Essay on Philosophy of Socrates and Plato is published for informational purposes only. The free papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a quality Essay on Essay on Philosophy of Socrates and Plato at affordable prices please use our essay writing services offered by EssayEmpire.

For many people, the phrase "ancient Greek philosophy" immediately brings to mind the figure of Socrates, bearded, snubbed-nosed, pot-bellied, asking annoying questions of everyone he met. Educated people tend to be aware that Socrates was executed in 399 BC after a trial by an Athenian jury, and if they have read Plato's Apology of Socrates, they know that the charges on which he was convicted were "corrupting the young" and "not respecting the Gods, but introducing new and different divinities." The life and death of Socrates, as presented by Plato are dramatic and inspiring; the dialogues continue to be fresh and challenging both as literature and as philosophy. It is also worth remembering that we have a great deal more text from Plato than we do from any Greek philosopher before his time. There are about 30 extant dialogues attributed to Plato; at least 25 of them are really from his hand.

In getting an idea of Socrates (470-399), we also have dialogues by Xenophon, plays by Aristophanes, and reports by Aristotle and others that focus on Socrates, allowing us to triangulate on his activity. Socrates was widely regarded as a Sophist by his contemporaries, but several of Plato's dialogues emphasize the differences. The Sophists claimed to be able to teach something and demanded to be paid for the service; Socrates is represented as claiming that he does not teach anything and is not paid. More importantly, despite his protestations of ignorance, Plato's Socrates clearly rejects both skepticism and relativism, repeatedly demonstrating that he believes that value terms have objective definitions discoverable by the sort of dialectical inquiry that he carries on with his interlocutors. Although we do not get an objective definition of "temperance" in the Charmides or of "courage" in the Laches, it is clear that Socrates believes that such a definition is in principle available, and that those who teach that there is no such thing are very wrong to do so.

The Socrates of the dialogues has proven to be a model and inspiration for the philosophical life, in a sense an ostensive definition of the word "philosopher." The image is so dominant that we call all of those philosophers who are chronologically "pre-Platonic" rather "Presocratic" even if, like Democritus, they outlived Socrates by decades. Some scholars have argued that Plato's thought developed over the 50 years or so that he was writing; philological analyses have to some extent contributed to that argument by supporting a rough chronology of composition. But there is also a strong tradition that assumes, as Paul Shorey put it, the "unity" of Plato's thought. Certainly the ancient Neoplatonists believed that Plato always was putting forward the same message.

In the context of the mid-fourth century BC, Plato's Academy was in competition with the school of Isocrates, which also claimed to be teaching "philosophy," but the Academy was clearly the more successful institution. Attracting leading scholars like Eudoxus of Cnidus (c. 408-355 BC) and able students like Heraclides of Pontus (c. 388-c. 310 BC) as members, it was a major source for leading philosophers of the next generation. Aristotle was associated with the Academy for some 20 years; Aristotle's closest associate, Theophrastus (371-c. 287 BC), was also associated with the Academy. Plato's nephew, Speusippos (c. 410-340 BC), who took over the directorship of the school on Plato's death, was an active and creative philosopher, as was his successor, Xenocrates (396/5-314/3 BC)

Plato (428-347) was born early in the Peloponnesian War, and was a young adult during the last years of the war, when proSpartan oligarchic sentiment grew into open disloyalty to the democracy, and eventually resulted in the rule of the Four Hundred and of the Thirty. Plato's own loyalties were divided; for he was a relative of Charmides, a member of the Thirty, but he was also a disciple of Socrates, and approved of Socrates' dissent from the lawlessness of the Thirty. The Thirty were deposed; but the restored democracy put Socrates to death, and Plato gave up any ambitions he might have had for a political career. He founded his philosophical school, the Academy, in Athens, and remained as its head until his death.

Plato wrote dialogues presenting Socratic philosophy in conversational form; and we have already drawn on his earlier dialogues for our account of Socrates. But in Plato's middle and late dialogues, the character 'Socrates' discusses questions of metaphysics, epistemology, and political theory, on which the historical Socrates was silent.

Plato begins from Socratic problems, and implicitly claims to find the best arguments for Socratic convictions. But a defence of one Socratic view may imply a challenge to another. Socrates' interlocutors have to give up some of their cherished views in order to defend others. Plato finds that he has to do the same with Socratic views; he discovers that he cannot be Socrates' disciple without being his critic. Even if he does not openly disagree with Socrates, Plato implies that Socratic convictions are justified only if we accept further doctrines that would have very much surprised, perhaps even repelled, Socrates himself. As far as we can tell, Socrates never realized that his convictions about ethics and philosophical method committed him to the elaborate and controversial theories and speculations about knowledge and reality that occupy Plato. But surprising though Plato's development of Socrates may seem, it is, in Plato's view, inescapable for a serious defender of Socrates.

Plato believes he defends the central Socratic convictions; probably this is why ' Socrates' remains the main character in most of the middle and late dialogues. But to some readers, both ancient and modern, his defence of Socrates has seemed more like a betrayal, a disastrous perversion of the Socratic outlook.

Plato believes that Socratic inquiry can lead from mere belief to knowledge:

At the moment "the slave's" beliefs are newly aroused, as though in a dream. But if someone asks him these same questions over again on many occasions and in many ways, you know that in the end he will have knowledge as accurate as anyone's about them.

The early dialogues did not draw a clear and explicit distinction between knowledge and true belief. But they relied on some distinction; for Socrates disavowed knowledge of the virtues, but did not disavow true belief about them. Plato now draws an explicit distinction:

True beliefs . . . are not in the habit of staying put for a long time, but run away from a person's soul, so that they are not worth much, until one ties them down by reasoning about the explanation. And this, Meno my friend, is recollection, as we agreed previously . . . And this is why knowledge is more valuable than true belief, and is superior to it in having this bond to tie it down.

If we have knowledge, our beliefs will be tied down, not shaken by questioning as Euthyphro's beliefs were, because they will rest on a reasoned justification giving us some rational ground for our convictions.

Plato's view of the difference between true belief and knowledge, and of the possible progress from the one to the other, disagrees with a prevalent naturalist view about the unreliability of common sense. Democritus argues from the alleged unreliability of common sense to the truth of his naturalist theory. But his argument shows how easily the rejection of common sense can support scepticism about both common sense and naturalist theory. If common sense disagrees with itself, we may conclude that the disagreement is irresolvable; in that case we are confronted with conflicting and equipollent appearances, and cannot choose between them. Similarly, if naturalist theories disagree with each other and with common sense, we may conclude that this is another irresolvable disagreement forcing us into scepticism. If we accept these arguments from disagreement, then apparently we cannot trust either common sense or naturalist theories, but must resort to scepticism.

Against naturalist and sceptical views Plato insists on the continuity between common sense and knowledge. Socratic inquiry criticizes common sense from its own resources. Plato assumes that we have the capacity to sort the true beliefs from the false, and to find the justification that vindicates the true beliefs. . .

Free essays are not written to satisfy your specific instructions. You can order a term paper, research paper or custom TOPIC at our site which offers professional essay writing services. Get your high quality custom paper at relatively cheap prices. EssayEmpire is the best solution for those who seek help in essay writing related to TOPIC and other relevant topics.