1. Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Homer (yesterday the question was about Hesiod)?
I think that Plato wants to censor Homer because the Iliad shows a lot of things you shouldn’t teach your children. For example Achilles is always killing people, he cries because his war prize is taken away, they use words that shouldn’t be used like punk, and the Iliad is full of anger and revenge. People don’t want their kids reading this because it sets a bad example like Hesiod with the gods. So I think that this is why someone will try to censor Homer.
2. According to Plato, what are some aspects of poetry that should be banned and why?
Some aspects of poetry that should be banned are to stop talking about the after life, misrepresenting god with evil, the names in the underworld, and description of reputable characters. This is because it sends out the wrong message and it’s unsuitable for the ears of children.
3.What should poetry “teach” and why?
I don’t think that poetry should teach only one thing. I think poetry should teach a variety of things. For example it should about god, people, justice, law/government, culture, and society, because people need to know this, and it will help out the leaders to know this information.
4. If you were talking to Plato what would you say to him? Do you agree with his ideas? Do you think poetry, or literature in general, should be put to the purposes that he says it should?
If I was talking to Plato I would tell him that I do agree with him. I think that poets should not write about the gods and heroes being bad. Also about people harming each other, and I do think it’s giving kids a bad example. So I would agree with him and tell him that I think he’s right, and I would follow his laws/principals.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Due Tue 3/27 - Republic Assignment
1. Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Hesiod?
I think that Plato would censor Hesiod because there’s probably something that Hesiod did wrong that Plato didn’t want people to know about. Or maybe it was not as important as other things that happened.
2. What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?
Homer is guilty of misrepresenting gods, and it is not right so its better to not say anything about it, because it gives an idea that gods were bad when there good.
3. What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?
The two main characteristics of god are that god is perfect in beauty and goodness, and that god is without deceit or falsehood. So the principles that have to be followed are first that God is the cause, not of all things, but only of good, and that when you speak of god they shall not represented as using magic to disguise themselves nor as playing us false in word or deed.
4. Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?
My personal reflection was somehow true and had to do with what Plato wrote. This is because it is true that Hesiod did something wrong, he misrepresented god in his play. But I was wrong about it not being important as other things because god is a very important subject.
I think that Plato would censor Hesiod because there’s probably something that Hesiod did wrong that Plato didn’t want people to know about. Or maybe it was not as important as other things that happened.
2. What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?
Homer is guilty of misrepresenting gods, and it is not right so its better to not say anything about it, because it gives an idea that gods were bad when there good.
3. What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?
The two main characteristics of god are that god is perfect in beauty and goodness, and that god is without deceit or falsehood. So the principles that have to be followed are first that God is the cause, not of all things, but only of good, and that when you speak of god they shall not represented as using magic to disguise themselves nor as playing us false in word or deed.
4. Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?
My personal reflection was somehow true and had to do with what Plato wrote. This is because it is true that Hesiod did something wrong, he misrepresented god in his play. But I was wrong about it not being important as other things because god is a very important subject.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Due Thr 3/22 - Prep for Seminar
In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?
I think that it is not right to harm anyone. But it is sometimes ok, but only as self defense. This is because if you harm someone they will harm you back its like karma. Its not right to harm someone unless they harm you first wich will be self defense. I think weather you like it or not you have to harm someone if they attack you because you cant just stand there and do nothing that’s why its okay to harm someone at one point. But it should not go to the point where you kill the person because you don’t have a right to take someone’s life away. I think that Socrates will probably response by agreeing because of the believe that sometimes you have to deviate from the law for justice.
I think that it is not right to harm anyone. But it is sometimes ok, but only as self defense. This is because if you harm someone they will harm you back its like karma. Its not right to harm someone unless they harm you first wich will be self defense. I think weather you like it or not you have to harm someone if they attack you because you cant just stand there and do nothing that’s why its okay to harm someone at one point. But it should not go to the point where you kill the person because you don’t have a right to take someone’s life away. I think that Socrates will probably response by agreeing because of the believe that sometimes you have to deviate from the law for justice.
Due wed 3/21 - Republic Assignment
1. In your opinion, how can acting “right” (i.e. justly) help or harm the achievement of happiness? In your answer you need to first establish, in true Socratic fashion, what you mean by "right" (justice) and what you mean by happiness. What do you think Socrates would say about what you wrote and/or what do you think Thrasymachus would say?
In my opinion acting right can help or harm the person it depends on what brings happiness to them. For example if following the law doing the right things make you happy then acting right helps your achievement of happiness. But if you’re a rebel you like to break the law than acting right harms your achievement of happiness. To me right means doing what the law and justice says, and happiness is what makes you feel good and happy. I think that Thrasymachus will probably say that this is true because to him justice is the interest of the strong witch make the strong happy, but like I said if following the law doing the right thing makes you happy then there’s no problem.
In my opinion acting right can help or harm the person it depends on what brings happiness to them. For example if following the law doing the right things make you happy then acting right helps your achievement of happiness. But if you’re a rebel you like to break the law than acting right harms your achievement of happiness. To me right means doing what the law and justice says, and happiness is what makes you feel good and happy. I think that Thrasymachus will probably say that this is true because to him justice is the interest of the strong witch make the strong happy, but like I said if following the law doing the right thing makes you happy then there’s no problem.
Due Tue 3/20 - Republic Assignment
1. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?
Socrates’ main arguments against the idea that justice is whatever the strong say are that the exercise of any skill is, as such, disinterested, and that right is for the interest of the strong, so the person’s actions positive way because when they make justice it will suit there own interest.
2. What are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?
Thrasymahcus two main points are that political power is the exploitation of a class by another, and that justice is the interest of the stronger party, injustice is the interest and profit of oneself. Socrates’ two main points in response were that each professional skill brings its own peculiar benefit, and that no one really wants to look for other types of authority.
3. In your opinion, does injustice pay? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer.
I think that injustice does not pay off most of the time. Or at least what you do get paid is not enough to help you out or make you happy. And when justice is done since your not a strong person then it pays to the strong and not you. Thrasymahcus will probably agree with me because my idea comes from what he said, ‘Justice is the interest of the stronger party, injustice the interest and profit of oneself.”
Socrates’ main arguments against the idea that justice is whatever the strong say are that the exercise of any skill is, as such, disinterested, and that right is for the interest of the strong, so the person’s actions positive way because when they make justice it will suit there own interest.
2. What are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?
Thrasymahcus two main points are that political power is the exploitation of a class by another, and that justice is the interest of the stronger party, injustice is the interest and profit of oneself. Socrates’ two main points in response were that each professional skill brings its own peculiar benefit, and that no one really wants to look for other types of authority.
3. In your opinion, does injustice pay? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer.
I think that injustice does not pay off most of the time. Or at least what you do get paid is not enough to help you out or make you happy. And when justice is done since your not a strong person then it pays to the strong and not you. Thrasymahcus will probably agree with me because my idea comes from what he said, ‘Justice is the interest of the stronger party, injustice the interest and profit of oneself.”
Due Fri 3/16 - The Republic Part 1 Section 2 pp. 8-15
1. In your opinion, is Polemarchus definition of justice, derived from the poet Simonedes, an improvement from his father’s definition?
In my opinion Polemarchus’ definition of Justice is derived from the poet Simonides. Because both talk about helping friends and harming enemies.
2. What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?
Simonides definition of justice is that justice is to benefit one’s friends and harm one’s enemies. I think that Polemarchus has interpreted Simonides correctly, because what Polemarchus’ definition of justice is to help friends and harm enemies basically what Simonides said.
3. What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?
Socrates thinks that the phrase is wrong because what if your friends are actually your enemies and your enemies are your friends. Or that you picked the wrong friends because you never know who your true friends are and who your enemies are what if your enemies are good people, and that’s why that’s not a good definition of justice.
In my opinion Polemarchus’ definition of Justice is derived from the poet Simonides. Because both talk about helping friends and harming enemies.
2. What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?
Simonides definition of justice is that justice is to benefit one’s friends and harm one’s enemies. I think that Polemarchus has interpreted Simonides correctly, because what Polemarchus’ definition of justice is to help friends and harm enemies basically what Simonides said.
3. What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?
Socrates thinks that the phrase is wrong because what if your friends are actually your enemies and your enemies are your friends. Or that you picked the wrong friends because you never know who your true friends are and who your enemies are what if your enemies are good people, and that’s why that’s not a good definition of justice.
Due Fri 3/16 - Republic Assignment
1. Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
Cephalus is Polemarchus’ father. He believes in the traditional like religion, business, and he thinks that justice is the law. Polemarchus is Cephalus’ son he thinks for himself, using reason from his dad’s social convention.
2. What is the profession of Cephalus?
Cephalus’ doesn’t have a real profession. He got the money from his grandfather and father.
3. What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
Cephalus was sacrificing something before the discussion.
4. According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
According to Cephalus the virtues of old age are not plagued by desire for sex.
5. What is Cephalus’ view of justice?
Cephalus’ view of justice is to be truthful and pay your debts.
6. What is Socrates response?
Socrates response is that it is not always right to be truthful.
7. Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
I don’t agree with neither Socrates nor Cephalus when it comes to justice, because sometimes you need to lie but its better to say the truth. Cephalus believes you always have to say the truth and Socrates thinks that you shouldn’t, because it’s not always right so I agree with both of them, at times, even though I know that the right thing to do is say the truth and not lie.
Cephalus is Polemarchus’ father. He believes in the traditional like religion, business, and he thinks that justice is the law. Polemarchus is Cephalus’ son he thinks for himself, using reason from his dad’s social convention.
2. What is the profession of Cephalus?
Cephalus’ doesn’t have a real profession. He got the money from his grandfather and father.
3. What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
Cephalus was sacrificing something before the discussion.
4. According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
According to Cephalus the virtues of old age are not plagued by desire for sex.
5. What is Cephalus’ view of justice?
Cephalus’ view of justice is to be truthful and pay your debts.
6. What is Socrates response?
Socrates response is that it is not always right to be truthful.
7. Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
I don’t agree with neither Socrates nor Cephalus when it comes to justice, because sometimes you need to lie but its better to say the truth. Cephalus believes you always have to say the truth and Socrates thinks that you shouldn’t, because it’s not always right so I agree with both of them, at times, even though I know that the right thing to do is say the truth and not lie.
Due Fri 3/16 - Personal Reflection
I think that a friend is someone who is always there for you no matter what. Someone you can talk to at all times and that most of the time agrees with you. You should be nice to a friend and act friendly with them. A enemy is someone who does things to hurt you or to affect you in a negative way. I think that you shouldn’t really care about them but you need to always be in the lookout making sure they don’t do anything to you. Like the saying goes “Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.” I don’t think you should harm your enemies because you don’t want to be a bad person by hurting them.
Due Thur 3/15 - Similie of the Cave Reading Questions
1. What happens to the prisoner when he gets outside? Why does this happen to the prisoner?
When the prisoner gets outside of the cave he would be dazzled to see properly the objects he once saw in shadows. In my opinion this happens because he has never seen the real thing. He has lived living a lie, and finally he sees the truth so he is dazzled.
2. Why would the prisoners kill someone who is trying to lead them outside?
The prisoner would try to kill anyone who tried to liberate them and lead them out of the cave because to them the shadows are the real thing, because they have lived believing that there whole life and there not willing to be told different.
3. What is special about “the intelligible region” and why is it important for public servants/political leaders?
The intelligible region is important because it controls source of truth and intelligence. It is important for public servants and political leaders because they don’t make a fool of themselves and try to make the shadow people believe in there world.
4. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society?
It’s wrong for uneducated people to run society because they have no single aim in life so there always directed to do things, and they have no knowledge of the truth. Having intellectuals is wrong too because they wont take practical actions of their accord, and they think there better than everyone by living out of the real world.
5. What is the job of a lawmaker and how is a lawmaker supposed to influence the best minds?
The job of a lawmaker is to create laws. A lawmaker is supposed to influence the best minds by sharing their labors and reward people, and to compel the best minds, and to ascend to the vision of the good.
When the prisoner gets outside of the cave he would be dazzled to see properly the objects he once saw in shadows. In my opinion this happens because he has never seen the real thing. He has lived living a lie, and finally he sees the truth so he is dazzled.
2. Why would the prisoners kill someone who is trying to lead them outside?
The prisoner would try to kill anyone who tried to liberate them and lead them out of the cave because to them the shadows are the real thing, because they have lived believing that there whole life and there not willing to be told different.
3. What is special about “the intelligible region” and why is it important for public servants/political leaders?
The intelligible region is important because it controls source of truth and intelligence. It is important for public servants and political leaders because they don’t make a fool of themselves and try to make the shadow people believe in there world.
4. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society?
It’s wrong for uneducated people to run society because they have no single aim in life so there always directed to do things, and they have no knowledge of the truth. Having intellectuals is wrong too because they wont take practical actions of their accord, and they think there better than everyone by living out of the real world.
5. What is the job of a lawmaker and how is a lawmaker supposed to influence the best minds?
The job of a lawmaker is to create laws. A lawmaker is supposed to influence the best minds by sharing their labors and reward people, and to compel the best minds, and to ascend to the vision of the good.
Due Wed 3/14 - Personal Reflection (Plato)
When I was a little girl in pre-school, one of my friends told me that we were eating ants on a log. So I thought that I should never eat it because maybe we were easting ants. Until one day my mom told me to try it and it might be good and that ants on a log was just the name really it was celery with peanut butter and raisins. So I finally tried it and it was good and now I eat it as a snack. It did change my outlook on things because now I always try new things instead of just avoiding things, and saying everything is gross with out trying it first.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)