The Truth Of The Philosopher King
When you observe the etymology of the word philosophy, it very literally means “lover of knowledge”. But what a broad term; what does philosophy englobe? It has many branches which specify on various topics, such as aesthetics, ethics, logic, metaphysics, epistemology and politics. All of these cover the broad subject that knowledge is, of what our world is composed of. One of the most famous names amongst the many philosophers who have contributed to the furthering of knowledge throughout history is Socrates. Even for his time (469-399 BCE), he was considered an atypical character, although he had many followers. Socrates was a rebel of his time, with his unkempt looks and his Spartan hair style; this was …show more content…
We know that he had a specific method of inquiry when questioning others about philosophical issues: “ [He would] elicit an answer to a question, then ask further questions to help the interlocutor test the rational adequacy of the answer.” This can be seen in his dialogue with Menon about the definition of virtue, more specifically in the passage where Socrates uses the figures metaphor to make Menon understand the value of virtue (Meno 27). He firmly believed that knowledge was all and ignorance was nothing, which is why the rulers of Ancient Greece should have been philosopher-kings (Republic V 318). To Socrates’ most widely known legacy to the world of philosophy was the concept of double and simple ignorance. As he famously believed, to know that you know nothing is to upgrade from being an arrogant know-it-all to being on his philosophical level. Socrates believed that “there were philodoxers (lovers of sight and sound) and philosophers: philodoxers are those who have opinions about what they consider knowledge to be while philosophers simply know that knowledge goes beyond what we can see and what is physical”* (Republic V 322). To come back to the philosopher-king concept, he believed that those who pursued political power or intellectual wisdom, and not both at the same time, were doomed to fail; not just as a city or a society, but as a species (Republic V 319). Those who understand the true place and value of knowledge in …show more content…
While I recognize it, I can’t agree that one who has an opinion on something physical and temporal is automatically a philodoxer (which he makes sound pejorative) or lesser. In fact, I find that opinions are a great part of our society and even some branches of philosophy, such as aesthetics and politics. Opinions are representative of our values and beliefs, and are constantly asked and debated throughout our lifetime.But then again, maybe opinions are such a great part of our society because our leaders aren’t balancing political power and knowledge. Isn’t our society crumbling, as Socrates predicted? Maybe it is time for us to stop blabbing on about our opinions and to look at the more abstract concepts our world has to offer in order to find our truths and accept
When you observe the etymology of the word philosophy, it very literally means “lover of knowledge”. But what a broad term; what does philosophy englobe? It has many branches which specify on various topics, such as aesthetics, ethics, logic, metaphysics, epistemology and politics. All of these cover the broad subject that knowledge is, of what our world is composed of. One of the most famous names amongst the many philosophers who have contributed to the furthering of knowledge throughout history is Socrates. Even for his time (469-399 BCE), he was considered an atypical character, although he had many followers. Socrates was a rebel of his time, with his unkempt looks and his Spartan hair style; this was …show more content…
We know that he had a specific method of inquiry when questioning others about philosophical issues: “ [He would] elicit an answer to a question, then ask further questions to help the interlocutor test the rational adequacy of the answer.” This can be seen in his dialogue with Menon about the definition of virtue, more specifically in the passage where Socrates uses the figures metaphor to make Menon understand the value of virtue (Meno 27). He firmly believed that knowledge was all and ignorance was nothing, which is why the rulers of Ancient Greece should have been philosopher-kings (Republic V 318). To Socrates’ most widely known legacy to the world of philosophy was the concept of double and simple ignorance. As he famously believed, to know that you know nothing is to upgrade from being an arrogant know-it-all to being on his philosophical level. Socrates believed that “there were philodoxers (lovers of sight and sound) and philosophers: philodoxers are those who have opinions about what they consider knowledge to be while philosophers simply know that knowledge goes beyond what we can see and what is physical”* (Republic V 322). To come back to the philosopher-king concept, he believed that those who pursued political power or intellectual wisdom, and not both at the same time, were doomed to fail; not just as a city or a society, but as a species (Republic V 319). Those who understand the true place and value of knowledge in …show more content…
While I recognize it, I can’t agree that one who has an opinion on something physical and temporal is automatically a philodoxer (which he makes sound pejorative) or lesser. In fact, I find that opinions are a great part of our society and even some branches of philosophy, such as aesthetics and politics. Opinions are representative of our values and beliefs, and are constantly asked and debated throughout our lifetime.But then again, maybe opinions are such a great part of our society because our leaders aren’t balancing political power and knowledge. Isn’t our society crumbling, as Socrates predicted? Maybe it is time for us to stop blabbing on about our opinions and to look at the more abstract concepts our world has to offer in order to find our truths and accept