Callicles, Socrates, Plato

Callicles
Support:
“Won’t he ever stop talking rubbish? Tell me, Socrates, doesn’t it embarrass you to pick on people’s mere words at your age and to count it a godsend if someone uses the wrong expression by mistake?” (p.74)
“In my opinion, that’s what natural right is – for an individual who is better (that is, more clever) to rule over second-rate people and have more than them.” (p.75)
“That if a person has the means to live a life of sensual, self-indulgent freedom, there’s no better or happier state of existence; all the rest of it – the pretty words, the unnatural, man-made conventions – they’re all just pointless trumpery.” (p.79)
Evidence:
“I’m thinking of people who’ve applied their cleverness to politics and thought about how to run their community well. But cleverness is only part of it; they also have courage, which enables them to see their policies through to the finish without losing their nerve and giving up.” (p. 77)
“Under this wonderful regime of justice and self-discipline, how could they possibly be happy, when even if they did have political power they wouldn’t be able to use it to their friend’s advantage and their enemy’s disadvantage?” (p.79)
Callicles becomes very upset and impatient with Socrates throughout their conversation. Callicles thinks that Socrates is babbling on about nonsense and twisting his words in order to make himself look good in the argument. Callicles understands many of the statements made my Socrates, but does not find them evidence for his conclusions. Believing that people with great power should exert force upon others with no restraint, Callicles uses the example of a person born to inherit a kingdom or a dictator. He believes that power and pleasure bring happiness, and that self-discipline does not allow the person to experience the full effect of his or her authority.


Socrates
Support:
“Because the upshot is that good things aren’t the same as pleasant things, and bad things aren’t the same as unpleasant things either.” (p.88)
“As long as it is in a bad state (which is to say ignorant, self-indulging, immoral, and irreligious), we must prevent it from doing what it desires and have it keep strictly to a regimen which will make it better.” (p.101)
“It follows, Callicles, that because a self-disciplined person is just, brave, and religious, as we’ve explained, he’s a paradigm or goodness. Now, a good person is bound to do whatever he does well and successfully, and success brings fulfillment and happiness, whereas a bad man does badly and is therefore unhappy. Unhappiness, then, is the lot of someone who’s the opposite of self-disciplined – in other words, the kind of self-indulgent person you were championing.” (p.105)
Evidence:
“So it takes organization and order to make a house good, does it? And without these qualities any house is worthless?” (p.100)
“No, our helmsman knows that, once a person has gone bad, it’s better for him not to live, since he’s bound to live badly.” (p.112)
“Alright, has Callicles ever made any of his fellow citizens a better person? Is there anyone from here or elsewhere, from any walk of life – who was previously bad( that is unjust, self-indulgent, and thoughtless), but who has become, thanks to Callicles, a paragon of virtue?” (p.117)

Socrates wishes to impose his believes on other people because he wishes to make each man a more moral being. He carries on his conversation with Callicles (even after the point when Callicles refuses to speak) because he wishes to help live a more productive and meaningful life. He does not wish to use flattery and states that rhetoric should “only ever be used in the service of right”. He wants others to practice justice and virtue in order to better society. He uses odd analogies, but with the understanding of these analogies comes evidence of the necessity of being a ‘good person’.


I believe that Plato has a strong position that supports the use of evidence. He feels that evidence through daily life experiences and through common good analogies can help others understand in a more clear way. But, he also emphasizes the need of support. For example, Callicles (the rhetorician) tells Socrates (the philosopher) that he is “not entirely convinced” (p.114) and refers to his speech as “lowly little questions” (p.87). Also, during the beginning of their conversation, Callicles starts off by saying” You pretend that truth is your goal, but in actual fact you steer discussions towards this kind of ethical idea – ideas which are unsophisticated enough to have popular appeal, and which depend entirely on convention, not on nature” (p. 65). The power of support and analysis of statements by Socrates eventually persuades Callicles to see the opposite of what he says as true. I believe that Plato believes what Callicles is true, if and only if, the situations could be viewed without the application of morality, but his inner beliefs cause him to side with Plato. Callicles’s opposition to listen to Plato symbolizes the internal resistance Plato suffers with morality.

Harming - Persuasion

In a situation where one person is being harmed and the other is doing the harming, I believe that the one harming the other is the one to be most avoided. This, I believe, is only true if the harming is done unjustly. If there is reason for a person to be harmed (for punishment that fits the crime- which is a whole other topic) it should be done. But, in this case I am going to assume that the person is harming the other for unjust motives.
If the person doing the harming does not get caught, it should no matter. The person’s conscious should make them feel guilty enough. You know that feeling – the kind you get when your brain can’t shut off at night and it takes you hours to fall asleep. You know when you did something wrong and when you did something that violated your morals. This alone should be punishment enough if you are a strong believer in your morals. But, if you do not feel guilty, then there is another problem. A person who feels no guilt has revealed the hardness of their character and concern for the well being of others. I feel sorry for the person who lives solely for his or her own benefit. What a lonely life he or she must live. I back this up with evidence from personal experience. During my lunch period my senior year the talk of the table would consist of ‘God bashing’. Many would mock Christianity and recite horrible jokes demeaning my religion. I would like to say that their comments didn’t affect me, but they did. They were harming me emotionally and spiritually. But, I would answer back and explain why I believed what I did and why it was important to me. I wish I could say I touched one of their hearts, but I don’t think I did. But, I would rather be harmed knowing that I am standing up for what I believe is right. Although some days I felt weaker, I came out of the experience much stronger with a better understanding of my own belief system. A more global example can be the Holocaust. Although countless Jews and others were tortured physically, emotionally, and spiritually, they are now know through record of history books and documentaries as heroes. Although the situations in which they were placed resembled those of hell the reputation and respect they acquired after the fact make up for their suffering. Those inflicting the pain of the innocent people now life with eternal damnation by a great majority of the world.
Who doesn’t like to be right? I love to be right and I have a hard time admitting that I am wrong (hopefully I will get a little help with this over the semester). But, I believe that all people should work to posses the skills to discern whether the beliefs we have are true or false rather than wasting time trying to persuade others to agree without beliefs. If a person does not truly belief in a fact or a statement, but rather just accepts its being, this person will not make the effort to convince others of this same belief. I can pursued a large number of people to join Student Council (which I did), but if none of them believe that what they are doing is important, nothing will be accomplished. Also, who wants to be known as the leader who led others down a dark path? Your followers would be lost and hopeless.
But, a common goal among men should be to enrich our own lives as well as those around us, and to do this we must acquire knowledge – as much as humanly possible. This knowledge, of course, can only benefit our society if it is true. Our beliefs help shape our character, and who wants a character built on false beliefs? Would that make you a false person? I support this stance by pointing to the Presidential Election. A large number of people can post signs in their lawn or put a button on their backpack, but without belief in the candidate, this “campaigner” will not have the will or the desire to go and recruit more members. So, for example, if I was a campaign manager I would first want to make sure that I was 100% convinced that my support for the candidate and belief in the candidate’s platform was based off of truth. Then, after knowing the truth of my beliefs, my conviction for the candidate would be so strong, it would take little effort to reveal the intense support to others. Another example of the importance of knowing the truth of your beliefs lies in the Enron scandal. If the countless everyday investors would have known the truth behind the newfound Fortune 500 Company, many would not have lost saving, retirement funds, and salaries. For this example, knowing the truth of the belief would have saved billions of dollars.
I believe that both questions ask a person if morality is an important factor in expressing their character. Most of these scenarios ask you if you think deceiving people is ok. Some people can live with that type of behavior. I cannot. Also, there are no “right” or “wrong” answers, but they invoke a feeling of right and wrong in each person.
OK. Now I am done. I think I wrote a little too much, but I guess that’s not really a bad thing.

August 27th Discussion - Intro

I loved our class discussion today. My group decided that there is (and never will be) a universal concept of morality. Also, we agreed that your own experienced and influences you encounter shape and mold your morality. And, our last point of agreement was that people use the label "immoral" to invoke fear in others. No one enjoys or respects the label or immorality. I believe all people strive to be moral through their beliefs, behavior, and expression of character. But, morality is so difficult to discuss because context shapes what society views as "right" or "wrong".

But, I can't sit here and type and pretend that I am open minded to everyone's opinions. I believe that my morals are correct although I have no empirical evidence that convinces me that my opinions are superior. I will willingly listen to others and respect their opinions, don't get me wrong, but I find it hard to grasp the idea that everyone can be "morally correct" when placed in the right context.

Morality

I believe that our class discussions will get extremely intense when we discuss issues such as morality and what is considered right and wrong. But, sometimes the feelings you feel most passionate about are the ones that are the hardest to explain. It mostly a gut feeling that you don't know how to put in words. Most of my beliefs come from my devotion to my religion. I am personally concerned with my own behavior and if others precieve if it is moral or not. But, this brings up another question of what different people view as good and bad. I am looking forward to this semester. I have a strong feeling I will walk away from this class tested, and stronger.

Finally...I Hope

Well, my first attempt at creating a blog failed. I hope this one turns out better. I don't really know what you talk about in a blog, or if anyone reads them. I have never read a blog or had any intention to create one, but I guess it will be an exciting experience. Let's get started! Yay blogging!