisms and discuss whether or not you agree or disagree with them. We heard from many of you in class, and here's your chance to refine or air out your ideas.

200 words minimum. Due Tuesday, Dec. 15.

(if you lost the article, it is available on the T drive, in my handout folder, in Philosophy, and then in articles. There are six pages).

Blog #10 - Questions of Socrates

Due Monday, December 8 - 200 words

We discussed four of Socrates' big questions about life Thursday and Friday:
- What is virtue? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue
- What is courage? http://www.wisdomquotes.com/cat_courage.html
- What is beauty? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauty
- What is justice? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice

What I would like for you to do is to pick one of these big questions and take a moment to consider where you see it lacking in American society.

If you choose virtue, where in American society is there a huge need for virtue? What about beauty? What part of American society could become more beautiful? In what sense? Who in American life could use a little (or a lot more justice)? Which Americans need to show more courage in our tough economic times? Why? (these are sample questions to get some ideas flowing - I figure that you can come up with something yourself).

Editor's Note - I don't want to influence this too much, so I'll refrain from including pictures or quotes or anything else. I've included links to Wikipedia or quotes on courage in case you're stuck on a topic. You DON'T have to pick the same topic that you personally discussed in class, but if you want to, that's fine.

Blog #6 - The Most Perplexing Questions Imaginable

We've tackled heaven and hell, good and evil, perception and reality. What awaits us after we die? Anything? Catholic Purgatory? Absolutely nothing? Is evil an objective or subjective term? Who defines what or who evil is?

I know that there are many questions still left out there unanswered. What the heck was Plato thinking with his Forms? Why did Socrates allow himself to be put to death? Where is the novel going to go now that we know it's really a novel?

What if the whole Lost series is really going on in Hurley's head? Could the island be purgatory and everyone be dead waiting while their sins are washed away? What if you had a chance to reinvent yourself, who would you become?

There are many more questions to be answered, places to go, people to meet and we can't possibly cover them all in 12 weeks. Obviously, I'm just showing you the path to help you begin your journey of self-discovery, you'll have to do the rest on your own.
These are just a few examples of some questions that you can ask for this blog entry. 200 words minimum. Due Thursday, October 30th.

P.S. I apologize for posting this so late - had to go grocery shopping, make dinner, get my wife's new laptop going, and then Mario Kart Tournament. I got 2nd. If you need another day to do the blog, that's fine. Cute picture of my dog, Izzy, below.