Plato

Plato’s allegory of the cave is considered a good example of illustrating the way people think. It also explains the concepts of adapting people to different changes including things they don’t know or are not familiar with. Plato explained that some prisoners were living in a dark cave in their whole life and it’s isolated from the outer world. They are banded with shackles. They only saw some shadows of creatures such as animals and plants because of the fire lighten in the cave. It’s the only reality they saw. These shadows are controlled by some people who decide what they want to show. Suddenly, one of them was freed from shackles and for the first time, he walked out of the cave and discovered the fire that lighten things in the cave and saw the sun and it blinded him. Then, he realized that the power of enlightenment came from the sun. He also saw real animals and plants and understood that what he saw is a mere shadow not the reality of things. Then, he went back to the cave and tell his friends what he saw and that’s the shadow is a lie. They thought he’s crazy and they tried to stop him.

Day to day, we use this allegory in our daily life. Each symbol of it represents a significant part of human’s life. Starting with the cave, it refers to human’s life experience, environment and ignorance; what kind of information he would like to hear and what to ignore. Secondly, the shadows that are the mere reflections of the reality. Sometimes, we believe that something is true, but it turns out after a while it’s not such as thinking the earth is flat. Thirdly, the chains or the shackles that holds the prisoners. They control what the prisoners see; it’s kind of ignorance or close mindedness as we look into a specific direction and don’t see other views or opinions or the big picture. Forth, the people who decide what we see represents the politics or the media. For example, some Journals like Youm 7 or El-Watan provide the Egyptians with certain news and issues the President and his entourage would agree with. Fifth, the prisoners are the people who refuse to learn new things and hold on their beliefs and ignore anything that deviates them. Sixth, the sun light represents the reality they scape from; they were living in complete darkness.

Reflecting the allegory of cave into our life especially when using social media such as Facebook and Twitter is very essential. Humans by natural are social beings, however, after introducing the social media, they started to isolate themselves hours, days and even weeks in their houses. They become prisoners of these media that reduce human interactions and engagements. It also narrows our scope of thinking by dealing with the people who have the same mind or thinking who share the same things. Thus, we are not introduced to new ideas or minds. We are only constrained or limited with our circle of friends and relatives. People start to become blind or visually impaired; they prefer to stay in their caves unlike the people who spend much time in real world.

Moreover, they built a whole wrong story depending on the shadows they saw, making false beliefs on the world they imagined as these shadows doesn’t represent the reality. Same thing is applied for social media users; they don’t know how the real world look like, they only see reflections in their timeline or certain point of views which in turn built their life accordingly. They don’t want to free themselves and go out for the real world. Thus, social media imprison their minds in computers. They also fail to differ between the real objects and illusions such as fake news or facts. Also, the puppets control what they see same for the social media, News are directed toward a certain direction or viewed as a deviated point of view. We saw a lot of fallacies made without getting aware of them.

Thus, some of the implications of using the socials media are failing to deal with humans or challenges in real life and getting blinded when going out to the real world. In addition, social media users resist any changes and may not belief in other’s opinion. They only care about fake reality or ideal reality they live in the social media.

To sum up, Plato’s allegory of the cave reflects the effect of education and enlightenment and the lack of it in our society. Every aspect of the cave represents significant part in our modern life especially social media life that makes humans close minded.

Plato’s allegory of the cave is considered a good example of illustrating the way people think. It also explains the concepts of adapting people to different changes including things they don’t know or are not familiar with. Plato explained that some prisoners were living in a dark cave in their whole life and it’s isolated from the outer world. They are banded with shackles. They only saw some shadows of creatures such as animals and plants because of the fire lighten in the cave. It’s the only reality they saw. These shadows are controlled by some people who decide what they want to show. Suddenly, one of them was freed from shackles and for the first time, he walked out of the cave and discovered the fire that lighten things in the cave and saw the sun and it blinded him. Then, he realized that the power of enlightenment came from the sun. He also saw real animals and plants and understood that what he saw is a mere shadow not the reality of things. Then, he went back to the cave and tell his friends what he saw and that’s the shadow is a lie. They thought he’s crazy and they tried to stop him.

Day to day, we use this allegory in our daily life. Each symbol of it represents a significant part of human’s life. Starting with the cave, it refers to human’s life experience, environment and ignorance; what kind of information he would like to hear and what to ignore. Secondly, the shadows that are the mere reflections of the reality. Sometimes, we believe that something is true, but it turns out after a while it’s not such as thinking the earth is flat. Thirdly, the chains or the shackles that holds the prisoners. They control what the prisoners see; it’s kind of ignorance or close mindedness as we look into a specific direction and don’t see other views or opinions or the big picture. Forth, the people who decide what we see represents the politics or the media. For example, some Journals like Youm 7 or El-Watan provide the Egyptians with certain news and issues the President and his entourage would agree with. Fifth, the prisoners are the people who refuse to learn new things and hold on their beliefs and ignore anything that deviates them. Sixth, the sun light represents the reality they scape from; they were living in complete darkness.

Reflecting the allegory of cave into our life especially when using social media such as Facebook and Twitter is very essential. Humans by natural are social beings, however, after introducing the social media, they started to isolate themselves hours, days and even weeks in their houses. They become prisoners of these media that reduce human interactions and engagements. It also narrows our scope of thinking by dealing with the people who have the same mind or thinking who share the same things. Thus, we are not introduced to new ideas or minds. We are only constrained or limited with our circle of friends and relatives. People start to become blind or visually impaired; they prefer to stay in their caves unlike the people who spend much time in real world.

Moreover, they built a whole wrong story depending on the shadows they saw, making false beliefs on the world they imagined as these shadows doesn’t represent the reality. Same thing is applied for social media users; they don’t know how the real world look like, they only see reflections in their timeline or certain point of views which in turn built their life accordingly. They don’t want to free themselves and go out for the real world. Thus, social media imprison their minds in computers. They also fail to differ between the real objects and illusions such as fake news or facts. Also, the puppets control what they see same for the social media, News are directed toward a certain direction or viewed as a deviated point of view. We saw a lot of fallacies made without getting aware of them.

Thus, some of the implications of using the socials media are failing to deal with humans or challenges in real life and getting blinded when going out to the real world. In addition, social media users resist any changes and may not belief in other’s opinion. They only care about fake reality or ideal reality they live in the social media.

To sum up, Plato’s allegory of the cave reflects the effect of education and enlightenment and the lack of it in our society. Every aspect of the cave represents significant part in our modern life especially social media life that makes humans close minded.

The position Thrasymachus takes on the definition of justice, as well as its importance in society, is one far differing from the opinions of the other interlocutors in the first book of Plato’s Republic. Embracing his role as a Sophist in Athenian society, Thrasymachus sets out to aggressively dispute Socrates’ opinion that justice is a beneficial and valuable aspect of life and the ideal society. Throughout the course of the dialogue, Thrasymachus formulates three major assertions regarding justice.

These claims include his opinion that “justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger,” “it is just to obey the rulers,” and “justice is really the good of another  and harmful to the one who obeys and serves. ” Socrates continuously challenges these claims using what is now known as the “Socratic method” of questioning, while Thrasymachus works to defend his views. This paper seeks to argue the implausibility of Thrasymachus’ views through an analysis of his main claims regarding justice, as well as his view that injustice brings greater happiness.

In Book I of Republic, Socrates attempts to define justice with the help of his friends and acquaintances. After a number of suggestions prove false or insufficient, Thrasymachus tries his hand to define the term, convinced that his definition rings true. Thrasymachus begins in stating, “justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger,1” and after prodding, explains what he means by this. Thrasymachus believes that the stronger rule society, therefore, creating laws and defining to the many what should be considered just.

He pertains, however, that the stronger create said laws for their own benefit and therefore in acting justly, the ruled are performing for the rulers benefit and not their own. This argument is not feasible for a variety of reasons. One of the key characteristics of justice is fairness, which can also be defined as being reasonable or impartial.  Impartiality means that you do not favour one side over another6, and therefore implies that if one were to act justly and therefore impartially, they would not act in a way to benefit only a select few.

Furthermore, justice in its true form cannot be used solely for the advantage of the stronger without the masses acknowledging the injustices being imposed upon them, as Thrasymachus suggests is the case. For justice is one of the many characteristics of morality, which is considered to be intrinsic based on an inner conviction.  Therefore, if the many were acting against said inner conviction wholly for the benefit of the stronger, would they not experience a natural feeling of injustice?

This argument alike can be used to refute another of Thrasymachus’ primary claims that “justice is really the good of another and harmful to the one who obeys and serves. ” In addition to his definition, Thrasymachus argues the value of justice as a human or societal characteristic, claiming that injustice is far more beneficial to the individual. Thrasymachus asserts that tyranny: makes the doer of injustice happiest and the sufferers of it, who are unwilling to do injustice, most wretched injustice, if it is on a large enough scale, is stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice.  To decide whether an unjust man finds more happiness than a just man does, one must understand the true meaning of the word. The dictionary defines happiness as “characterized by pleasure, contentment, or joy. ” Thrasymachus typifies the unjust man as someone who is constantly seeking self-fulfillment, pleasing their desires no matter what the cost to others.

It is in their nature to never be satisfied with what they have, and therefore it is unlikely that the unjust man could ever experience true contentment. In contrast, the just man is content upholding laws and acting for the greater good and is therefore capable of experiencing a greater happiness than one who partakes in injustices. The dictionary goes on to state that happiness can also be defined as “feeling satisfied that something is right or has been done right. 8 Thus, an unjust man could never truly be happy, as they are aware of the injustices they have committed unto others in order to benefit themselves. In addition, if one is to look to the cardinal virtues, not only is justice itself included, temperance is as well. Temperance, meaning “restraint in the face of temptation or desire” is not a characteristic of an unjust man. In fact, Thrasymachus argues that one should always seek to fulfill their own desires exercising injustice as a way to do so.

Virtue is said to be a measure of one’s worth, therefore, in turning their back on it, an unjust man could never be as self fulfilled and happy as a virtuous one. The first book of Republic illustrates a diverse range of views in reference to the definition of justice. None, however, evokes such controversy and analysis as Thrasymachus’ dialogue. His point of view calls to the forefront a number of important questions regarding the issue, and is an essential piece to Plato’s puzzle of defining justice. Thrasymachus’s arguments in and of themselves, however, are implausible as discussed above. Not only does his claim that “justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger,”1 go against morality and assume the masses naive, but his attempt to prove that the unjust man is happier than the just man is insufficient and untrue.

Works Cited

1. Encarta World English Dictionary. 2004 Plato. The Republic. Translated by G. M. A. Grube. Revised by C. D. C. Reeve. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company. 1992. 382c

Plato is one of the popular and widely read philosophers in the world. His thoughts have greatly influenced the western political mindset and discourse. Born in Athens around 427 BCE Plato accomplished a lot by writing a different treatise that shaped the world’s political thoughts before his death around 347 BCE.

He was a student to a great philosopher, Socrates and a teacher to a famous philosopher scholar Aristotle, who also taught Alexander the great. He was greatly influenced by his teacher, Socrates who always remains the profound character in his works. In other words, his thoughts are greatly influenced by Socrates while on the other hand, he also influences Aristotle.

His thoughts are significant historically and intellectually in the western political and social infrastructure.One of the popular works of Plato is the Republic. It is popularly known as the Socratic dialogue, which Plato sought to address the issues of justice. Plato was more infuriated with the way Socrates was treated before the authority.

On the same pedestal, Plato is concerned about justice and the city-state. His main investigation is whether the just man is happier than the unjust in Athens. In his argument, Plato proposes a state of the philosopher kings. He asks the society to promote education among young boys and girls so that leading them becomes easier. In other words, Plato only trusts educated leaders.

He is very uncomfortable with uneducated leaders since they would not be in a position to handle the intricacies of leadership. He identifies different sets of “constitutions that promote injustice in the society, which include democracy, oligarchy, timocracy, and tyranny.” Among the four, Socrates through Plato argues that tyranny is the worst regime.

Tyrants are harsher and know no language of diplomacy, but rely on wrath to instill fear in order to rule. His classical thoughts until influences political decisions in the contemporary society, not only in the west but in other parts of the world as well.From the Republic, readers are exposed to some of the social injustices fuelled by poor leadership. Plato makes it apparent that justice has been frequently used as an instrument to lure people to follow certain leaders while on the other hand, they are duped and manipulated.

He relates justice as it is communicated to the person led to a bull that is well fed, not for its welfare, but for the benefit of the owner. It is blinded to believe that the good care is meant to take care of its welfare. However, the truth of the matter is that the owner gives it good feeding in readiness for slaughter. The owner wants it to be fat so that it can produce a greater amount of meat.

From this standpoint, it means that the feeding is nothing meant to benefit the bull, but for the grander interest of the owner who intends to slaughter it. The same way, when people believe in justice as pronounced by their leaders, they sell themselves cheap for manipulation and tyranny. Plato is against justice that accused and executed Socrates falsely. Through his thoughts, the world has been on the lookout to shun bad leadership and dictators of history.

Therefore, his arguments have been promoted in different spheres of life to promote virtue and ethics among the people living together.

In my opinion, Socrates” analysis of human nature is very true as it ultimately brings us his definition of justice. I agree with his theory of human nature but not his social-political theory. In order to understand Plato”s theory of human nature and his social-political theory, we must examine each one of them closely. Plato believed that no one is self-sufficient enough to live individually. Human beings are not created equally; some of us are born wiser then the rest and some of us are just born stronger.

For this reason, only the select few (which would be the guardians) among us are supposed to now what is best for the society and therefore becomes the ruler of everyone else. Our reasoning, spirit, and natural wants are all part of human nature. In book 1 of The Republic, Plato had several detailed discussions on the nature of justice with other speakers in a dialogue form. The process of discussion involves Socrates” questioning, arguing against various inadequate theories that attempts to define the true meaning of justice. From the rich old man Cephalus, we learned that justice involves telling the truth and repaying one”s debts.

However, Socrates points out that this definition of justice is inadequate because it cannot account for the instances of certain circumstances. The simple example of returning a borrowed weapon to an insane friend who demands the return of his weapon, would be an instance of following the rule but would not seem to be just. Then Polemarchus, Cephalus”s son attempts to define justice by proposing that justice means ” one should pay what is owed”. Not returning or refusing to return the borrowed weapon would clearly benefit one”s friend.

Socrates said that harming our nemies is only likely to make them even more unjust than they already are and cause them to make more unjust choices. After that, Thrasymachus came up with his own definition of justice which is nothing more than the advantage of the stronger; those in positions of power use law to decide what is right. The kind of justice practiced anywhere depends on the type of government they have in power. Socrates does not disagree with this view if the facts about the society are as says they are, however, he argues that sometimes rulers make mistakes.

In that case obedience to the law maybe leads to its own disadvantage, therefore Thrasymachus”s definition is also inadequate. Furthermore, Socrates says that the best ruler must always know how to rule. They should rule for the art of ruling, but not their own interest alone. Later, Glaucon suggests that human beings, given an opportunity to do injustice without being caught and therefore without suffering any punishment or loss of good reputation, would naturally choose a life of injustice, in order to maximize their own interests.

Glaucons efinition of justice is that it”s an equal contract, an approach between what is the best (doing injustice without paying the penalty) and the worse (suffering injustice without being able to avenge one self). Adieamantus narrows the discussion further by pointing out that to have a good reputation of justice is more important than justice is itself, whether or not that person really does have a good reputation of justice. In an attempt to provide an adequate, satisfying definition of justice, Socrates tries to make an analogy between the justice of individual human beings and of an entire society or city.

Since the crucial elements of justice may be easier to observe on the larger scale like a city than on a smaller scale like an individual. Socrates focuses on the perfect city, because the city will represent the human soul. Socrates began with a detailed analysis of the formation, structure, and organization of this ideal city. He argues that since individual human beings are not self-sufficient; no one working alone can acquire all of the necessities of life by themselves. In order to resolve this difficulty, we gather together into society for the mutual achievement of our common goals.

If each of us specializes in the practice of a specific art, we can work more efficiently. To make this ideal city healthy (opposite of a feverish city), Socrates states that the fundamental needs of human beings in the society are food, shelter, and clothes. From these fundamental needs, some additional requirements emerge that become necessary only because these needs are a part of the defense of the city against external attacks or internal disputes. Socrates proposed an additional class of citizens, the guardians which are responsible for guarding the city and keeping the city in order.

In order to fulfill their proper functions, the guardian then must have a philosophy that gives them the ability to distinguish the true and false, friend and foes, and to avoid turning against their own kind due to external influences. I think Socrates” social-political theory does follow his theory of human nature, he believed that an ideal state, embodying the highest and best capabilities of human social life, could really be achieved, if the right people are put in charge.

Since the key to the success of the whole is the wisdom of the rulers who make decisions for the entire city, Plato held hat the perfect society would occur only when kings become philosophers or philosophers are made kings. Guardians would need the virtue of courage to carry out their orders in the face of danger without regard for personal risk. The rest of the people in the city must follow its leaders instead of pursuing their private interests. Plato held that guardians should own no private property, should live and eat together at government expense, and should earn no salary greater than necessary to supply their most basic needs.

Under this regime, no one will have any corrupt motive for seeking a osition of leadership, and those who are chosen to be guardians will govern solely from a concern to seek the welfare of the state and what is best for all of its citizens. Education in the city is needed to promote the achievement of a proper balance of society. Physical training and musical performance along with basic intellectual development and the ability to get rid of human natural desire would be needed to fill this position as a guardian.

On Plato’s view, it is vital for a society to exercise strict control over the content of everything that children read, see, or hear. By excluding all the poets and actors, there will be only one stimulation allowed in the city which is education. The highest goal in all of education, he believed, is knowledge of the “Good”; that is, not merely an awareness of particular benefits and pleasures, but acquaintance with the actual form of “good” itself. Glaucon and Adeimantus pose some of the arguments against the kind of life style Socrates promotes. They question Guardians” happiness when they are separated from the general public.

Socrates said that the happiness of the guardian must be put aside for the sake of the city. However, he points out, the guardian class should be the happiest group under such a system. Socrates” definition of justice is when each of these classes performs its own role appropriately and does not try to take over the function of any other class, Plato believed that the entire city as a whole will operate smoothly, exhibiting the harmony that is justice. Then, a human being is only properly said to be just when the three souls perform their proper functions in harmony with each other, working in agreement for the good of the person as a whole.

In onclusion, it was found that the education of the guardians was necessary to keep the city running and with their education you must devote their lives to persue the common goals and good of the city. Once the individual and the other individuals in the society or city were working in complete harmony only then would the circle be complete and everything would run smoothly. However, in order to achieve this the guardian had to be trained right and raised accordingly. The people must cooperate. Everyone would reap the benefits from a perfect society.

It all started as I branched out of the dark inner core of the red bricked doll house that I had previously occupied. I was instantaneously burst by an almost blinding array of sunlight. I paused for a swift second, quickly in taking a deep breath as a faint wind crawled passed me, making me wince ever so slightly. I blinked as if trying to avoid hazard, and as if someone had turned on the retrospective flash on the universe, it all became clear. The majestic sun kissed the lower earth with its luminous rays of warmth, leaving the world beneath brighter than I had once thought.

Come to think of it actually, everything looked… different, but not in a gruesome or unfriendly way. The sky seemed glazed with a more indigo hue than what I have even seen before. The clouds were so light and vivid, they spread across the sky with their milky existence. The stillness of the water mass, creating a perfect mirror of its blue superior. Even the grass radiated a certain newness as it danced among the distinctive calm of the lilac trees.

Every color, every detail, seemed so vivid in my now once lacking world. My mind tossed with clarity as I stood on that maple wood porch. I leaned against the rail only hoping to take in half of the outside world’s newly exposed beauty. It was radiant. And as I stay there, I began to realize of how much I had missed in my blinded slumber. Oh, how much I resented my once naïve mindset that had once over passed the details I now have seen.

I felt betrayed, in a sort of uncanning way, I felt betrayed by my own once dismissive self. How could I have never noticed such beauty? Such color? Such vivid beauty? I had to regain myself. I didn’t want to miss any more than I once had. I wanted no more than to immerse myself in the world around me, even if just for a second. I strolled down the hard, wood steps, anxious to be surrounded by the lilac beauties that followed to the lake. The sky gave a great blow, and wind caressed past me, leaving shards of the green grass to flutter around my bare toes. I breathed in, the sweet aroma of the lilac beauties lipped my nostrils, with a slight scent of baked goods being carried from one of the nearby houses.

It was then that my wandering feet meet with the gentle pebbles of the sand beach, and to which my body softly sunk. I stay there, if not maybe a little too long, gazing at the abundance of fresh white and yellow lily pads that seemed strategically placed amongst the sky’s reflection. I sign, not if sadness or in guff, but in rest and realization. The world seemed so vivid and in reach of my fingertips. It was life in all of its euphoric glory, planted and left out for me to see.

The creak of a sliding door echoed past me, and as the patter of old paws swift past me, so does a chocolate brown doberman. With a pant of her tongue and a glimpse of her once young spirit, the brown dog cheerfully lounges into the once still reflection, causing ripples to cross the now fluttering lily pads. With a soft bark, the brown dog fanned her old paws against the quivering fish underneath the shimmering reflection.

The fade in her muzzle gave it away, but in that moment, I could see the once young heart come out in the brown dog, as she tried against the water’s surface. I’m not going to lie, she failed miserably at trying to capture one of those swift little blue gill. They all darted around her, teasingly, as she splashed the water’s edge. The sight brought with it a slight chuckle from behind me, and I raised my head to see a familiar face sitting on the edge of the wooden stairs. A smile slid itself across my lips in acknowledgement, the day’s unseen beauty and humor of the brown dog brought with it an unusual sense. A sense of serenity that had seemed to be a small fragment of our past.

A few heavy drips of water cross my path, and reraise my attention to the brown dog, still engrossed with not the fish, but the freedom of the water itself. I fluttered up from my sandy perch, gently splash a free crystal-like water drops toward the brown, only to than find myself in a game of chase in the shallows depths of the sky’s mirror. The breeze stirred past my playful stride from the young spirited dog, as I swerve around lightened lilac beauties that seemed too had drifted in the wind’s sweet arms.

My feet stumble, crashing me into the water’s shallows, a small laugh escapes my lips as the brown down splashes around me, seeming to cariole a lace of vivid colors around her. A light click is carried past my ears, and my attention draws back to the maple deck where an old camera lens has captured this one truly beautiful day.

In the myth of the cave Plato and Socrates discuss the theory of having prisoners trapped in a cave chained, in where they are shown figures of the world being cast by shadows. Until one of the prisoners is dragged out into the real world and he experiences a change in perspectives. After realizing how wrong his perspective of the world was, he decides to share this information with the rest of the prisoners that are still trapped in the darkness of the cave.

The other prisoners were so full of their own perspective, disbelieving that there was a world different than what they believed in, that they threatened to kill him if he spoke another word of nonsense. The prisoner returned to the outside world and left the other prisoners in the darkness of their ignorant ways. In “A Very old Man With Enormous Wing”, one day as Pelayo is disposing of crabs in the ocean, he notices an angel lying in the sand ill, he decides to take him home and keeps the old man caged in his chicken coop. fter a ew days Pelayo and his wife Elisanda start to noticed that their ill son is cured and healthy. They seek help from the priest who believes he is the devil since he dint speak God’s language. People came from far and close to see the old man with their own eyes. Elisanda saw a great opportunity and started to charge people admission to see the angel, making her and Pelayo wealthy that they build a new home for themselves. When the old man regained his health and strength he disappears never to be seen or heard from again.

The characters in “A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings”, by Gabriel Marquez relate to the characters in Plato’s “Myth of the Cave” because they are blinded by their perspective and there are similarities in the surroundings from both of the stories. Perspective; a particular evaluation of a situation or facts, especially from one person’s point of view, is both a positive and negative thing in both of the stories. In the beginning the prisoner had this perspective that he strongly believed that the shadows that he was being shown all his life were what the world consisted off. When he did get the chance to go into the real world, he was hesitant and had to be dragged out of the cave.

Once he stepped out of the darkness of the cave, he saw the light and came to the conclusion that all this time he was wrong for thinking that way. He tried to share his knowledge with the others that believed that the prisoners they were in was the world of sight. It is then, when he steps back into the darkness once more that he realizes how ignorant people could be, Socrates himself once said “That the unexamined life is not worth living”. Not bothering to question the chance or possibility of their being another world than the one they believe to be real.

In the case of Pelayo and Elisanda in the beginning their perspective about the old man was that he was gruesome looking and that he was dangerous. They planned on letting him regain his strength and send him of to sea with enough food and water to last him for three days. After seeing that there ill son became healthy since the old man had arrive, the thought of him not being such a negative thing crossed their mind. They ended up becoming egan to spread that the old man had powers that could cure others illness, that it led a leper, a blind man, and a paralytic to come visit the old man hoping for a miracle for the price of a nickel.

Leaving with a miracle they didn’t have in mind; the blind man didn’t recover his eye sight but he did grow three new teeth, the paralytic who didn’t get to walk but almost won the lottery, and finally the leper whose sores sprouted sunflowers. In the end Pelayo and Elisanda changed their perspective on the old man being dangerous and having powers that made miracles happened, but lso changed their financial status they went from being poor to becoming so wealthy they were able to build a big house that keep the crabs out.

The surroundings in both of the stories can relate to each other. In Platos story the prisoners are trapped and chained inside a cave, while the old man was kept locked away inside a chicken coop. in both stories the prisoner and the angel are surrounded by people that are too arrogant to accept the fact that there might Just be a world that’s different than what they believe in. If they were able to change their perspective and step outside of the darkness and into the light there whole life would have changed completely.

As it did for the prisoner who got his freedom into a whole new world he was amazed and curious about, while Pelayo and Elisanda not only became used to the old man towards the end, but also became very wealthy because of him. Both Plato’s and Marquez story’s share similarities from the characters to even the surroundings, from being trapped in a cave to a chicken coop. The way the prisoner saw how completely rong his perspective of the world was, that it was more than Just shadows being cast on a wall.

How Pelayo and Elisenda were once scared of the old man with enormous wings until they changed the way the saw the old man. That they even allowed their son to play inside the chicken coop with the angel, leading to both the old man and child to catch chicken pox together. Most importantly how Plato uses the darkness of the cave to represent the ignorance we could have if we don’t bother to question the world we live in, and Marquez uses the money to symbolize the root of all evil.

Rebecca L. Hunt Stickiest Point #1 1. THE CLAIM: “The man who’ll live correctly ought to allow his own appetites to get as large as possible and not restrain them. ” –Callicles, Gorgias 491e-492a. 2. CALLICLES’ ARGUMENT: Callicles claims that one should fill his appetite as much as possible. Socrates’ view on a happy life requires self mastery which means that your appetites and emotions are controlled and you mind manifests order. Also, Socrates’ ideal happy person would not do what is morally wrong.

Callicles argues that if you live a life like Socrates wants, you are living like a corpse or a stone. Callicles believes that “living pleasantly consists in this: having as much as possible flow in” (494b). To truly be happy, one needs to be constantly filling his appetite to the maximum capacity. This is not possible for many. The people who cannot fulfill their appetites are apparently embarrassed and “their own lack of courage leads them to praise self-control and justice” (492b).

According to Callicles, the rules created by the weak “enslave” the more naturally gifted men. For the ones born into power, Callicles believes that they should defiantly feel shameful that they let the talk of the people and the laws that rule them stop him from filling his appetite. 3. CRITICISM: Callicles is wrong to think that one should fill his appetite constantly and to the fullest. This may seem like a pleasant life but it is defiantly not a fulfilling one.

You need more goals and ambitions that are not just centered on what you want. . One could argue that everybody does not have appetites that are bad and selfish, but Callicles is defiantly referring to the self-indulgent ones. Callicles theory is similar to Darwin’s “survival of the fittest”. Both believe that the strongest creatures will rule and take over the weaker ones Callicles is also wrong in saying that the strong should do whatever they feel and the weak need to quit holding them back with rules.

He believes that the “weak” create these rules because they are jealous and embarrassed at their own incompetence. It is not that the weak are jealous; they just want order in their cities. If the strong had the ability to do whatever they feel then many people would suffer. Why would a city want a majority of its citizens feel inferior to just a handful of, what I would call, bullies? This includes people born into power. Just because they are rulers does not give them the right to not have any kind of ethics or morals.

They should actually do the opposite of what Callicles says and set an example for their people and lead good, self-disciplined lives. Smart people should have more of a right to rule the people, but only if they are trying to work for the greater good. They should not have ultimate power but I would rather a room full of smart, morally good men rule a city then selfish men constantly trying to always fulfill their own appetites.