Objective Truth In The Journey

Superior Essays
“Your mind has roads that are just as real as your body’s roads. And just as you must choose whenever you come to a fork in your physical road, you must also choose between different mental roads, different philosophies of life.” Throughout The Journey, Peter Kreeft explains that life will always have two ways. One cannot either pick to have or not to have philosophy but the choice is between good or bad philosophy. To decide which way of thinking is good or bad one must question other views to strengthen their own. Peter Kreeft is in a dream-like state in Plato’s cave. Socrates come along and presents Kreeft with a quest. The first question Kreeft had to answer was whether to begin or to not begin the quest. Socrates explains that throughout …show more content…
Socrates explains that logic will help Kreeft decide his own thoughts. After questioning Protagoras, Kreeft came to the conclusion that to have subjective truth there has to be objective truth. Socrates helps Kreeft understand the flaw in Protagoras’ philosophy by pointing out that it is subjective to believe that objective truth does not exist and that one cannot subjectively look at an objective point. So to say that objective truth is not real, objective truth must exist. Once Kreeft feels confident in his view they continue on their journey. Diogenes was the next philosopher Kreeft met on his quest. Diogenes tries to persuade Kreeft from his “pointless quest” by proposing that there is no meaning to life. The meaning of life itself is subjective. Diogenes’ argument is that there is no objective truth about anything nonphysical or if there is objective truth then no one would be able to understand it or know it. Diogenes’ argument is “that the meaning of life is subjective because people disagree on it.” Before trying to disprove Diogenes’ philosophy, Socrates restates is argument back to Diogenes and teaches an …show more content…
Socrates questions Domocritus’ philosophy until the conclusion was that ideas can be true or false but since ideas are not material things, his philosophy was wrong and was more of a faith. Soon after Socrates and Kreeft climbed through the whole they were met by the next philosopher, Thrasymachus. Thrasymachus states that, “there is no natural law of good and evil.” This philosophy is how one gets to the land of liberty. Socrates gives a lesson on logic and points out a flaw in Thrasymachus’ view. Socrates states that Thrasymachus is not a rebel, just a noble conservative to the authority above

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    The final reason Socrates presents against Crito’s offer of help is the Agreement Argument. The Agreement Argument follows that by participating in Athenian society, the citizens of Athens have implicitly agreed to obey the Laws. Socrates made an agreement to the State to follow the Laws, and it is just to keep to one's agreements, and so to escape would be to break an agreement and so Socrates ought not to escape with Crito (Plato, 1997b, §51c-52d). This agreement refers to is a form of political obligation which relies on the idea of tacit consent, which is formed solely by living as a citizen of Athens. Tacit consent is the idea that by living in Athens, the citizens have agreed to follow the Laws of Athens implicitly by benefiting from the organization, protection, and education of the State.…

    • 1501 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In Plato’s three works Crito, Apology, and Euthyphro, Socrates’ conception of virtue and pursuit of knowledge about virtue, leads him to question and in some cases reject the ideas of others. Examples that show this are: Socrates discussion with Crito, his questioning of Meletus in the Apology, his speech to the jury before and after his conviction, and in his discussion with Euthyphro about what is pious. The teachings of these three works seem to go hand and hand with one another, with the teaching of the Crito being a culmination of the teachings of Euthyphro and Apology. If one were to read Apology and Euthyphro without reading the Crito, one may not understand the teachings of the formers since the Crito gives practice to the teachings…

    • 1839 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    If Socrates is to successfully refute Thrasymachus and prove that it does in fact pay to be just, then he needs to find out precisely what it means to be just before moving on to whether or not it is beneficial to act in accordance with justice. However the only way in which good progress can be made is Socrates can get his opponent to sincerely believe in their discussion, and he fails to do this. After the “wage-earner” argument, the reader is reminded that the essence of Thrasymachus’ argument is that the unjust life is better and more profitable than the just. Socrates announces he will use a question-and-answer technique to tackle this position on justice, Thrasymachus is given no choice but to comply. When Socrates asks his opponent to answer truthfully, Thrasymachus responds by asking whether or not it even matters if he says what he really believes.…

    • 2199 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Socrates in Apology In the Apology, Socrates presents an argument for his belief in the Greek gods to invalidate Meletus’ assertion that Socrates is an atheist, which therefore means his teachings corrupt the youth (26b). Socrates’ argument is valid through philosophical logic yet as we will find, his argument is not sound. There are also revisions to Meletus’ claims which will be presented as it will display a stronger argument in favor of Socrates’ atheism.…

    • 1311 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Socratic practice, as presented in The Apology through Socrates’s explanation of it and his way of implementing it, relies on its implementer being perceived as truthful and disinterested in wealth, while simultaneously questioning the perceived knowledge amongst individuals of authority. Socrates’s form of philosophical discussion forced the burden of the conversation upon his opponents though this questioning. In the Republic, Socrates provides an apt example of the Socratic practice as he argues against Thrasymachus. The first and foremost aspect of Socrates’s rhetoric is that he claims to speak only the truth. In the Apology, Socrates begins his speech by saying to his fellow Athenians that “From me you will hear the whole truth,…

    • 1453 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Similarly, Socrates asserts this idea in the Allegory of the Cave, when he declares…

    • 2010 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Plato's The Crito Argument

    • 1769 Words
    • 7 Pages

    One such argument Socrates presents is if “there someone who has knowledge”(47d) or is there an expert of the…

    • 1769 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In Plato’s dialogue Apology, Socrates stands trail to defend himself from the accusations of “corrupting the youth” and disregarding the Gods of the state. In his speech he tells the jury that an oracle at Delphi told Chaerephon a friend of Socrates that Socrates is a man of wisdom and no man is wiser than he is. To prove this cannot be true Socrates conducts cross examinations to find someone who is wiser than he is. Through these examinations Socrates mission and main points are to help people by exposing their ignorance to find wisdom, to find virtue, to find truth and to improve the soul.…

    • 762 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Socrates’ Success in Answering Meno’s Paradox Introduction In the dialogue Meno, Socrates and Meno start by attempting to find what virtue is, but are unsuccessful. They then dig into a more generalized question of how to find what any thing or idea is when one does not know what it is they are looking for. This is Meno 's Paradox. Socrates attempts to solve this paradox through the theory of recollection which states that the human soul is immortal and has knowledge of everything.…

    • 1174 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Was Socrates guilty as charged?" Socrates, an ancient Greek philosopher, is linked with Western systems of logic and philosophy. At an early age, he served in the hoplite-ancient Greek infantry, and later devoted his life to philosophy. His rather unique perspective and wisdom in philosophy attracted friends and enemies at the same time. Socrates metaphorically was the gadfly that stung the horse- Athenian state.…

    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Glaucon is unsatisfied with the argument between Thrasymachus and Socrates regarding Justice. Thrasymachus believes Justice is for the common good, it is not for the good for an individual, that any compromise is involved. Glaucon renews Thrasymachus’ argument, he divides the good into three classes: things good in themselves, things good both in themselves and for their consequences, and things good only for their consequences. Socrates places justice in the class of things good in themselves and for their consequences without any hesitation. Glaucon wants Socrates to prove by exploring that Justice is best, not a compromise.…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Elaborating the Definition of Justice Plato, the Republic is about the history of political thought, it includes long conversations and arguments among several intellects. Thrasymachus, a fierce fighter, argues that justice is what is good for the stronger and that the unjust man lives a more profitable life than the just man does. Socrates, Plato’s teacher, play the role in defending justice in all these arguments. He praises justices for itself and its consequences. Next, Glaucon and Adeimantus, sons of Ariston, restore Thrasymachus’s argument in a different prospect of perfectly unjust life is better than a perfectly just life.…

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Socrates claims that true opinion becomes knowledge when one provides a reason for why the opinion is true. In other words, true opinion becomes knowledge when one justifies it. Through several thought experiments I will attempt to show that Socrates is right in declaring that knowledge is more valuable than true opinion. I will start with the…

    • 967 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Plato's Apology Argument

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Every human being has the ability to decide what they believe and what they do not. At a very early age, we develop judgement that allows us to choose whether or not to accept certain claims. These assertions may be tempting, but our reasoning allows us to critically analyze the information with respect to all of our previous knowledge. These claims may be faith based, fact-based, or opinion. Without recognizing it, we take every bit of information we gather, analyze it, and decide whether we accept its validity.…

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    One must constantly go through the process of introspection in order to live an examined life to not be swayed by popular opinion but instead become knowledgeable of the world around them and the self. For Socrates, to care for the soul is the most crucial responsibility in life because of his belief that the soul of an individual is the true being of who a person really is. Throughout the book of Plato’s Five Dialogues, Socrates constantly questions society’s ethics and emphasizes how important it is for one to question and examine the world around them in order to care for the soul. Those who choose to live an unexamined life are losing the chance of attaining knowledge and becoming corrupted by choosing to live blindly based on popular opinion instead of their own beliefs. In order for people to live the good life,…

    • 1717 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays

Related Topics