Ad
related to: socrates argument of opposites explanation examples essay introductionstudy.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Socrates offers four arguments for the soul's immortality: The Cyclical Argument, or Opposites Argument explains that Forms are eternal and unchanging, and as the soul always brings life, then it must not die, and is necessarily "imperishable". As the body is mortal and is subject to physical death, the soul must be its indestructible opposite.
As an example, Socrates affirms that he is certain, that had the god granted Alcibiades the rule of Greece, he would have accepted. With his question Socrates could also be playing on Alcibiades' ambitious nature, that was known throughout Greece and was immortalised in Thucydides' history. [ 4 ]
The unity of opposites is the philosophical idea that opposites are interconnected due to the way each is defined in relation to the other. Their interdependence unites the seemingly opposed terms. Their interdependence unites the seemingly opposed terms.
Socrates secures his interlocutor's agreement to further premises, for example "Courage is a fine thing" and "Ignorant endurance is not a fine thing". Socrates then argues, and the interlocutor agrees, these further premises imply the contrary of the original thesis; in this case, it leads to: "courage is not endurance of the soul".
Socrates asks Protagoras "in respect to what" Hippocrates will improve by associating with him, as, for example, he would improve in medicine by associating himself with a doctor (318d). Protagoras begins by saying that a good Sophist can make his students into good citizens by teaching civic virtue (πολιτικὴν τέχνην).
Socrates is known for proclaiming his total ignorance; he used to say that the only thing he was aware of was his ignorance, seeking to imply that the realization of one's ignorance is the first step in philosophizing. Socrates exerted a strong influence on philosophers in later antiquity and has continued to do so in the modern era.
Socratic dialogue remained a popular format for expressing arguments and drawing literary portraits of those who espouse them. Some of these dialogues employ Socrates as a character, but most simply employ the philosophical style similar to Plato while substituting a different character to lead the discussion. Boethius
An example of this is the use of the rules of inference found within symbolic logic. Aristotle held that any logical argument could be reduced to two premises and a conclusion. [2] Premises are sometimes left unstated, in which case, they are called missing premises, for example: Socrates is mortal because all men are mortal.