Difference between revisions of "Spring 2009 201 Model Student Work"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
 
(29 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Return to [[Human Nature]]
 
Return to [[Human Nature]]
  
==Section 1: Reconstructions==
+
==Section 1: Participation Journals==
  
==Euthyphro1==
+
===Euthyphro 10===
  
When Socrates asks Euthyphro, “is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” he is questioning the basis of things. He wonders about the relationship between two things, especially those which are in effect of one another. The question brings to mind a circle with one idea spawning another and no clear beginning or end. However, Socrates seems to believe definitively that piety is loved by the gods or that the gods create piety through their love; one is an affect of the other. If piety is pleasing to the gods, then people would be more in control for if they swayed their actions to be pious they would attain the favor of the gods. However, if the gods create piety then they would hold more power for people would respond in respect and humbleness to the gods will.
+
====Student 1====
Socrates would answer this question with a serious of questions regarding a similar topic, but one less complex. He would then relate the responses to these questions back to the original idea. For example, in Euthyphro, Socrates states that there is a difference between something carried and something carrying. He then goes on to ask if “the thing carried is a carried thing because it is carried, or for some other reason?” By addressing the idea from a simpler perspective, Socrates is able to achieve solid conclusions about issues that can be applied to a more complex situation.
 
Though his dialogue, Socrates decides that something changes or is created because it is affected by something else and did not change or come about of its own accord to produce a response. He deems that “it is not being loved by those who love it because it is something loved, but it is something loved because it is being loved.” However he also comes to the conclusion that something is being loved because it is pious (which would be an act to produce a response) and that something is god-loved because it is loved by the gods (a state of being that causes an action). For Socrates, these two ideas clash and he comes to the conclusion that piety and god-loved are not synonymous.
 
  
==Euthyphro2==
+
Throughout the entire dialogue, Socrates asks Euthyphro repeatedly what the definition of piety is. After each explanation given to him, Socrates finds the flaw and proves the definition to be false. Presumably, Socrates wants to know the answer to this question, because he is entering court on this day. He wants to be able to argue against the true definition of piety and, therefore, win the case against him. In Euthyphro’s third definition of piety, he basically says, “All that is loved by the gods is pious, and all that is hated by the gods is impious”. When Socrates says, “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious or is it pious because it is loved by the gods”, he questions the definition. Ultimately, he completely eliminates Euthyphro’s previous definitions for piety. His first reason for not accepting this definitions is because, he proves that the piety came first, before the liking, through his “see/seeing and carry/carrying” analogies.  Basically, Socrates means that “being liked” is a state of an object/idea already in existence. Therefore, that which is righteous is liked by the gods, because it is righteous, it isn’t righteous solely because the gods like it. Socrates offers a definition as well; "piety is a species of the genus 'justice'”. Soon enough, Socrates points out that his definition is also false. All that is pious is not necessarily just, as well as, not all that is just is necessarily pious.  However, most human beings generally associate that which is pious, is also just, or considered “morally correct”. Finally, Socrates points out that there are many actions that cannot be sorted into both or either category. If you save your brother’s life by shooting a killer, it is not considered morally correct. But is it considered pious?
  
==Euthyphro3==
+
===Are we radically wrong about our knowledge of reality?===
  
==Euthyphro4==
+
====Student 1 ====
 
+
====Student 2 ====
==Euthyphro5==
+
====Student 3 ====
 +
====Student 4 ====

Latest revision as of 17:48, 2 February 2010

We'll use this page to post student work. You may take your name off your work if you wish.

Return to Human Nature

Section 1: Participation Journals

Euthyphro 10

Student 1

Throughout the entire dialogue, Socrates asks Euthyphro repeatedly what the definition of piety is. After each explanation given to him, Socrates finds the flaw and proves the definition to be false. Presumably, Socrates wants to know the answer to this question, because he is entering court on this day. He wants to be able to argue against the true definition of piety and, therefore, win the case against him. In Euthyphro’s third definition of piety, he basically says, “All that is loved by the gods is pious, and all that is hated by the gods is impious”. When Socrates says, “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious or is it pious because it is loved by the gods”, he questions the definition. Ultimately, he completely eliminates Euthyphro’s previous definitions for piety. His first reason for not accepting this definitions is because, he proves that the piety came first, before the liking, through his “see/seeing and carry/carrying” analogies. Basically, Socrates means that “being liked” is a state of an object/idea already in existence. Therefore, that which is righteous is liked by the gods, because it is righteous, it isn’t righteous solely because the gods like it. Socrates offers a definition as well; "piety is a species of the genus 'justice'”. Soon enough, Socrates points out that his definition is also false. All that is pious is not necessarily just, as well as, not all that is just is necessarily pious. However, most human beings generally associate that which is pious, is also just, or considered “morally correct”. Finally, Socrates points out that there are many actions that cannot be sorted into both or either category. If you save your brother’s life by shooting a killer, it is not considered morally correct. But is it considered pious?

Are we radically wrong about our knowledge of reality?

Student 1

Student 2

Student 3

Student 4