Socrates

Greek theatre has always been a significant constituent in the past and present Athenian society. Fifth Century BC Athenian society proposed numerous playwrights in their festivities honouring the god, Dionysus. Amongst the many crowd favourites was a legend to describe him in the least, Aristophanes. His works of satirical comedy are still celebrated and enjoyed today. One such example of his famous satirical works is “The Clouds”, written in 423BC. “The Clouds” is about a father, Strepsiades, who is in debt because of his son’s expensive horse hobby.

Strepsiades tries to convince his son, Pheidippides, to attend the “Thinkery” (a school for sophistry), to learn the art of double talk in the hope of outwitting his creditors in court. However, Pheidippides denies his father’s request, so instead Strepsiades decides to enrol himself. Strepsiades’ attempts to learn sophistry but fails miserably when his old age gets the best of him. Another attempt to encourage his son to enrol becomes successful and Pheidippides learns to double-talk from the teacher Socrates. This is later regretted when, at the climax of the story, Pheidippides uses double-talk to justify him beating his father.

Strepsiades, out of anger and rage, then sets fire to the Thinkery. The main theme dealt with in the “The Clouds” is that of new versus old. Aristophanes challenges the radical thinkers like sophists and the imaginative thinkers like Socrates for oppressing the traditional values held and demoralising the youth. Another theme pertaining to “the clouds” is the confliction of religion and science. In fifth century BC, around the time when Aristophanes wrote the clouds, the commotion of “scientific theory” had just begun.

With religion prevailing at the time, such atheistic thinking brought about by people like Socrates was firstly unlawful and secondly prone to ridicule by conservative figures such as Aristophanes. “The Clouds” is rather accurate in depicting Athenian life. However the perception of Socrates evident in the text is not parallel to that of Socrates in real life. Aristophanes, like many, linked Socrates with the rest of the Sophists for the reason that he was a philosophical thinker, that is, he came up with reasoning without relying on faith. However, Socrates, like Aristophanes rejected the ideas of the Sophists.

The sophists argued that guiding principles of a society, such as justice and truth, varied according to the needs of men in a particular time and place. In teaching their students, the sophists emphasised the art of argumentative discussion and came to be associated with deceptive and hollow reasoning. This is depicted in the clouds where better argument represents traditional thinking and the worse argument depicts that of the sophists. Despite Aristophanes’ rather critical portrayal of Socrates, the description of him as expressed through Pheidippides as ” pale-faced charlatans, who haven’t any shoes” is actually relatively true.

Since Socrates wore simple apparel, and walked barefoot through the streets, his ideas and peculiarity made him an easy subject of derision and he was often thought of as a fraudulent figure. Socrates was also ridiculed for the fact he believed in one intelligent being as the creator of the universe. This went against the religious life of the Athenians. In “The Clouds”, Poseidon, god of horses is sworn on by Pheidippides and later again by Pasias (one of Strepsiades creditors) who also swears by Hermes and Zeus. These accounts are an accurate reflection the religious beliefs upheld by Athenian society.

However, since “the clouds” is a satirical play, Aristophanes pokes fun at Socrates who is depicted to believe in the “vortex” as the ruler, not Zeus. This part of the play is not accurate, as it does not hold a factual purpose but rather that of entertainment and humour. Rather than just analysing “The Clouds” on its plot, a more comprehensive read of the text reveals further details on 5th century Athenian life, all of which are precise in information. For instance, it is apparent in the text that concepts such as creditors, debtors and interest, were already in use at the time.

This shows that Athenian society had in place forms of financing that still exist today. Also, there is a clear depiction of the judicial system present at the time. It is evident in the text that when taking a person to court a deposit must be made and if the case was lost the deposit was forfeited. Other instances in which “The Clouds” has effectively portrayed Athenian life is through their currency, such as drachmas and obols and also in their legal system, when the Better Argument makes reference to the punishment of adultery, this being having a radish shoved up his anus and his pubic hair singed with hot ash.

The people of the 5th century BC Athenian society were rather wealthy and could afford slaves. The polarisation of the two classes of people within society is portrayed rather well. This is evident with Strepsiades’ servant Xanthias who lives an unpleasant life when compared to Pheidippides who indulges in the costly hobby of buying racehorses. This is further exemplified when Pheidippides mother insists to add -hippos (meaning horse) to Pheidippides name at birth so he could have the marks of the aristocratic classes. In conclusion, “The Clouds” is a satirical play and should not be taken for face value.

However, his portrayal of issues and figures within the society give an accurate insight into some of the beliefs held by the general public and if treated carefully could be considered as reliable historical source. A serious theme underlies this comedy, namely: Ideas espoused by radical thinkers like the sophists and by highly imaginative thinkers like Socrates are undermining traditional values and corrupting the morals of youths. The sophists maintained that the guiding principles of a society, such as justice and truth, were relative concepts-that is, these principles changed according to the needs of men in a particular time and place.

What was right and just in Athens was not necessarily right and just in another society. One man’s virtue could be another man’s vice. In teaching their students, the sophists emphasized the art of argumentative discourse and came to be associated with deceptive and specious reasoning, lampooned effectively in The Clouds. Another target of Aristophanes was Socrates, along with his associate, Chaerephon. Ironically, Socrates, like Aristophanes, renounced the methods and ideas of the sophists.

Nevertheless, Socrates angered the establishment (1) by declaring that the validity of many long-standing precepts could not be proved by logical reasoning, (2) by rejecting the Olympian gods and sometimes speaking of a single intelligent being as the creator of the universe, and (3) by spreading “dangerous” ideas among young people. In addition, he alienated many Athenians because he was ugly and untidy (sometimes neglecting to bathe for a long while), wore simple apparel, and walked barefoot through the streets. Thus, his ideas and eccentricities made him a ripe subject for ridicule.

Life is Beautiful, a film by Roberto Benign’, is a two-part film, the first part was purely comedy, the other brought smiles through tears (Bert 1998). It is about a guy named Guide Orifice, a Jew, who lived in Italy with his uncle during the time of the Nazis. He fell in love with a girl named Dora, a Gentile, to whom he had his only son. He was a free-spirited man who always has his way out of misery. He can always shed light to a very miserable experience.

This was specifically illustrated in the second part of the elm wherein all the Jews, including Guide, his uncle, and their five-year-old child Joshua, were taken by the Fascist and Nazis and were brought in a concentration camp. So was Dora, who pleaded the officers to let her go with his family so she also went aboard the train. There, Guide was still able to make up a story in order for his son not to be terrified. He told his son that they were Just in a big competition and they must gain a thousand points in order to win the first prize.

He even went to the extremes by lingering as a translator of the Germans, Just for his child to believe that what he was saying was true, because all he said was about the competition since he really did not speak German. He also went through a lot of sacrifices Just to protect his family who was also there. He even became a waiter for the Nazi and used the intercom to tell his wife at the other end of the camp that he loves him so much.

He risked his life because his wife’s and child’s life are more precious to him than his So the main issue here that must be dealt with in relation to morality and peace is he very act of Guide lying to his child Just to protect his life and his innocence from the terror that the concentration camps bring so that he will never lose hope that some day they will go out there as victors. But the question remains whether it is right to lie Just to save someone from the terrible truth of life or not?

Does it Justify the act because it may lead to peace? Having plotted the situation in the film and having rendered it noble for a man to do such thing Just to have his child protected, white lies would then be acceptable in he society despite the fact that it still constitute lies. Lying is wrong, however, if these white lies, which aims to salvage the other by not telling the truth, were acceptable now a days, would these then be viewed as moral?

But wouldn’t this corrupt the people’s view regarding the evil of lies? In light of the technical norm, which has to do with the matter of survival and thus of the health and well being of human individual and the community (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 1), what Guide has done in order for his child to survive is right. His lies were Justified because those were for the good of his son and for him not to get killed in the concentration camp.

However, this act would run in conflict with the moral norm, which refers to the dignity of the human person (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 3). Lying, when viewed in this aspect would be wrong despite the fact that it is for the benefit of another person because the very act of not saying the truth entails deviation of man from the uncorrupted state of not lying. Since there lies a violation of the dignity of man, the act is Judged to be wrong. Another way of looking at the act done of Guide is through the lens of Moral Dimension.

One of its features is the sense of obligation, which signifies imperative, something one must or ought to do, or not in accordance with some rule or principle (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 93). In Guides situation, what one ought to do as a father and a husband is without a doubt to save his family from the horrors of the place they are in, so he lied to his son for him not to be frightened because this is what he believed must be done. He believes that the meaning of his existence is to be able to protect his family, especially his son.

So he resulted into lying, but he only did this with the purest intention and for the simple reason that he loves his child so much. But when analyzed in view of the tells, which is the search for truth and meaning of all things and the search in general for mutual recognition of consciousness referred to as love (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 89), it would certainly be an immoral act. Although his acts were moved by love for his son, e stole the truth from his child by not telling him the real reason why they were there.

His act of lying is a clear deviation from the orientation toward the tells, which is geared towards the ultimate meaning and communion of all consciousness (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 89), rendering his action to be bad. The final article to be used in analyzing the issue at hand is Plat’s “Debauchery’. Here occurred the discussion of Socrates and Typhoon about the holy. Socrates pointed out that not all the Just are holy, only part of the Just is holy and the other is meeting else (Plato 2010, 13).

In light of this, one may infer that Guides act could be Just since it upholds the life of his child. By lying and keeping him from the Nazis, he was able to protect his child and save him from the possibility of early death. Although it would be rendered Just, it could not be rendered holy. This is so because According to Socrates, which was agreed by Typhoon, an act, to be holy must essentially be holy in whatever form and not merely because the gods loved it. Holiness must come first before it is loved.

Therefore, lying is not holy since goodness s not innate in the act itself even if the end goal was good. In conclusion, considering all the description of morality, lying itself is not in accordance to what is moral in the eyes of man or of the gods. Yet, when the reason for his lies is taken into further consideration, the act may seem Justifiable, but it does not necessitate that it is already morally right. Another thing worth noting is that morality is not Judged only in accordance with what one thinks is right or bad because this might result into one concluding that morality is relative.

This should to be the case because what is moral does not vary, what varies are the lenses used in analyzing the act done. Therefore, one must be critical in the analysis of an act in order not to render false Judgment.

Guess whose “big apple” is celebrating his 32nd birthday in April Fool’s Day. Yes, I would be sure that you would know it is the company of Apple, the one established by CEO Steve Jobs that had currently still withstanding the race for information technology supremacy. According to Steve Jobs, his company had only started in his parent’s garage but year after year, his idea for pioneering in the field of information technology, had made one of the biggest fortune came up into his life. Establishing a big tech company out of a small investment had not been an easy task for Mr. Steve Jobs.

Without the help of his co-founder Steve Wozniak (the other Steve of Apple), who had started the design for Apple I, he could not have achieved what he is famous as for now. Wozniak and Jobs, had worked partners for the arcade game “Breakout” for Atari before Apple I’s design task, and this was the beginning of their fond ideas with developing something greater than making a game. It all started with Steve Wozniak’s long-time dream of building a computer of his own. With the technology available during those days, the high cost of hardware had challenged him to find a way on how to make assembling a computer a little cheaper.

Upon finding the right set of computer parts for his dreamed personal computer, he then had started to code. By then early 1976, he had completed his 6502-based computer. After this success, Wozniak thought that it would be better if he would open to the market his pc’s architecture. This then made Wozniak partner again with Jobs to materialize this dream. Jobs had made suggestions during the design process that helped shaped the final product. After successfully securing their starting capital, they had then coined the name for their company, which is the Apple on April 1, 1976.

Since pc back then is a new trend that quickly catch the people’s attention, the sales had been reasonably very good that had made Jobs and Wozniak decide to continue developing and enhancing Apple. Many future versions had been out to the market as each year progresses. And as time goes by, their starting capital had then ballooned into more than $18 billion in cash, no debt, and still increasing due to the company’s $25 billion annual sales. Though, Wozniak had retired from the company 21 years ago for such reasons, his 12 years stay for making the company as stable and as progressive is still felt until of today.

The company is now then venturing out for the race for digital mobile phones supremacy, which they had launched through their recently released iPhone. This article relates to Doing Business in the Digital Economy as discussed in Chapter 2, The Modern Organization in the Digital Economy. The hardships of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak for pioneering in the information technology particularly in the architectural makeup of computers had been proven to be worth it because it had made them the two great Steve’s of Apple.

After securing the needed capital with only Steve Jobs parents’ garage as their workplace and also securing their way on how their finished product would penetrate into the back then baby market for computers, they had then took this as their stepping stone for building their dreams. With their imagination and skills for computers, they had made themselves build one such big company that had surpasses challenges through such a long period of time.

Their business in the digital economy is one such great model for others who would like also to invest in the vast field of information technology. The history of the Apple, the history of Steve Jobs, the history of Steve Wozniak, proves that there is something worth promising in IT development.

Works Cited:

Weyhrich, Steven. Apple II History. April 1, 2008. < http://apple2history. org/history/ah02. html> Fortt, Jon. Happy 32nd birthday, Apple. Fortune Big Tech. April 1, 2008 <http://bigtech. blogs. fortune. cnn. com/2008/04/01/happy-32nd-birthday-apple/>

This is a dramatic poem where the speaker and his lover are in bed together. The speaker personifies the sun, and is speaking to it throughout the poem. As the sunlight comes through the windows, the speaker tells the sun to leave them alone. He seems to feel that their life together is complete, and that the sun is being a nuisance. He then tells the sun that his lover is worth more than anything the sun can ever find outside their bedroom. It is a love poem of an unusual kind.

In this poem, composed in the form of a dramatic monologue, the poet lover is angered at the Sun and calls it names for disturbing the time him and his lover are spendong together. . He addresses the Sun as “busy old fool”. He calls it unruly because, by peeping in to the bedroom through windows and curtains it disturbs the lovers. The poet-lover tells the Sun that lovers’ seasons do not run to its motions. He advises the Sun to go and do such routine and dull jobs like chiding late-schoolboys and apprentices, waking up court-huntsmen and peasants.

The expression “country ants” is imagery. It refers to the peasants, drudging like ants. However, the poet and his lover are not like ‘them’, they are superior to all that is going on around them and they should not be disturbed. They get up with the Sun and toil the whole day, till sunset. Love knows no season, no climates. It is not affected by time. In this section of the poem we come across personification like “busy old fool” and “saucy pedantic wretch” to show the annoyance the poet has at this intruder.

The poet’s wit is apparent when he tells the Sun that he has no reason to think that his beams are “so reverend and strong”. The poet lover could eclipse and could the beams of the Sun with a wink. He does not do so because he does not wish to “loose her sight so long. ” This indicates that the love between the poet and his lover is so obsessive, so strong and has such potency that he does not even want to lose sight of her for her second. The Sun travels all over the world in twenty four hours. The poet asks the Sun to go round the world, see all Kings, come back tomorrow and say if

Donne uses hyperbole to exaggerate the importance of himself and his lover, “in one bed lay”- he is insinuating that all important elements of the world are there in the their bed and in their room. They are everything. To Donne, this moment with his love means everything and he describes it as such. The same imagery continues in the concluding verse of the poem where “She’s all States, and all Princes I”. The poet’s mistress is all States. She is the world. The Sun can shine over only half of the world at one time. The lovers, on the contrary, are the world.

It logically follows that the Sun is “half as happy as we”. When we come to this part of the poem we notice a shift in the mood of the poet. The Sun is no longer the “busy old fool” or the “saucy pedantic wretch” of the first verse or stanza. It is now an aged fellow in need of ease. The poet offers it the needed ease; the Sun’s duty now is warming the world. It warms only half of the world at a time. By shining on the lover’s bed it can shine over the whole world at a time. “Let the bed be the centre and the walls the sphere” of the Sun with this arrangement the aged Sun can do its duties with ease.

At the beginning of the poem the poet asked the Sun to go away from there. Now he invites the Sun to go round their bed and shine on them. He does not want to lose his lovers sigh for even a second- shows how much he loves her. The poet addresses the sun as a person and rebukes the sun because it has wakened him and his lover from their sleep. He demands to know why lovers should obey time. He also shows his dominance over the sun, calling it a ‘saucy pedantic wretch’ and tells the sun to bother other people instead such as late school boys or workers imploring or more time to sleep.

He tells the sun to find the royal court people and farmers to let them start their day instead of controlling the lovers, because time does not exist in love and unlike season or climate or sun, love doesn’t change. Hours, days and months are just silly, useless measures. The poet challenges the sun about its strength, that the sun isn’t is high and mighty because he can make it disappear by winking, except he doesn’t want to lose sight of his lover. He teases the sun that his lover’s eyes are so beautiful and bright that it can blind the sun.

He tells he sun to go to far away countries like India or stay because the entire world is with him in the bed. The sun can also find kings but he and his lover are so superior that even the kings will say the most important people are in his room, ‘all here in one bed lay’. The poet claims that his lover is ‘all states’ and in fact the whole world itself and he is the ‘prince’ that rules it, nothing else exists other than them. They are the celebrity, and even other princes want to mimic them.

He declares that honour and science are nothing compared to their love and that the sun is only half as happy as they are. He says the sun is old and so it should rest because its duty is to warm the world and since they are the world, the sun has completed its duty. Then, the poet cleverly turns the sun’s refusal to leave into a show of its generosity and by shining at them, it has centered itself upon the room of his love and so they are the sun, the center of the universe

Socrates was an intelligent adult male who idealized the hunt for truth and justness. I love the manner he would inquire inquiries in order to encompass others with cognition of the encompassing universe. Socrates used what we call inductive logical thinking. Inductive logical thinking agencies that from all the fact we get replies. He believed that adult male was capable of geting at truth through the usage of ground. He besides linked cognition to happiness. He believed that cognition or penetrations was the foundation of virtuousness and felicity.

The Socratic Method is a method of look intoing jobs through duologue treatment in a schoolroom a instructor can let a pupil to believe critically and engraft the Socratic Method. The pupils will larn as the instructor keeps on inquiring inquiries. The instructor analyzes some of the possible effect of the pupil ‘s comments. The accent is upon the believing procedure of the pupil, who must believe for himself and accept the effects of his logic. I have tried the Socratic method with my kindergarten category. The topic was to jump count by two ‘s and my pupils were able to reply my Socratic based inquiries good.

Besides, in learning we should direct the pupil into the right reply instead than stating him the right reply. With the Socratic Method the instructor does non state the pupil the proper reply ; the instructor should pull the pupil to the likely reply. I believe that pupils can utilize their encephalons and be challenged on an mundane footing. This manner so the pupil learns when he discovers the true generalisation through his logical thinking procedures.

Plato

Plato was the first philosopher in instruction. He was influenced by Pythagoreans and believed that Mathematical apprehension can act upon apprehension of the universe. He believed that math was the footing of the universe. He mentions that if people do non understand math so they should non be allowed in his school.

Plato demonstrated that pedagogues have deep attention for the wellbeing and hereafter of their pupils. I found Plato really influential because he besides mentions in differing educational demands is needed with assorted life phases. Plato references that each and every individual is different and needs degrees of instruction, understanding and concluding. We as instructors know that every kid can larn otherwise. Some kids have knowledge in some topographic points where others do n’t and frailty versa.

In every schoolroom at that place will ever be pupils that are non traveling to be on the same degree as other pupils. I think that pupils who are making ill in the category or have a certain disablement should be placed with pupils that are stand outing in the schoolroom. In add-on, the instructor may desire to hold the pupils who are holding trouble sitting in forepart of the category and pay closer attending to the lesson. The instructor should besides hold group undertakings more frequently, because it may be easier for pupils who are holding troubles in the surveies to larn and understand better.

I think that group work is really of import in kids ‘s development. Group work gives kids abilities to socialise and place themselves as a portion of a group. I think that math should be the foundation of the pupils school work. Plato was a strong truster in this and so am I. I think that mathematics is a portion of mundane life and should be incorporated in mundane lessons.

Aristotle

Aristotle was a scientist. He explained that cognition is gained by esthesis. He mentioned that when people experience something they are able think about it, retrieve it and how it alters their life. He states that we abstract things and we take it within ourselves. In add-on, Aristotle believed that people should believe for themselves and develop thoughts on their ain. The importance of instruction in the doctrine of Aristotle was great and believed that we could larn to utilize our ground to get at virtuousness and felicity, merely through the procedure of instruction.

Aristotle placed habit high in the acquisition procedure. Aristotle thinks that adult male learns by nature, wont, and ground. In my schoolroom I as the Pre-k instructor would form stuffs harmonizing to the Torahs of ground. I would seek to do the schoolroom every bit natural as I can. I would integrate existent life state of affairs through drama. For illustration, when learning math-addition or minus, you can convey different things in similar confects and really demo the pupils with the confects how to add and how to deduct. In the play centre, I would do a food market shop and allow the kids add up different points. For illustration, A bag of murphy french friess cost a penny and if they brought two how much money would they necessitate? It will be easier for the kid to hold on instead than merely giving them a press release. Besides, insistent drill would be used to reenforce what was understood by ground. I would besides integrate in my schoolroom positive support. I would promote my pupils to dispute themselves on an mundane footing.

Rabbi moses ben maimons

Maimonides was born in Spain ( 1135-1204 ) . He did non desire to learn and acquire paid for it so he chose to go a physician. He respected and treated everyone every bit as a doctor. As for instruction he said that we should take high on our ends. He besides states that a lazy instructor is a dishonest instructor. He believed that motive besides plays a large function in acquiring pupils to larn.

Maimonides brings a really of import affair in a schoolroom. The schoolrooms should non be overcrowded. He was the first philosopher to explicate that if there are more than 25 pupils at that place should be a instructor helper in the schoolroom. Students need individualised attending in a schoolroom. This to Maimonides was critical because pupils need to hold the instructor ‘s attending in order to win the schoolroom. This manner a pupil will experience of import and will be able to larn and derive more out of the lesson if the instructor is paying attending to each person. If the schoolroom is overcrowded non every individual pupil will acquire the attending they deserve. Maimonides thought that kids will larn when instructors use positive support. In add-on, in the schoolroom you may desire to hold spines or ice lollies for childs who participate in category as a good incentive to acquire pupils to take part.

Rabbi moses ben maimons thought that the instruction of the organic structure and the psyche is really of import. He besides thought that the pedagogue needs to be knowing and moral. I believe that a instructor does necessitate the cognition and ethical motives to learn. She/ he needs to be ready and cognize the reply to their pupil ‘s inquiries. Maimonides thought that kids need to socialise and larn. Integrating Maimonides thoughts on instruction, I would make more group work so my pupils will be able to larn and turn from each other.

Meno Paper Assignment Can virtue be taught? Plato starts off the Meno with this simple question. Prior to answering this question, Socrates is adamant about first understanding what virtue is. Socrates and Meno go back and forth throughout the story attempting to figure out the definition of virtue. When they come to the conclusion that they do not know what virtue is, they attempt to prove whether virtue can be taught, is attainable by practice, or is simply possessed by nature. As Meno asks Socrates whether virtue can be taught, Socrates explains to him that he does not know what virtue is.

Meno defines virtue to Socrates in many forms. For a man virtue is managing public affairs and in turn benefiting his friends, and harming his enemies. For a woman she must manage the home well, preserve its possessions, and be submissive to her husband. He also explains that a child, a slave or an elderly man also have different virtues. Socrates refutes this definition of virtue. He has not been given a definition but yet a list of examples. He gets his point across to Meno by using bees as an example. There are many different types of bees, but one bee does not differ from another in the fact that they are both bees.

This same concept has to be true with virtue, for there are many and various types but they all have the same form making them virtues. Here we are presented with the first rule of giving a definition, and that is simply to not give examples. Meno attempts to give Socrates a second definition, stating that virtue is simply the ability to rule over people. Once again Socrates refutes this definition. In the case of a slave or a child this cannot be true; hence this is merely another example of a specific trait of someone who is virtuous. Socrates also adds that if this were true than it would have to be justly and not unjustly.

Menos response to this is that justice is virtue. Is justice virtue or is it a type of virtue? This is the next issue Socrates points out to Meno. In response Meno says that justice is a type of virtue, therefore he has done nothing more than give another useless example of virtue. Socrates wants to put an end to this problem so he gives Meno the definition of both shape and color to give him an example of a good definition. We are given a third definition by Meno, in which he states that virtue is to desire beautiful things and have the power to acquire them.

With this Socrates translates desire for beautiful things as the desire for good things. Meno agrees with this statement, in turn allowing Socrates to once again disprove this definition. There are those who desire bad things, but in their own minds believe these bad things to be good. Therefore these people essentially desire good things but are not virtuous. Meno now explains to Socrates that he has found the definition; it is the capacity to acquire good things with justice. Socrates goes on to explain that this is yet again just a fragment of virtue.

In essence all Meno has explained now is that virtue is virtue, for justice is a type of virtue. Socrates has brought forward the second rule of definitions, which is that you can’t use the word in the definition. At this point Meno is perplexed, and begins to get angry with Socrates. He informs him with the fact that he came here knowing exactly what virtue was, but now Socrates has driven Meno to the point that he now doesn’t know what virtue is either. Socrates explains that he has not done this purposely but that he truly is just as perplexed, and therefore they should search for this answer together.

Meno displays his confusion by asking how it is even possible to search for something that you do not know at all. This is where Socrates introduces the idea that the soul is immortal and learning that which we do not know is recollection. Meno would like Socrates to show him that this is true. Consequently Socrates picks out a slave boy, who was raised in the home of Meno, and begins to ask him geometric questions. He questions the boy about a square, naming the different principles and rules of a square.

As the boy begins to answer these questions correctly, Socrates points out to Meno that he has created his own right opinion concerning this logic. Through constant questioning the boy is able to form right opinions on logics that he has never before been presented. Socrates reveals to Meno that this is recollection. Being immortal the soul has learned all there is to know, whether it be in this life as a human or in a time prior to that. In turn recollection is simply the process of turning true opinions into knowledge through constant questioning.

With this being known, Socrates illustrates to Meno that one should always seek to find out that which they do not know. In order to find out whether virtue can be taught Socrates and Meno set up a hypothesis that virtue is something good. Socrates begins to elaborate on this fact by stating that if virtue is good, than it is beneficial. They begin to examine what kind of things benefit an individual. Socrates and Meno both agree that Health, strength, beauty, and also wealth all benefit us. Socrates also points out that these same things can do harm do someone.

So what is the directing factor that determines whether they are beneficial or harmful? All things directed by wisdom end in happiness. Therefore since virtue is beneficial, it must be knowledge. In turn virtue must be a kind of wisdom. If this is true, then virtue can be taught. Meno agrees with Socrates that this is true. Immediately after the two agree Socrates questions whether they were wrong by agreeing to this. He points out to Meno that virtue might not be knowledge. If knowledge is teachable, and virtue is knowledge, then there would be teachers as well as learners of virtue.

Up to now they have not been able to come across any such individuals. At this point Anytus is introduced into the story, and Socrates invites him to join them in their search for teachers of virtue. Socrates asks Anytus if they should send Meno to the sophists who profess to teach virtue. Anytus wastes no time in sharing his negative harsh views of these sophists. Socrates tells Anytus to give Meno the name of an Athenian in which he should visit to learn the meaning of virtue. Anytus claims that any Greek citizen would be able to make him a better man that the sophists.

Of these good men can any of them teach virtue, for they have yet to see this. Socrates uses Themistocles as a prime example; he was even the best of men but failed to pass down his virtue to his son. Instead he taught his son to be a great horseman. He presents Anytus with a couple other examples of virtuous men who failed to pass their virtue down to their children. At this point Anytus becomes angry and he leaves. He asks Meno if there are many good men among his people. Meno says that there are many good men. Among these good men do they agree hat they are teachers and virtue can be taught? Meno states that sometimes they say it can be taught, and other times they say it cannot be taught. After hearing this Socrates goes on to explain that these men cannot even agree on this point, therefore they are not teachers of this subject. Thus there are no teachers of this subject, as well as no learners, consequently virtue cannot be taught. Now that Meno and Socrates have agreed that virtue cannot be taught, Socrates begins to explain where they went wrong in their original investigation.

He explains that they were right in agreeing that good men must be beneficial, and that they will be beneficent if they give correct direction in our affairs. The agreement that one cannot give correct direction if one does not have knowledge, is where they have gone wrong. One may use right opinion as a guide for correct action, in which it is no less useful than knowledge. Right opinion and knowledge differ in the fact that right opinion escapes a man’s mind very quickly. It is not until one ties these right opinions down, by giving an account of the reason why, that they become knowledge.

Socrates explains to Meno that this is recollection, as they have previously gone over. At this point Socrates and Meno have come to a conclusion. Virtue is not teachable and is not acquired by nature, but comes to those who possess it as a gift from the gods which is not accompanies by understanding. Socrates leaves Meno and ends the story with one final statement. He says to Meno, “We shall have clear knowledge of this when, before we investigate how it comes to be present in men, we first try to find out what virtue in itself is. ”

Man is a complex individual. Embodying the gift of life and the challenge of living it, man is faced with challenges brought by the decision he makes in living his life. Through these challenges, he explores his identity and personality. He is able to assess his inherent characteristics, his abilities and skills. The discovery of his potentials will lead him to utilize it in a manner in which he sees fit. The ability to do what he wants in life is attributed to the freedom that he lives.

Humans are driven, free, and capable of governing their lives. The need to survive is the challenge that humans continuous to overcome every day. The individual behaves and reacts to the situations and the people around him. He has an idea of what he wants in life and how he should live it to its full potential. Personal reasons such as success or the need for financial resources and a suited career is sometimes included in the reasons why man behaves and reacts towards his surroundings in a certain way. All these reasons contribute to what is essential in life, to be happy.

It is such a cliché for people to talk about happiness in the modern times the society now lives in. The information technology era had brought a perception that man is keen to adapt in a fast-paced and complicated life. The modernism ideology has influenced how people thinks and behaves. This can be mostly associated with the need to be famous, or rich. To further understand how man identifies himself with happiness, Socrates’ definition and view regarding happiness can be used to explain how it is. The Greek word “ethos” is where the word ethics is derived from.

Consequently, the word also is defined as “habit”.(Beebe, 2003) Socrates is one of the several philosophers who explored the definition of habit and character that one must cultivate in order to live. On a greater scale, how should man be and become in this life. Socrates believed that one should settle the definition of ethical character as a manifestation of its morality actions.(Beebe, 2003) As an example, when a child discovers his father killed someone, and his father is hunted by the F.B.I, when someone ask him, he would automatically refuse to be truthful about the whereabouts of his father.

This is considering the facts that the child admires his father very much and can not imagine his father committing the crime. In that situation, should the child be tagged as a liar and dishonest person, considering the person involved in very dear to him and is a very influential person in his life. Should one doubt the ethical character of the child or understand the reason why he had lied. This is the question that Socrates posted on the idea of ethical values. With the definition of ethics comes the idea of virtue. Virtue is also associated to “excellence” and can be applied in many aspects of our lives. Socrates posted a question, “when does someone consider his life to be happy?” (Beebe, 2003)

Beneath the question is the question connecting the idea of virtue and happiness.  Using the definition of virtue, it questions how man can be of his full potential. What can make his life truly happy? In reality, when one person thinks of happiness, it becomes a subjective view on the person’s life. Socrates on the other hand thinks of happiness as an objective feature of one’s life. Socrates also claimed that “the most important thing is not life, but the good life”.(Beebe, 2003)

This statement comes with the idea that the fulfillment of life is the essence of life itself. Happiness is not just the mere smiles and the happy feeling attributed to it, but when everything is wrong, one lives and overcomes it. This is exercised by the ethical and virtuous persons. They consider more of the quality of their lives rather than just the length and living simply the life they ought to live. Understanding Socrates definition of ethics and virtue, rather than the pursuit of wealth, reputation, prestige and others, one must focus on aspiring to be ethical and virtuous more than anything else.

Because these two ideas generates happiness, is a factor of happiness and creates the life with moral quality. Virtue and happiness is both necessary and sufficient to be able to be happy. Being virtuous is necessary to become happy. The idea of living a virtuous life is fulfilling the excellent kind of life a person can fulfill. This is disregarding the material aspirations of one’s life, in return, one gains the ideals of honesty, fairness, and bravery that contributes to the quality of life one lives. These attributes may not give enough material possessions but the morale and quality of life is the result of living the virtuous life.

In Socrates famous saying, “The unexamined life is worth not living”.(Beebe, 2003) To this saying we pose the idea of wisdom and the pursuit of knowledge and reason. Virtuous living is having the gift of rationality and the capacity to think critically. The discussion of virtue is also important in the pursuit of happiness. Virtuosity also comes with work. Being virtuous is a process and a pursuit, and together with work, one can achieve happiness. We can therefore say that according to Socrates, one can not be happy without being virtuous, and one can not be virtuous without being wise.

BEEBE, J. R. (2003) Socrates on Prozac and Happines. acsu.buffalo.edu.

Beebe, James R. “Socrates on Prozac and Happines”.  2003. Lecture notes. acsu.buffalo.edu. November 27 2006. <http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jbeebe2/Happiness.htm>.

Kalin, J.G., Davis, G.S, and Geisler, N.L. “Determinism”.  2004. November 27 2006. <http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/determin.htm>.