HoP Midterm Flashcards
Socrates claims he does not know anything but he has at least three positive moral views. What are they? Does he contradict himself?
Knowledge is necessary for virtue, knowledge is sufficient for virtue, An eye for an eye is wrong (immoral). He does not contradict himself.
What is the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition?
A condition that must be fulfilled for something to be true is a necessary condition, while a sufficient condition may or may not be fulfilled for something to be true.
What is the elenchus? What is its purpose? How does it work? Does it involve any hazards that might lead it to fail?
The elenchus is a socratic method in which question are asked to find the truth. This takes opinion and transforms them into truth. The purpose of the elenchus is to draw out the consequences of a position in order to show them to be contrary to some accepted position. hazards include that 98% of the time there is no concluded answer and that misbeliefs can arise as well as faulty interferences.
What is the dilemma of authority? When, if ever, is it reasonable to rely on authority?
The dilemma is that when authority does not rely on one standard, the authority is not reliable. If the authority does use one standard, they must be more knowledgeable than the individual such that the individual seek out the authority
is knowledge enough to make one virtuous?
for Socrates, knowledge was enough for one to be virtuous. So in this regard we can say that for Socrates, knowledge was both necessary and sufficient for a person to become virtuous. But for Aristotle, knowing absolute was not enough; knowledge was necessary, but insufficient in itself. Take for example smoking. Socrates says that if you knew that smoking was bad for you, really knew, then you would be able to stop smoking. But Aristotle recognized what seems to be an obvious truth, that people often act contrary to what they know to be good. Aristotle accounted for this with his concept of akrasia—or what is loosely translated to mean weak will.
- What is akrasia? Give examples. How might one argue it doesn’t exist?
Akrasia is the state of acting against one’s better judgment. Such as, staying up too late to watch tv on a school night, doing drugs, waiting until the last minute to do homework, etc. Socrates argued that akrasia does not exist, stating that “no one willingly goes towards the bad.” If a person examines a situation and decides to act in the way he determines to be best, he will actively pursue this action, as the best course is also the good course, i.e. man’s natural goal.
- May we ever return injury for injury? What does Socrates think? Is punishment an “injury”? is self-defense?
no, according to Socrates we must never repay injury for injury because the act of committing an injustice is wrong in itself, and no matter how much we have suffered from the first injury, it is not ok to return wrong for wrong.
What is an “essence”? What role do essences play in Socrates’ theory of meaning? How does an essence differ from Wittgenstein’s idea of :”family resemblance”?
An essence is a essential or necessary attribute. We utilize the elenchus to uncover an essence, which plays in to Socrates’ theory of meaning. It differs from Wittgenstein’s idea of “family resemblance” because an essence refers to its essential attribute like sitting in a chair while family resemblance classifies things by rules in the instance of sports being similar
- What is Plato’s Theory of Forms? What questions is it supposed to answer?
a. The Theory of Forms maintains that two distinct levels of reality exist: the visible world of sights and sounds that we inhabit and the intelligible world of Forms that stands above the visible world and gives it being.
- Does Socrates believe that we can have objective moral knowledge? If so, where and how can it be found?
Keep applying the elenchus until there are no doubts left about a belief.
- Is objectivity compatible with fallibility?
Yes, people can arrive at the truth through other means
- Why does Socrates think the majority cannot harm a good man, even though it might execute him? What sort of “harm” is he concerned about?
a. A good man cannot be harmed by the majority because in reality they are only harming themselves. Attempting to have a man executed unjustly is more wrong, real harm is not physical harm but moral harm; which is the most wrong
- How does Euthyphro understand “piety”? (what are his four main proposed definitions?) How does Socrates question his understanding?
Euthyphro understands piety as what is loved by the gods. Socrates, however, replies that for something to be loved by the gods, it must give them a reason to love it, and they then conclude that something must be god loved to be loved by the gods
. Bring wrong doers to trial, Doing what is god loved or in the favor of the gods, Pious actions; caring for the gods, (4th not sure)
- What reasons does Socrates give (through the voice of the laws) for accepting his punishment? Are these reasons convincing?
. Socrates’ first reason for accepting his punishment is that he dedicated his life to the city. He followed the just laws of the city (accepted the procedures), so he is subject to the ruling of the court just like all the other citizens. He also argues that he rejected the option of exile during his trial, therefore he could not flee from his punishment. Socrates believes that he would be harming the city by avoiding his punishment, what would stop other citizens from defying the government? His reasons are convincing because they follow his moral doctrines. He believes that no one should commit wrong in return for wrong, and by not accepting his punishment he would ultimately commit wrong against the city.
- What is civil disobedience? How is it different from crime? From revolution?
. Civil disobedience is a USUALLY peaceful form of protest involving the breaking of one or more laws in order to prove that it is not a just law. It is different from a crime because it is meant to show that a law is unfair, not merely to disobey the rules. It could be seen as a type of revolution, or revolution causing event, however it is not necessarily meant to overthrow the governing force.
