Socrates in logic and ethics, refutations and speaking ones mind may not lead to seriousness. In many of the Platonic dialogues Socrates engages in the Elenchus referring to Socratic method, it is a method because in the form of debate or refutation, its an argument proving a contrary of conclusion. In syllogistic or syllogism - this precedes Aristotle (who found many problems with Socrates logic). This is used for an enquiry to being, logical truths preceding Aristotle logic, this is a requirement for truth and moral domain. For the things we are disputing are hardly trivial but, as one might say, those which to come to know is noblest and not to know most base. For their sum and substance is just this: knowing, or not knowing, who is happy and who is not. A part of this inquiry sees a pledge for where frequently, one is inclined to provide what is first come to mind. But how can such a form relate to the search for truth? Taking the first premise - argument and enquiry, alongside Socrates questions into what is the good, the ethical and custom and morality, we arrive at a form of ethical argumentation that requires content and logic, laws of thought in their most primitive sense. This search for truth is simultaneously part of the logic for individuals, refutation of what has been accepted as it cannot be sustained and to understand what is moral - its showing the fault in argument and examining propositions which have real implications. When Socrates says to Gorgias - I am one of those who would gladly be refuted if what I say is not true - Gorgias, realising that such a refutation is pointless, saying what is believed and what may come to mind cannot be pious. Action is god-loved because it is pious, not pious because it is god-loved (Eu. GN11 a). Ethics, logic, and a kind of paradoxical element in Socrates implied in ought to live and to test that single human being who is doing the answering a truth for two premises?
Posted on: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 12:22:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015