Philosophy is a logical method--a form of rigorous thinking which can be applied to any subject, including religion, if one wishes.
Would you all be willing to start by reading an encyclopedia entry about perhaps the most influential philosopher in Western tradition, Socrates? Socrates didn't write anything. He taught. If we want to, we could read some of the dialogues his student Plato transcribed. Anyway, Socrates' death is quite interesting, and pertains to the subject of religion, as he was executed for heresy. He was accused of atheism, although he denied the charge. He accepted his sentence willingly, even though his friends offered to help him escape. He said it was more important to abide by the regulations of the city-state than to have individual justice. Here's a link: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socrates/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I for one- after reading the Stanford Encyclopedia entry- would like to read Socrates and Plato’s dialogues. The entry was dense, so I imagine I missed some important points, as I read rather hurriedly.
ReplyDeleteWhat interested me the most-
Academics, scholars, philosophers, etcetera are frazzled by the “Socratic Problem.” I think the “Socratic Problem” would have delighted Socrates; it applies his method of inquiry to his legacy- it is his legacy. But why are so many concerned by the ambiguities of one ancient thinker? The conflict of interpretation and objective comprehension attacks us constantly. And it is very current.
The entry mentioned how Plato, while being the most widely accepted Socratic source, is flawed in his account because of how his own beliefs changed, and changed his recollection, I had a “Well, duh” moment. Isn’t this true of everything? Our individual experiences and education affects our perceptions; subsequently, our analysis could be considered less constructive for others.
I think I’m getting lost in my own thoughts...How do we set standards for our standards? Everything is regulated by another installed regulation. How do we define truth that works for everyone? I refuse to believe that there is no truth and only individual honesty. If we don’t subscribe to a standard, to a system, why do we live? We are tribal animals. I believe we must. Socrates died for his system. I want to live for mine.
And one more thing, why do we strive to be objective? I think what I’m getting at is that I’m skeptical to the notion that objectivity truly exists...I don’t believe I can ever be truly objective, but I would like to be able to truly consider other systems and other standards, in a pursuit of bettering my own.
I realize that this diverges from our topic of religion, but I know that when I have a better grasp on these questions, I can understand religion better- or at least try to do so. After all, religion is a system- one many have lived and died for.
Thanks for reading this ramble. I don’t think I’m asking the right questions. Yet. I just want to keep it just.
I found this article to be rather illuminating when it comes to one of the most famous figures in the world of philosophy. Too few people are aware of the full impact that Socrates had although this is probably due to the ambiguity surrounding the true nature of this man.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that reading Plato's dialogues would serve as a source of illumination, philosophically.
About his death, I was fascinated by how he so willingly faced death in order to set a precedent about justice. I like to think that Socrates was sending a message when he was put to death. I think that this would be a great sub-topic for discussion.