Socrates

Post Reply
lady cop
Posts: 14744
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:00 pm

Socrates

Post by lady cop »

GG don't worry...i have never studied philosophy. all i know is what i figured out for myself!
koan
Posts: 16817
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:00 pm

Socrates

Post by koan »

Socrates was one of the earliest "Fathers of Reason". He didn't write much because he taught through oral tradition and most of what is known of him was recorded by his student, Plato. He was greatly concerned with ethics and morals.

I found a good link to a brief summary of his life and work (a good refresher for myself as well :o ).

http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/socr.htm
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

Socrates

Post by anastrophe »

Godiva Girl wrote: I am so happy that we have a Philosophy section now. I have just started learning about Philosophy and find it quite interesting. Since I am new to learning this subject I will probably use wrong words at first and may make some mistakes, please be patient with me. I just finished reading an article about the Greek Philosopher Socrates. Since I had heard his name so many times I was surprised to read that he did not write much of anything. That he was quite the antagonist and mostly tore other peoples opinion down. To those of you out there that know alot about philosophy, what is your opinion of Socrates?
although i studied primarily philosophy in college (before dropping out!) i'm not terribly well read in the ancient classics. however, i can address the notion that he was an antagonist and mostly 'tore other people's opinion down'.



what you're referring to is appropriately named 'the socratic method'. it has less to do with tearing down opinions as it does getting people to question the definitions upon which their opinions are based. it's a means of understanding what we know by questioning what we know. socrates challenged people's presumptions and assumptions, and strived to get to a deeper understanding of what people took for granted. in that sense it was antagonistic, because it was based upon skepticism. but unlike the 'entrenched' skepticism of the sophists, his was based upon a genuine desire to find the root, the core of our understanding of existence.



a 'google' on 'socratic method' brings up some excellent explanations of it.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Hawke
Posts: 427
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 1:00 pm

Socrates

Post by Hawke »

We use the Socratic method quite a bit in archaeology. I'm going to use this thread to mention a nifty little website, the Perseus Project, which is run by Tufts University. This website has a lot of the Greek/Roman classics in the original and in translation, including many of the early philosophical works.

Check it out and enjoy.
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

Socrates

Post by anastrophe »

each of us is a unique individual, but we all share humanity in common. it's not 'necessary' to go back to aristotle, hippocrates, herakleitos, etc., to learn about existence, but it is illuminating to find common themes in the utterances of someone who lived 2,500 years ago, and a precocious ne'er-do-well in Pink Floyd.



:yh_bigsmi
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
kensloft
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:37 am

Socrates

Post by kensloft »

ArnoldLayne wrote: I guess when we do study the common themes of our contemporaries and those that have gone before, we haven't really changed that much .We're no more "civilised "now than we were thousands of years ago and my guess is we wont be.

Are our morals any different now?

Do we treat fellow human beings any better than our stone age descendents?

I dont think so

So it follows that we never will

That's quite depressing cos if there is one thing we have learnt, it's that we never learn


Somehow I don't think that we are less civilised than our stone age forefathers. Looking at the historical data available from those times tells us that we have come a long way from where we were in terms other than the thousands of years that have passed bye. We still get a little stone agey at times but that is war and defending against stone aged mentalities that think that might is right.

I love reading the classics from all ages because there is the common thread that is people and their wants and needs. Their growth from the caves to the caves of this day and age known as homes.

Get your hands on a copy of Herodatus, the Father of written history, and see what life was like about 2500 plus years ago. Interesting, easy, informative guide to what life was like then.
koan
Posts: 16817
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:00 pm

Socrates

Post by koan »

You're rambling :wah:

If you were it would be typical of philosophy anyway.

I think that reading the classics is enlightening in that you can see how schools of thought were developed, thereby adding to further understanding not just of the philosophy but also to the process of advancement.
kensloft
Posts: 2793
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:37 am

Socrates

Post by kensloft »

ArnoldLayne wrote: With respect ,Im sure we have come a long way...technically.... that's why we are able to have this real time conversation over thousands of miles and I'm certain that in another 100years the scientific wonders will be ever more wonderous

My specific question was , are we better for it on a human level.

I dont think so.

Our brains and genes, I'm sure, opperate along the same parameters as did our ancient ancestors

Inventing the computer is no more profound than inventing the wheel .Neither carries us people to knowing ourselves or others, or changes the way we think of fellow humans and the way we treat them

i'd go further and suggest we'd be better off going back to being cave dwellers, atleast we respected our surroundings more. But maybe thats the benefit of hindsight :-3

Do I make any sense or am I rambling?


Have we taken into consideration that we are only using about ten percent of our brain, presently?
Light
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 4:50 am

Socrates

Post by Light »

lady cop wrote: GG don't worry...i have never studied philosophy. all i know is what i figured out for myself!


Great philosophy! How could philosophy be to read and take over other persons ideas? then it would not be philosophy anymore, or is that to simple to think?

Well perhaps it is, our best ideas do come from others, but it is only philosophy if you use those ideas to think about to enrich and build your own ideas with.

I have read somebody here saying something like this..

You may try as hard, as you want, but I will defend my ideas to the end.

And I am thinking. :-2 :-2 :-2 How can you build out ideas or think about new ideas if you try to hold one to your excisting ideas. Only if you can and are willing to refuse your own ideas, only then you can think and enrich your ideas.

more like another very nice thing I read here...

Old Man: "Young man, do you know what wisdom is?"

Young Boy: "No sir, I don't."

Old Man: "Wise Answer."

It is beautiful!

But these are just my ideas of philosophy... For another person it may be different of course;)
User avatar
chonsigirl
Posts: 33633
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am

Socrates

Post by chonsigirl »

I'm the proverbial gadfly.........................

*ps Socrates didn't write a thing, his student Plato did the writing*
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy”