The viewpoint of Socrates as discussed by Plato provides an important concept of what this means to life an ethical and important life. The combo of Socratic irony, the Socratic Method, and Socratic ethics as observed in the Euthyphro as well as the Apology helps us to comprehend what Socrates means when he says that the unexamined life is not worth living. This newspaper will make clear what it means to live an examined life and can also condition my view of what viewpoint is, and just why it is important in a modern world.
In the first section of the paper, I am going to explain Socrates' beliefs in terms of his use of Socratic irony, Socratic Method, and his notions of ethics. I will then clarify how each one of these pertains to the assertion posed by Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living.
Socratic irony is a method used in the Socratic approach to teaching. Irony can be used when someone says something that conveys a message that contradicts the literal words. In the case of Socratic irony, Socrates might pretend to think his students sensible or he could denigrate his own intellect by pretending he is ignorant or that he will not know the answer. Socrates would pretend to be ignorant of the topic under debate, to draw out the flaws in the quarrels of his competitors. An example of this can be seen in Plato's Euthyphro (Plato, 2010) where Plato feigns ignorance and asks Euthyphro to teach him the real interpretation of piety, to which Euthyphro claims to have overall understanding of. Socrates will this to show Euthyphro's ignorance by using his Socratic Method. The irony lies in Socrates' knowledge of Euthyphro's ignorance even though Socrates is pretending to be ignorant himself (Plato, 2010).
The Socratic Method is an activity of question and answer. Socrates would have an opponent state a thesis and would then show that it led to a contradiction by requesting his opposition questions. It is a basic form of inquiry and controversy between individuals with opposing viewpoints based on asking and responding to questions to induce critical thinking also to illuminate ideas. The method usually involves an oppositional talk in which the defense of one point of view is matched up against the defense of another. Generally, one participant may lead another to contradict himself in some way, to be able to expose defects in their opponents' quarrels. Better ideas are located by figuring out and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. The Euthyphro offers a wonderful example of the use of this technique. Socrates questions each of Euthyphro's meanings in regards to what piety is, and constantly shows how these explanations fail when reviewed critically (Plato, 2010). Socrates' contention is the fact that Euthyphro is merely giving explanations and types of pious things, rather than actually offering an objective response to the essence which makes a thing pious (Plato, 2010). Socrates complains that Euthyphro is stringing him along as he's not teaching him what piety actually is (Plato, 2010). It's important to note how Socrates uses his method with Euthyphro. Socrates functions as the learner, and elevates Euthyphro to that of a mentor, which allows Socrates to lead Euthyphro though the process of critical analysis, instead of simply dictating information directly to him. In this manner, Socrates allows Euthyphro to look at his own debate, and realize the mistakes that plague it. This commences to give a knowledge of what Socrates recommended by his idea of the unexamined life which will be expounded after later in this section.
According to Socrates, knowledge - and its own pursuit - is the method by which we perform, and understand, honest action. Knowledge is usually to be known as virtue, and to have knowledge is usually to be virtuous. By using parallel we can infer that because knowledge can be discovered, we must also be able to learn virtue. From this it uses that virtue can be taught, and as a result, our activities will have outcomes on the virtues of others. Our actions must seek knowledge and intelligence over our very own personal interests to allow them to be ethical. The Apology offers a solid example of Socrates' character and ethical idea. The Apology deals with the defense made available from Socrates to his accusers - of the offences of impiety and corruption of the youngsters of Athens - in which he demonstrates the strength of his convictions (Plato, 2010). Socrates is available guilty of the charges against him, and is sentenced to death by ingestion of hemlock (Plato, 2010). When confronted with death - a substantial personal interest to place it gently - Socrates experienced the choice to flee the city of Athens, but refused as it would have been around in direct violation of his moral rules. He says that:
"You're incorrect, my man, if you believe a person who's of any use in any way should take hazard into consideration, weighing up his likelihood of living or dying, instead of making it the only real concern, whenever he functions, whether his actions are just or unjust and whether they're what a good man would do or a negative one. " (Plato, 2010, p. 46)
To escape could have been contradictory on the most basic level of his ethics as fleeing would have been an injustice not and then Athens itself, but to his idea of ethics as a whole. To Socrates, every action any particular one can take should be take knowledge and intelligence into consideration to become consider ethical or simply.
What Socrates was attempting to convey with his notions of the unexamined life had not been any particular one must verify their own life for it to have worth, but instead that if one would declare that their life is worthwhile, they might need to examine it themselves to understand it's worth. INSIDE THE Apology, Socrates talks about his attempt to get Athenians in positions of expert to realize they don't know very well what they're talking about (Plato, 2010). He themes their values to critical scrutiny and embarrasses them when as it happens they aren't as educated as they've stated. This is exactly what Socrates does with his dialogue in the Euthyphro (Plato, 2010). He feigns ignorance to raise Euthyphro to an increased level with Socratic irony, and guides him along the path of self assessment along with his Socratic Method. So, the examination that is being discussed is actually the questioning of men and women in expert who claim to have knowledge. Socrates himself doesn't promise to know anything, but does indeed claim to realize that he doesn't know any thing. This realization is the data, and fact, that was produced through Socrates' own self-examination. Socrates argues that living a life where one does not realize their own ignorance is a life not worthwhile living. When Socrates discusses "life", we are not to consider an individual life, but rather the life we live as though it were a kind of skill, or alternatively some sort of thing that we all do alongside one another. In a way, we all have been living life, but it has no worth if we do not look at it for soundness. In ways, it could be a better translation to say the unexamined world is not well worth living in. To put this quite simply; finding one's life to be significant is an answer to the questions that are helped bring forth through inside evaluation, and without asking the questions, one won't receive the answer. This is why the offer posed by the jurors in The Apology for Socrates to avoid philosophizing was a non-option for Socrates (Plato, 2010). To give up the capability to question also to examine, would be to give up on a life price living. To Socrates, death - as opposed to this offer - could have been the better plus more honest option.
In the second area of the essay, I am going to explain that philosophy is not merely the study of available questions, but an application of the abilities gained by process of questioning and evaluating these questions.
Simply put, beliefs - if you ask me - is the need to understand. It really is a genuine fascination with the pursuit of knowledge, and is also - at the main - the driving push of my curiosity. Obtaining a remedy is not a necessary corollary to the quest for an answer, and therefore is not necessarily the essential requirement. It is in the process in which one makes an attempt at finding a remedy where the value lies. To me, the ever evolving understanding of the earth will do for idea to be important. It allows me to grasp forms of understanding that I could have never conceived. It really is invaluable solely as a result of critical thinking it needs. However, I find it hard to articulate why the content of philosophy concerns. At least, I find it hard to suggest idea is relevant in a far more general or useful sense. I dispute there is a need to find a place for viewpoint within the world outside of academia. Perhaps it generally does not necessarily need to be in terms of finding ways to turn the profession into capital, but instead finding a way to make the content of school of thought relevant. One may argue that viewpoint sorts the foundations of most sciences and it allows ideas and ideas to be extremely clear and extremely powerful. The question to ask then is how useful is this? Can we not simply settle for the former responding to the last mentioned? I claim that the issue we face is that we are trying to form a primary link to the modern world. For instance, it's quite understandable that the practice of idea may well not be as functional or directly applicable with an electrician as the data of electrical anatomist. It could however, be erroneous to think that the practice of philosophy in an over-all sense could not profit such a person. The ability to assess, to be critical in exam, also to view problems in a different perspective is where in fact the benefit lies, which is applicable to everyone areas of life. Heidegger offered an opinion on the problem when he said:
"It really is entirely right and completely to be able to say, 'You can't do anything with idea. ' The sole oversight is to think that with this, the judgment concerning philosophy reaches an end. For just a little epilogue arises in the form of a counter question: even if we can not do anything with it, may not philosophy in the end do something around, provided that we indulge ourselves with it?" - (Heidegger, 2000, 9-10)
I argue that while it might not exactly be the case that beliefs itself will have any direct or practical application, the practice of school of thought will impact the way we view and deal with the planet, and affect everything we do in the standard form, as long as we take part in the constant quest for knowledge.
Socrates' philosophy - and his concept of the unexamined life - is a guide for how you need to take action and live. Regardless of the difference with time this concept is still relevant to today's modern ideals. The quest for knowledge is important to Socrates as a way of establishing what's ethical, and creating what it is to reside a life value living, equally it's important to how exactly we approach the world view with modern day mindset.
