Plato had a great influence on Aristotle and other Greek philosophers. His works also influenced the Greek and Latin Fathers of the Christian church. The study of Plato's doctrines and the influence o...
| Notification [x] |

| Author | Feedback | Action |
|
01/03/2010 By making a big deal of the charge of corrupting the youth, Plato garners more sympathy from the youth. It is as if their leaders are saying they are not smart enough to think for themselves, and to choose between true and false. Plato writes in a style that makes the philosophy more easily acceptable to the youth, by making their parents and the ruling party their enemy. Plato never entered politics. He chose instead to induce change through the teachings of his philosophy at his school the Academy. He did induce some change because "Unlike Socrates, Plato took no part in the civic life of Athens, but he was much more interested in political philosophy, and is said to have been consulted by statesman both at home and abroad" (Plato, "Apology: Introductory Note." Great Works of Literature, 01-01-92). The treatise was successful considering Plato's works are still used to today by many political-philosophers. Regardless of the government or law Hobbes believes "no man can transferre his Right to save himselfe from Death, Wounds, and Imprisonment" (Hobbes 199). |
||
|
06/03/2010 Therefore, it could be argued that for Descartes there are two things which cannot be argued. They are "I think, therefore, I am," and "I think, therefore there is a God!" Descartes knows he is a thinking thing. He believes in God because he as a clear and distinct picture and idea of God in his mind, and the one thing he cannot deny is he exists because he thinks. Ockman says this was Descartes whole purpose in writing "Meditations." According to Ockman: John Locke was the son of a wealthy family who sought to maintain and justify his family's wealth in the chapter "Of Property" in his Second Treatise of Government. Locke believes that the purpose of government is to protect property and that societies were set up to avoid civil or foreign wars that may occur over the dispute of property. Locke attempts to rationalize the right of men having "unequal possessions of the earth" (Locke 29), but fails because he does not recognize that unequal ownership of property does not allow for the basis of his argument that ownership of property is only justified if there is good and enough for others (Locke, 20). |
||
|
08/03/2010 Animals, therefore, are not guided in these inferences by reasoning: Neither are children: Neither are the generality of mankind, in their ordinary actions and conclusions: Neither are philosophers themselves, who, in all the active parts of life, are, in the main, the same with the vulgar, and are governed by the same maxims. (Hume, David S. "Concerning Human Understanding" Section IX, 84.) The sovereign (government) according to Hobbes is the glue that holds society together. The sovereign enacts and enforces laws. The sovereign is the power that all men fear if they break the law. The sovereign has the right to execute its citizens if they are found guilty, but the citizen has no obligation to assist in his own execution or death (Hobbes 199). It is against the Law of Nature not to resist death. Hobbes states: "For though a man may covenant thus, Unlesse I do so, or so, kill me; he cannot covenant thus, Unlesse I do so, or so, I will not resist you, when you come to kill me" (Hobbes 199). |
||
|
09/03/2010 Descartes goes on to say that he will try to prove not only that God exists, but that his existence is clearer and more certain than the existence of anything other than ourselves--that we can be more sure that God exists than we can be that tables and chairs exist. (Ockman, William, "Medieval Elements in Descartes." http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/z3611.html accessedApril 8, 1999) If we apply Dewey to Dewey we find that his naturalistic metaphysics does not wash. Rorty is correct he makes the same mistakes he criticizes. How can there be a definitive naturalistic metaphysics of experience, if the world is constantly in flux and truth is only relevant to the values and meanings that currently define it? Will the naturalistic metaphysics of experience change with history like values and meanings? Will it change the different experiences of each individual? If the door no longer closes, but did close before, it still closed previously. The first experience does not change. It still remains true. Rorty explains: |