Socrates And Importance Self Reflection Philosophy Essay

Socrates And Importance Self Reflection Philosophy demonstrate1. Socrates developed this philosophy when he himself was facing some challenges as he was facing trial for corrupting young hoi polloi and undermining the state religion. Socrates erst said that the unexamined piecener is non worth living. In this he was Socrates wanted forward various issues including the independent of head teacher or autonomy, if an exclusive does non smoothen on their values and manners and just living reflection the likes of they ar going through a motion. One be pass ons like a mere cog in the machinery of that is the human universe. When we feed experiences whether easily or bad we should think ab issue them and try to identify out why they ar happening to us. One should al modes question their ad hominem actions, what drives them, and we should remodel our character into a behavior we feel it is the most confiscate and non what others or situations think.A life that has non been examined has no author, for the someone did not live his life still mere followed the force of disposition or others. therefrom it is very substantial for an psyche to be examined for it helps them to find their place in the society. match to Socrates the human life is supposed to be for one to achieve both psycheal and spiritual growth. An person leave behind be adapted to understand their true nature when they examine and reflect on the life they ar living. By having an examination on the life we live we exit matterter understand our pattern of air. By deeply contemplation on our life we will better understand our subconscious mind mind which is what controls our life. Therefore if we do not make time to understand our subconscious we will unconscious be living a repetitive life with no meaning.Examining our life relates to philosophy as it means we carry to place time to study our behavior and find ways of improving this behavior.2. Plato in the discussio n that he made on the myth of the undermine, he distinguish on aspects of aw argonness which atomic number 18 knowledge and opinion. In the myth of the hollow he described how one has been deeply chained inside a undermine. As they atomic number 18 chained in the cave their zeal upnot strike individually other and they acquire restricted vision and what they female genitalia only see is the wall in the cave and which sees shadows from statues belonging to animals and various objects emanating from a burning at the stake fire. One of the chained individuals escaped from their captivity in the cave to the start out of the day. After escaping the person sees real cosmosness for the first time and goes foul to those still in the cave and informs them that they have only been seeing appearances and shadows and if they weight-lift to free themselves they will see the real world out on that point.The environment in the cave which has appearances that argon shadowy it shows to for Plato is the appearance that is in that location in the physical world. The escape to the world full of the sun outside of the cave is a symbol of transitioning into a world that is real, where things ar full and ameliorate, and at that place are real forms, this are the true aspects of knowledge. Plato argued that Forms are arranged agree to hierarchy. With the top Form cosmos the form that is rock-steady, according to the myth of the cave is the sun. The sun which acts as the form of favourable helps to explain on how an individual becomes aware of how things they are the way they are or how they came to be. The cave stands for the world which is in our imagination, the in the shadows cave shows of how at passive state that we are at when thinking. Those who fall to learn in the cave are the individuals who have empirical knowledge and are able to make predictions. The knowledge that they have is not useful but a shadow. Education is only important if it ca n be able to free someone from their bondage. Every individual has an ability to think and If does not utilize this it is because he is held by chains.3. Elizabeth Spelman at one time claimed that, women have been portrayed as bodily being. By portraying the cleaning lady this way she is denied her status that belongs to her as a human being. According to Rene Descartes who is true to have developed the theory of Cartesian dualism, he argued of distinction amid the mind and the corpse and they are as well separate. Cartesian dualism states that the popular opinions of a man are a reflection of his beliefs, values, conditions, experiences, and development.The Cartesian dualism that speaks of the independence and separation of the mind and dead body perpetuates a sexist beliefs and behaviours. This is because it privileges the cognitive and intellectually is represented. This masculine discourses Spelman argued that it deeds in reproducing a disembodied way of thinking which bl inds large number on how a normal world is. Spelman argued that the viewing of the woman as a property or a sex product undermines who the woman is. Elizabeth Spelman the Cartesian dualism is used to justify why the women are subordination especially in fields such as Politics.The stereotyping of women is a dangerous aspect in the society, judging a woman based on her body is an abuse to the women. The theory tends to give accredited roles to women, like that they have a certain position in the society and they are field that are specifically for them and others they should not venture into. They are seen as models and not engineers.4. Aristotle refuted Plato Theory of Ideas contestation that, that the existence of various Ideas that contradict themselves and deny in that respect being a possibility of a negation. He likewise argued that the portraying of Ideas was an empty metaphors and ultimately that the theory used various impermanent abstractions that created perception. The theory by Plato was meant to open that the knowledge of universe was. Aristotle considered the crease to be full of inconsistencies and he look atd that reality depended on correlations of other elements. These ideas, Plato believed were self contained absolutes and are permanent and they help in establishing what knowledge is and how it is attained by use of human thought. Plato also viewed Ideas as good standards to which it can be used to judge human determination and at the top of hierarchy of ideas leads is that of Good.Also the theory argued that that the states of being are based or dependent on the interaction of number of Forms of existence, also the objectivity of knowledge and on that pointfore more real, it also argued that only the surgical procedurees that are from nature are valid entities. However, Aristotle attacks this theory on the grounds that Platos arguments are inconclusive any his assertions are not al all cogent. Aristotle says, or his arguments lead to contradictory deaths. Aristotle claimed that the argument by Plato makes one to conclude that those entities that powerfulness be man-made and the negation of great ideas can exist like from non good in when in opposition to good. This workings in contradicting the belief by Plato which was that only natural objects can be used by unto themselves, that they are independent of the subjective experiences of human. Aristotle argued that Ideas cannot be abstractions but they are duplicates experiences that are witnessed by individuals everyday in their daily life. Aristotle meant that Platos idea which stated that Ideas are not tangible to the subjective human experiences is perfect entities, has no grounds, since all standards are set by the perception and ordinary human activity.5. Behaviorism is a theory of that believes that that all human behaviors are learnt or acquired through the process of conditioning. The process of conditioning happens when an individual interacts with the environment. Behaviorism experts believe that behavior can be effectively studied in an observable and systematic way without the consideration of the internal mental states in the subject of which the behavior is being studied. Behavior theorists believe that learning is just but the acquisition of behavior and this acquisition is conditioned by the environment that the person lives in. there are both methods of conditioning, namely the classical conditioning and the operant conditioning.According to dualism there are number a number of uses of thought. The idea of dualism believes that, for everything, there are two options or categories of principles or things. A dualist will believe that there is Good and Evil. The dualist belief that the two things or principles, are independent able opposing forces in the world. In the mind philosophy, dualism theory believes that the mind and body is radically different thing. It is a theory that tends to say that everything come s from the mind and the body and that both are very different and distinct. The spirit, mind, or soul is thought to be the conscious and it help to show the self using the brain.The computational theory of mind argues that mind of human beings should be seen as a system for processing information. It also argues that thoughts are a form of computation.I prefer behaviorism as I belief that all behaviors that people exhibit are based on the environment that they live in. I buckramly believe that behavior is learned by people.6. Berkeley argued that the position of noble-mindedness can be held without any contradiction. Berkeley tried to portray realism as absurd, since it needed some concepts that cannot be conceptualized in reality. Therefore Berkeley made a conclusion that idealism was necessary, and the only theory we should work to understand. Realism is the ontological position which believes that there exists some things that which are neither in our minds or they are ideas i n minds and idealism is the ontological position that believes that everything which exists it exists as either as an idea in a mind or a mind.Anti realist believe that what cannot be observed is not real. They insist that people can only understand anything if they come to understand the circumstances it is the way it is. They deny the objective reality that is of entities. They also deny the verifying of pedagogy that are transcendent on a certain entity whether true or dour.Berkeley and anti realist have several things in common which include that he did not believe in realism but believed in idealism which he considered to be essential to people. He argued that for a concept to be concrete it has to be observable. This is the same as what anti realist hold.7. Jean-Paul Sartre, made the formulate that existence precedes encumbrance. In the past it was assumed that nature or subject matter was more important eternal than existence. The phrase that existence precedes essence means, that universe and reality, exist before there are any morals or values. An individual is born with nothing in their mind. Also human beings do not have any universal or form of predetermined principles that are common to all.Sartre made an argument of there being two kinds of being, being-in-itself which demonstrated as being complete, fixed, and there being no tenableness of it there, it just is, it works to describe the external objects. The other being is showed as being dependent on the way it previously existed. It is fixed, absolute and works to describe the state of humanity.There being no preformed essence or a clear what to be human is, an individual is tasked to form their experience concept about existence this can be achieved by an individual ensuring that they assert control and show responsibility for their choices and acts. Human beings gain their essence by their choices and actions that they make as individuals. It by living that an individual is able to define who truly they are.By life that we experience every day, we are involved in a process that shapes our identity. Since there is no set moral code that has been set for us to abide with, then there people as individuals have a fundamental freedom to image that they create their personal system of belief.8. The ontological argument is an argument on the existence of theology. The argument is based on reason and intuition alone. As per the argument, it states that that one should not assure for any physical evidence to show that beau ideal exists. But by merely thinking about it we can realize that God exists. In philosophy this argument is referred to as priori argument.According to the ontological argument, human beings are wise enough to know claims ludicrous without even by looking into this claims and to find out. The argument claims that the thought that there is no God and does not exist is an absurd thought. According to the ontological argument, human beings can ea sily be able to decide that it is false or wrong to claim that there is no God this last can be made without one spending his time to look at the details of the existence of God. This is compared to one knowing what a triangle is which means it is obvious that it is insurmountable to have a four-sided triangle. The argument states that by one knowing the meaning of God it would be impossible for one to contemplate of God being non-existence.Descartes argued that it was impossible for people to demonstrating there being or existence of God who he considered to be imperious and a perfect being. Since human beings supposes and conceive the idea that there exists a imperious and perfect being. Therefore because we all have an idea of the supreme and perfect being, it is therefore imperative that we should all make a conclusion that this supreme perfect being does surely exists.9. There being hellish and a lot of paroxysm in the world poses a bulky challenge for one to belief in the existence of a God who is perfect. The difficulty of malefic is an argument which argues that a God who is all-knowing, all powerful, and who is short good should not reserve any form of suffering or wicked to happen. The world today is full of countless aspects of people suffering and there being too much evil. The facts on the presence of evil and people suffering do counterpoint with the claim by the Orthodox theists that there is a God who is perfectly good. This challenge by this conflict is known as the problem of evil.Some argue that God could have a reason that is morally enough reason for him to allow there being some evils to happen, by doing this he ensures that a big good is seen or comes out of the evil. But those against argue that God should only permit evil or suffering as it should be necessary so as to attain a bigger good. But when people look at the world, there are a lot of prevalent incidences of excess evils that has no bigger good that comes out as a result. They also argue that the existence of pointless evil provide a strong case that God does not exist.Philosophers and theologians have worked to develop theodicies, which are responses that are meant to explain the argument from evil and help people to still have a belief in a God that is all-knowing, all-powerful and perfect and good. Some state that God allows people to undergo pointless evil for reason that are above human comprehension.10. Pascal Wager argued that that is practiced to believe that there is God since if later you learn that you were wrong you will have lost nothing. Also if one doesnt believe in God and it turns out to be incorrect, they will go to hell. He therefore believed it was not wise to be an atheist. I personally do not believe in this argument as it has several flaws.The argument doe not tell of which religion one should follow. Since there are many religions that are mutually exclusive and contradict each other example is Christianity and Isl am. Therefore one might end up avoiding pietying the wrong God gum olibanum avoiding the wrong hell and eventually end up in hell. ensample is in both Christianity and Islam they both belief in there being hell yet their practices are very different and they both worship God, which God should one follow?Another flaw is that the argument that the person who the bet losses everything, it might be that he loses nothing. If an individual puts his bet on the wrong beau ideal, the consecutive God just may decide to punish the person who bet wrong for his foolish behavior. Also the True God might be an independent God who respects the right hand of other people believing in what they reason rationally, therefore he does not pick on the bet.I also have a problem with somebody deciding to believe in a god since they think they have made a choice which will twirl them a lot of benefits and less danger. This might be a problem as the god you believe in might have a problem in one believ ing in it so as to benefit by being allowed into heaven or not to be punished in hell. The god might be fair but on the choices that people made, were they selfish choice?