Global Studies 2A:Comparative Political and Religious Systems
Friday, August 29, 2003
Andy Howe
8/27/03
Plato Reflection Paper
A real philosopher must obtain a valid education and has experienced a variety of different situations to become a true philosopher. Although it is possible for a man or woman in the younger years to attribute to philosophy, there is only so deep in which these younger people can fathom. This leads one to the concept that an older more matured individual would most likely and more commonly have the higher capacity and ability to acquire such philosophies.
Through the reading when Socrates engages in an argument with Cephalus in front of his son Polemarchus, who later participates with his short simple remarks, Cephalus and Socrates shuffle and show bits and pieces of insight concerning important rhetorical questions, and the argument shifts back and forth through each other’s perception on which path or explanation is closer to the truth. At one point in the argument, Cephalus removes himself from the situation and goes elsewhere. At this point, his son Polemarchus has now inherited Cephalus’ position in the highly advanced and in depth argument. Polemarchus, who considers himself an active in depth philosopher like his father Cephalus, has to take on this new challenge in his new situation. He is expected to have the same capacity and valid opinions and feedback in the situations and rhetorical question of the world.
When Socrates resumes the argument with Polemarchus, it is very clear through the beginnings that Polemarchus has become dumbfounded by Socrates philosophies. At this point in time, Polemarchus begins to consider this new point of view of, Socrates having the ability to out philosophize Polemarchus through the fact that Socrates has more experiences and a more variety of experiences of the world than Polemarchus could have ever had all because of the simple fact that Socrates has been living and encountering situations and question on the earth longer than Polemarchus has.
This brings up a very important question of why are the elderly considered, “out-dated.” People assume the elderly people’s mental capacity based on their physical appearance of having run out of steam. This physical exhaustion does not account for the mental activity and validity that still are being produced. In this frame of mind, the younger disrespect the elderly by taking advantage of them. The younger do no have as much of a respect and understanding of society as the elderly do. For example, when younger people hear the elderly speak they listen to them in a different mindset, as they would have otherwise had while listening to someone else, they listen to the elderly with a degree of pity. They pity the elderly because they assume they are tired and exhausted by life and its troubles. The assumption is that elderly people have been, “numbed,” by the world and are no longer a functioning part of society. Their role in life has been eliminated. Sadly, people do not give the elderly a chance to participate in society as much as they could.
Thursday, August 28, 2003
We still need to publish a couple of your essays online. We will work on this first thing in class. I got done correcting the first set of papers. I am still missing one from Aaron and another from Andy. Please pass them in tomarrow at morning meeting. Not a bad first set several people did not include quotes and that really hurt their grade. "If there is not proof you are a goof."
On a more serious side...
Maby the question you should be thinking about is what are the qualities of a good thinker? What advantages does age or youth give you? I know lots of very ignorant young people, and I also know a lot of really ignorant adults. What is the difference between them? So age does not really create an advantage when you are trying to develop your ability to understand. Both youth and old age have their advantages and disadvantages. What might these be?
Have a good night.
Sam
Global Studies 2A
8/26/03
The word philosophy means: the love and pursuit of wisdom. So, a philosopher is one who loves and pursues wisdom. Would a younger person be more capable of being a philosopher than an older one, or vice versa? Each of the two has the ability to become one.
The older one has most likely attained more knowledge, but that doesn’t make him any more fit to love and pursue wisdom. A philosopher is also someone who lives according to a philosophy. The older one might have the advantage, because his reasons for following that philosophy might be more advanced, simply because he has had more time to do so. Or he is just uninfluenced by elders, because he doesn’t have many elders to impress upon him.
The younger one could be influenced by his elders, which could change what his ideas could be. He might be restrained so that he doesn’t have the freedoms that the older one has to love and pursue wisdom. But, both younger and older also might not be heard as easily. Most people would say, what does he know, he’s younger and less knowledgeable. But all that knowledge does is increase the ability to prove a point. Or, what does that crazy old fool know. The older one could also be restricting himself, due to the fact that he has tricked himself into believing that he has learned all that there is to know and his/her way is the best. “Well, then,” said Cephalus, “I hand down the argument to you…” (The Republic of Plato, by Plato, 331 d). This shows how Cephalus is isn’t allowing himself to be free.
“…not old age, Socrates, but the character of the human being.” (The Republic of Plato, by Plato, 329 d) So, it seems that the real question should not be one of age, but of the abilities and freedoms to seek and discover wisdom. A person can’t gain or lose the ability to discover wisdom. All a person needs is a basic background of knowledge to work with, not a lifetime’s. The freedoms that you gain with age can be more helpful, but unless you are completely cut off from knowledge, you can’t lose the freedom to think, no matter what your age.
In conclusion, I think that age isn’t a key factor in who is more capable of being a philosopher. It is the one who has more ability to pursue wisdom and be the most open minded about it.
Tim
Philosophy is defined as “love of, or the search for, wisdom or knowledge,”(Webster). After reading the first book of The Republic, by Plato, and using my own wisdom, I’ve decided that old people are more capable of being philosophers, even though the words “old person” can be a person that is nineteen, which would then go partly against my argument, but maybe it is supposed to and it’s just a big mind game.
Old men have more time to search for wisdom or knowledge. Of course there are always exceptions, but if you have a young person in front of you and an old person in front of you, and they are the same person just at different times then it will always be the old man who is more capable of being a philosopher, because the older man is forced to learning more things because he physically can't do anything else. Plato also says this in the following quote: “For let me tell you, that the more the pleasures of the body fade away, the greater to me is the pleasure and charm of conversation,”(Republic, The). The more the old men talk especially with themselves the wiser they become because they can share wisdom with each other.
There is an example that I found where a young man, Socrates is seeking wisdom from an older man, Cephalus about life towards the end: “Is life harder towards the end, or what report do you give of it?,”(Republic, The). Not only is the older man more capable of becoming a philosopher but also he has more wisdom, which is a key part of being a philosopher.
In conclusion old men have more time to learn more wisdom, because they have lost the capability to do many other things that younger men are able to do.
Sources:
Webster: © 1988, 1991, 1994, 1996 Simon & Schuster, Inc.
© 1997-98 Accent Software International Ltd.
Fonts © 1997 Masterfont Ltd.
Mediaview Control © 1997 Inner City Software, Inc.
Stemming Engine © 1994 MCNC, Clearing House for Neworked Information Discovery and Retrieval.
Tobi
There are two philosophers to choose from, both qualified, but of different age. One is a young philosopher and the other is an old philosopher. How does one choose which one is better? They simply don�t. Both are more than capable of being a philosopher. The difference is that they have a different mindset on how they look at things. They each have a different way of thinking, coming up with theories, etc.
An older person views life with a depth of experience, which a younger person cannot match. This wealth of experience, which an older person accumulates over a lifetime, impacts on their logical reasoning. Logic is a method, which relies on the use of available facts to arrive at a conclusion. This conclusion though, is not a truth; it is a varying conclusion that is based on �lifetime� facts.
Logical reasoning is similar to an algebraic equation; in that there can be more than one answer. There is no concrete answer. For instance, in an algebraic equation there is a limited amount of information given, which resembles the facts that you need in logical reasoning. There is an x and a y and a numeral. The answers to what the x and y might be will be varying to what the numeral is. If the equation was x > 3 < y, one would base there plausible answers on this provided information. Obviously, there would be more than one answer for x and y.
The same thing goes for logical reasoning. Though, when an older person, using their own experiences in life, uses logical reasoning to unravel a varying conclusion, their answer is more restricting. This is so, because of what they know from previous life encounters. This is not to say that their logical conclusions are wrong at all, remembering that there is no truth in logic. In fact, their conclusions might be more logical than a younger person�s might be, seeing as though they have lived through so much more. Though, it also suggests that an older person might not be welcoming to a new idea or theory. We see and example of an old theory, that is brought to a new level in The Republic of Plato. In book one, Socrates discusses the meaning of justice with Cephalus and Polemarchus, and discovers that justice has more than one meaning. In the beginning, according to Polemarchus he believed that the wise Simonides theory of justice was correct.
��Tell me, you, the heir of the argument,� I said �what was it Simonides said about justice that you assert he said correctly?��
��That it is just to give to each what is owed,� he said. �In saying this he said a fine thing, at least in my opinion.�� (Bloom, page 7)
Polemarchus was wrong in assuming that this was the correct and �true� meaning for justice. Later on in the argument both him and Socrates come to learn that the meaning for Justice is more complicated than it seems. This excerpt shows how and old philosopher�s varying conclusions can be misleading because of their narrow views.
A younger person, though limited by lifetime experiences, is more willing to explore new ideas and theories. They on the other hand are not restricted to what they know in life, which gives them a freedom to work with. For both a younger and older person, there are many pros and cons. Though, if both two philosophers worked together, and shared their knowledge, they would be more successful. With the knowledge of life experiences that the older one has, and the new intriguing ideas that the younger person has, a lot would be accomplished. In The Republic of Plato Cephalus tells Socrates to have a taste of both worlds.
�Now do as I say: be with these young men, but come here regularly to us as to friends and your very own kin.� (Bloom, page 4)
Neither the old person nor young person is better. They both have their own qualities that work in an advantage and disadvantage to each other. Though, both an old philosopher and a young Philosopher are more capable of using their strength when working together as one.
