Global Studies 2A:Comparative Political and Religious Systems
Thursday, October 09, 2003
Comment on Sam's paper: I agree when you say that kids learn to be bad becuase that's how there parents act, but I don't think that it's instinct that's telling us to be that way. i would say that badness is a learned behavior and that's why the kids are seperated from their parents, so that they don't see that behavior. Some people are naturally born worse then other people and can be better then other people but kids aren't normally just born bad.
Wednesday, October 08, 2003
SS 5a
Erica Boudette
Why are the many bad?

Why are the many bad? If you ask the majority of people they would all agree that the world would be a much better place, if only so many people weren’t “bad”. If only people were better, more pleasant, more caring, and just generally concerned about doing the right thing, it would make things better for everything. So why are so many people bad, since it would obviously be better for everyone if they were good.
The first question to ask is what makes a person good? According to Socrates the best kind of man is “…A rememberer, a good learner, magnificent, charming, and a friend and kinsmen of truth, justice, courage, and moderation?” (487a) These characteristics are a lot like the ones that the people who became guardians need to have. This makes sense because the guardians have already been labeled as the “gold” people, the ones who are the best, who are suited to rule the perfect city, they are also, by nature, philosophers. In the earlier founding of the city we found out that in order to be named as one of the guardians kids went through rigorous testing to see if they had the right personality. Since all the kids were separated at birth and educated together it seems that Socrates believes that some people are simply born with a “good” personality. And since the guardians are the smallest most elite class, only a special few have this kind of personality, “…Such natures are few and born rarely among human beings.” (491b) So that is Socrates first explanation for why the many are bad, there simply aren’t enough good people born, and it is harder to be good then be bad.
But this isn’t the only reason that the many are bad because there are “….Many great sources of ruin for these few.” (491b) There is also the issue of the environment that kids are raised in. This may not be as much of an issue in the perfect city but in the real world it is. Socrates says that “….It is reasonable that the best nature comes off worse than an ordinary one from inappropriate rearing.” (491e) This is saying that kids become who they are based on the situation they grow up in. For example in the movie Gattaca, Anton grew up in a situation were he had the advantage and was told exactly the kind of person he could be, and he grew up to be that person. Kids who grow up in good situations where they are taught good ideals are more likely to grow up to be good people, just as kids who are brought up without these ideals, and are always facing bad situations, are more likely to grow up to be “bad” people. Socrates argument is basically that people are born with certain characteristics but even the best personalities can be changed by a bad situation. “Don’t you suppose, rather, that it’s a lusty one corrupted by it’s rearing, while a weak nature will never be the cause of great things, either good or bad?” (492a)
I would agree with Plato’s arguments, some people are just born good or bad, this has pretty much been proven genetically, but that most peoples’ personalities are dependent on the situation they grow up in. There is one important thing that I think Plato has let out however and that is the society that people live in, and what kind of behavior the society rewards. This is very different then the situation which someone is nutured in, everyday kids rebel against their parents, teachers and other leaders, refusing to accept the ideals which they have grown up with, but it is rare that people rebel against their whole society. Today a large portion of the world lives in the same kind of culture, one that rewards gaining personal wealth and power. Rich, famous powerful people are the kind of people we look up to and strive to be. Just look around at even the youngest kids and you’ll see it, I remember my youngest sister telling me when she was only three or four years old that she wanted to be “a spice girl” when she grew up. These are the kind people that get rewarded in our society, and they have been for hundreds of years, being a good person is rewarded in the way that we want anymore and I think that a lot of people don’t see the point in being good because it’s not going to help them at all. Adeimantus brings this up in the beginning of book 4, he says, about the guardians, that they are “[hardly going to be happy]” (419a), because they don’t have all the things people desire, land, big houses, silver, gold, and entertaining friends, etc. How can people be happy without all these things, so surely nobody would ever want to be a guardian? Most people don’t care about people who are truly good, they care about people with money. So not only does our society not reward “good” behavior we even condone it. Good people are taken advantage of, since many people are out to better themselves, it terms of money or power, they will do any number of things to get what they want. Socrates agrees with this, he knows that really good people are going to have it very tough. “I suppose kinsmen and fellow citizens will surely want to make use of him…for their own affairs.” (494b)
So, many people are bad because it’s harder to be good, and not many people can handle it, and because of the situation people grow up in. Also people are bad because that is the king of personality that gets you were most people want to be in our culture.

Global Studies 2A
October 6, 2003
Reflection question 6

Why are the many bad? What makes us all in some way or another a bad person? There are a few different ways to look at this question. You can break it down to show how the individual person is bad. But this just proves that were not perfect. If you look at the issue as a whole, you can see why we are bad.
When we look at all of the bad acts over the years, we can see a few different catalysts. “But if,” I said, “thanks to his good nature and his kinship to such speeches, one young man were to apprehend something and be turned and drawn toward philosophy, what do we suppose those will do who won’t do or any word they won’t say concerning him, so that he won’t be persuaded, and concerning the man who’s doing the persuading so that he won’t be able to persuade; and won’t they organize private plots and public trials?” (The Republic of Plato, By Plato: 494 d, e, page 174, Book 6) The above quote shows how material wealth is one reson that people are bad. In this instance, you have a rich, ignorant guardian that wants to become a philosopher. But the men who use him to gain material wealth, will do anything to keep him from doing becoming a philosopher and quite possibly justice.
People love to have luxuries and power. That is what we live for. When people are trying to get ahead in order to accumulate power or wealth, they are usually hurting someone in some way or another. If one person gets the job, ten others are sh*t out of luck. This isn’t nessesarally being bad but that person will sometimes go through drastic measures to gain even more wealth.
You also see the new generation being influenced by the older generation to keep practicing old, bad acts. If you look back, you can see the whole slavery thing in the states. After we initially started bringing slaves over from Africa, it got passed down. The children of tomorrow had know choice. Because, when you are influenced from the day you were born, into thinking that slaves are a tool. You most likely aren’t going to have the character to break this pattern.
When you look at the kind of people who would have had the character to do this, they would be the outcasts. Slavery was accepted in the states (mostly down south) in there culture. It wasn’t a question of doing wrong or right. The thought of “slavery is wrong” was like saying MTV is wrong today. I don’t think that there is anything wrong with MTV, and I really don’t think that it will be in history books in two hundred years. But that was probably how slavery was thought of years ago in the states.
“Therefore, say that not only being known is present in the things known as a consequence of the good, but also existence and being are in them besides as a result of it, although the good isn’t being but is still beyond being, exceeding it in dignity and power.” (The Republic of Plato, By Plato: 509 b, page 189, Book 6)
The above quote shows how another catalyst of people being bad, is just human nature. Humans naturally will be bad in order to get what they want. Parents will protect there children by any means nesesary. This is why Plato says that in the perfect city, the children should be separated from there parents at birth and be cared for by all of the parents. This would in tern, partly stop humans being bad, because there instinct tells them to.
In conclusion, I think that people are mainly bad in small ways. There little flaws in our character that make us bad and make bad actions. The things that I mentioned above are the things that set off these little flaws, which in tern, characterize us as bad. Human nature is probably the biggest reason for us to be bad. We can’t help it, it is just the way that humans are.

Tuesday, October 07, 2003
John Donahue
Why are the many bad?

Everyone will agree that it is a lot easier to misbehave than to act accordingly to the rules and regulations of a particular society. Why be good and work to earn something, when you can just snatch it without any work at all. There are standards that we live by today in our society that some people do not want to live by.

How you are brought up can determine the lifestyle you will lead. "Great crimes and pure evil come only from vigorous natures perverted by upbringing; a weak nature never does anything great, good or evil.”(line 491E) You can train anyone to do anything if you start with them a young age. Everyone starts out on a clean slate when you are born, and it is how you mold the mind of the youth that will determine how he or she reacts to the real world. Hitler started the Nazi Youth Organization to mold his soldiers at a young age. It was school where they would educate the men as well as they could, and then train them to be as vicious and savage

To refer back to the allegory of the ring, Plato states that a just man would act like the unjust man if he had no consequences. It so much easier to believe something than trying and find the truth. It takes no education to be bad, anyone can do it, but it takes work and effort to become at good at something. Certain people would rather slide through life doing sleazy things just to get the dollar instead going out and teaching yourself to become good at a certain trade.

Monday, October 06, 2003
Andy Howe
Plato: Why are the many bad?
According to book six in The Republic of Plato Socrates defines how and what causes and defines the corrupt or bad person, the many. According to Socrates, virtues also shared by the true philosophers such as courage and moderation have an awful affect on the soul, “each one of the elements we praised in that nature has a part in destroying the soul that has them in tearing it away from philosophy. I mean courage, moderation, and everything we went through.” (491 b). In order to rationalize this form of reasoning of seemingly contradiction Socrates adds “goods corrupt it (soul) and tear it away-beauty, wealth, strength of body, relatives who are powerful in a city, and everything akin to these.” (491 c) Meaning, that these virtues of moderation, courage and such are all good things until they become corrupt through this new concept of goods. Thus, this seemingly ambiguous concept of having a set of virtues be the bases of the true philosopher and having them also be the bases of the fake and corrupt person who steals the title of a philosopher makes perfect sense; if moderation and courage are practiced correctly then one is a good being, but if these virtues are skewed or meddled with then one becomes bad, through the corruption of their virtues.
Concerning the meddling of these virtues, the source most sensibly originates from the same place and time period in which the same virtues of true philosophers are obtained and put into practice correctly, one’s upbringing. During this crucial time in one’s life, if one were to receive a bad education they are most likely to do horrible things; evidently through Socrates “if the nature we set down for the philosopher chances on a suitable course of learning, it will necessarily grow and come to every kind of virtue; but if it isn’t sown, planted, and nourished in what’s suitable, it will come to all the opposite…” (492 a) Through this excerpt of dialogue, Socrates brings across the notion of education, parenting, and nourishment; all being closely related with respect to the quality of one’s virtues. It is stated that if the quality is questionable, then the ideal of producing a philosopher has failed miserably because consequently the results from one’s faulted upbringing is the opposite of that of a philosopher.
This brings up the issue of the ideal versus the reality. Concerning any city or state as a whole the ideal can never be holistically achieved, even though some might have come impressively close, but when the scale is brought down to the individual; the ideal is near impossible but can be achieved. Thus, there are few true philosophers in the city, the ideal, because the many have become corrupt along their path to success. These things are plainly evident through Socrates words “look at the corruptions of this nature (true philosopher’s) and see how it is destroyed in many, while a small number escape-just those whom they call not vicious but useless.” (490 e) Logically, through the reasoning of how a small number escape corruption along their journey to being a true philosopher there are few good citizens. Does this mean that everyone else in the city is bad? It depends on the intensity in which you are focusing on in a scale, for of course everyone in the city is not vicious and evil, yet being aside from evilness does not always provide the certificate of being a good citizen.
According to Socrates, not all citizens become evil to the extent of being opposite to a philosopher, fault due to the lack of their education’s influence and nature. Socrates raises an excellent point “a weak nature will never be the cause of great things either good or bad…” (491 e) The point presented here explores the idea that if ones education, upbringing, and nature are weak so they have never fully obtained any strong influencing bases on virtues and such, one has the inability to conduct impressively good or bad deeds. Many have this mediocre style of upbringing as apposed to highly influential ones, but through the eyes of Socrates, these people are still considered ‘bad.’ Thus, the many are bad.
The reason why the many are bad is evidently due to falters in the nature and upbringing of one’s life dealing with concepts such as virtues and values. When one “does not lose the keenness of his passionate love nor cease from it before he grasps the nature itself of each thing which is… knows and lives truly, is nourished…” (490 b) he becomes a true philosopher, something that only rarely is achieved, and thus the many are bad, through the eyes of Socrates.

Tobi Drori
"why are the many bad?"

We realize and expect that there will always be the many who are bad. However, does that answer the question of “why are the many bad?” Unfortunately, no it does not solve our problem with correcting the corrupt, nor does it lead us to the ultimate source of dishonesty. The fact that there are people who behave badly will never help us solve the root of the question, “why?”. One must realize that it is not the individual himself who chooses to act in such a way, but rather there is someone or something behind the individual leading him to a false image of what is truth and what is justice.
There are many sources that are responsible for why one does not function in a just and holy manner. All of these great sources of corruption stem from one form of immorality; the rearing and teaching of the many. Nonetheless, is it right to assume that the many are naturally bad, or is it something more, something deeper than how one acts. Are the educators responsible for making the many praise the image of injustice, rather than the truth of justice? Furthermore, are the educators corrupt as well as society, which does not know any better because of they way, in which it was taught? The answers to these questions all stem from the education that an individual is provided with and their resulting perception of the truth.
“Concerning every seed or thing that grows, whether from earth or animals,’ I said, ‘we know that the more vigorous it is, the more it is deficient in its own properties when it doesn’t get the food, climate, or place suitable to it.”(491 d). Here Plato is making an analogy with a seed, which symbolizes the individual in the society. Plato describes how that seed is grown to become the best crop if it is given the right “food, climate, or place” to grow. In a sense this seed resembles the individual because if nurtured in the correct form then both the individual and the seed are superior. However if both are not reared in the right system, and not given what they need to become just people from youth on, then neither will be of the “good,” but instead they will be bad, or rather corrupted. They will be tainted because they were not given the proper necessities. They were not given the truth.
Yes, the undeniable truth still resides in the fact that if one does not look past the images, or hypothesis then he is considered to be bad. He is bad because he is narrow-minded. One is unable to see or recognize the difference between the inadequate, which perhaps is the doings of injustice, and the ultimate truth, leading the soul to justice. Still, how can one know the distinction between the truth and what is taught to them if there is no one there to guide them. If all that the individual knows are the tarnished “blames and praises” that he has been taught, then that is what he will believe. Unfortunately, the one who is capable of guiding the individual is the one who is blamed as the useless and manipulative one for the city. Therefore these inauspicious souls are never shown the truth unless someone who is of the same “many” were to tell them the opposite of what they believe the philosophers to be.
These actions are ones that Socrates describes to Adeimantus. Socrates persuades Adeimantus to believe in the truth, which is that it is not the philosopher who is bad, but the fact that the society continues to believe that the philosopher can do nothing for the city because they do not understand the concepts of ruling a city. If it were possible to convince the society that this belief of the philosopher is an underestimation then they would be able to accept the philosopher as their ruler making their polis just. “But as for a man who to the limit of the possible is perfectly ‘likened’ to and ‘balanced’ with virtue, in deed and speech, and holds power in a city fit for him, they have never seen one or more.”(498 e- 499 a). However is it possible to ever have a perfect city where the ruler is the most qualified, a philosopher, and leads the city towards the truth making it as a whole, just? Or is this by chance impossible to acquire?
Why does Plato believe that a lover of wisdom and of knowledge will be best fit for leading the city? The answer is that they are the ones who are capable of grasping the truth rather than the image. “Since the philosophers are those who are able to grasp what is always the same in all respects, while those who are not able to do so but wander among what is many and varies in all ways are not philosophers, which should be the leaders of a city?” (484 b). The philosopher is one that will never look at a false statement and say that it is true because obviously it is not. The philosopher will instead cherish the truth. It must be understood that the reason for having the philosopher as the ruler is that he will not misguide the society towards the “image.”
However the society does not understand that to rule a city one must have the skill and knowledge, and the motivation to better the city by finding the truth. The ruler is not efficient if he is ruling only for the majority of the society. It is not about the wants and desires of the larger, louder part of the society. Ruling a city is not about the bribery and popularity the ruler will receive. This is corruption; it brings no truth to the polis. What good does it do society when our government focuses on popularity and who is the most clever at solving how to become the ruler, rather than the art of ruling?
Socrates uses an image of a ship, which represents the city to show how the sailors, or society, don’t realize how important the philosopher, or pilot, is. Without either ruling the city, or ship, then the many as a whole are not just. He says there is one “shipowner,” except that he is far from being capable of leading the ship, though he is strong and taller than everyone else. However this does not make the “shipowner” qualified to rule the ship if he has no knowledge of seamanship. Since this man is far from capable of directing a crew and ship the sailors take advantage of him. This is what happens in the city. If the ruler is given many honors, is treasured and glorified he will fall towards the corruption as well, and rule in the favor of the people who are controlling him. “And they are always crowded around the shipowner himself, begging and doing everything so that he’ll turn the rudder over to them.” (488 c). He will not rule in the best interest of the city because he will not know how too.
The sailors, who are representations of the society, will not believe that there is a true art form for piloting a ship. Nor will they believe that there is one person who can guide them because they are fixated on their control over the shipowner, the ruler, who is being controlled in an unjustified manner. “Besides this, they praise and call ‘skilled sailor,’ ‘pilot,’ and ‘knower of the hip’s business’ the man who is clever at figuring out how they will get the rule, either by persuading or by forcing the shipowner, while the man who is not of this sort they blame as useless.” (488 d). For all intents and purposes there is one true pilot who has the skill and knowledge and truth for sailing. He is not useless; it is that the sailors (society) that have been taught to believe that that one person is of no use for the ship (city). If this idea of philosophers, or pilots, was to vanish and the society did not think less of the philosopher, then the city would be guided towards the correct path.
Plato seems to think that by controlling an individual’s developmental environment, he can preclude the development of immoral individuals. However, in the final analysis, Plato admits that it is impossible to fully control an individual’s environment, which limits the likelihood that education can lead to a society, which is composed entirely of moral individuals.

Tim- I only meant "conquer" as in thats their main point in the chapter, and they are" all over "that subject.... not in a different way that you may be thinking. -Rache
Will Meyer
Why are the many bad?

When discussing why the many are bad we must look at an important human reaction. This reaction occurs when someone is given great power, and is worshiped at a higher level then the gods. This reaction is corruption.
Corruption is defined in the dictionary as, “someone who is evil, or depraved.” (Webster’s New World Dictionary and Thesaurus). Why is the reason that we must look at corruption when we talk about why the many are bad, you ask? Because corruption is the main reason why the many are bad in the first place. Corruption drives the human mind to do many bad things. For example, many world leaders today are corrupted by many different things. President George W. Bush got paid off by some of the major oil companies to keep clean air standards to a minimum.
Not only are the world leaders of today bad but also we are selves are bad according to human nature. For example, if someone came up to you and handed you a lot of money what would you do with it? Would you give it back? Or keep it for personal gain? Most people would simply say they would give it back if asked, but in actuality if they were given the opportunity they would take it. However, if you were raised and educated by someone who could teach you not to do such things, and prove to you why they cause corruption, then you could decline the money easily. In other words, you cannot avoid corruption without the teachings of philosophy. Plato thought that the same applied for ancient Greece.
This first quote comes on page 174 when Socrates is discussing what would happen to a young man if he were offered great power. “Wont he be overflowing with unbound hope, believing he will be contempt to mind the business of both Greeks and barbarians, and wont he, as a result, exalt himself to the heights, mindlessly full of pretension and empty conceit?” (494c-494d). Basically Socrates is saying that with power young people in particular are prone to be driven from the path of good, and instead go down the dark road to evil and corruption.
However, the many become bad not only for the reason of corruption. They also could become bad by their upbringing. For example, “Many gathered together sit down in assemblies, courts, theaters, army camps, or any other common meeting of a multitude, and, with a great deal of uproar, blame some of the things said or done, and praise others, both in excess, shouting and clapping; and, besides the rocks and very place surrounding them echo and redouble the uproar of blame and praise. Now in such circumstances, as the old saying goes, what do you suppose is the state of a young mans heart? Or what kind of private education will hold out for him.”(492b-c). This proves my above point that many people are bad because of their upbringing. They hear things that they think are right just because their parents told them that it was right. For example, if you live in a house where people believe that all republicans are bad, then you will act accordingly and also believe that all republicans are bad. This is of course not true, there are a lot of republicans that are good however, if you were brought up that way you would think differently. Also this proves that in such a situation, as described above, any education that the things that were being said are wrong would be swept out the door, and considered right by a young person who was hearing the discussion.
A cartoon example of children behaving on their parents actions are the Simpsons. Bart Simpson acts the way he does because he looks up to his dad as a role model, like all sons do. However, as we all know Homer is not the best role model for Bart. This proves that the many are bad because they all fallow in their parent’s footsteps, and their parents fallowed in their parents footsteps. So you can see that it is a vicious cycle that will repeat itself over and over again. There are some instances where people listen to their elders and it has a good effect on the youth.
“With great power, comes great responsibility.” This is a quote from Spider man the movie. It is important to look at this quote because, it was given to a youth by someone who was very old and wise. In the world that we live in today people take the advice of the old for granted. No one listens to the old anymore. However this movie is proof that we should because, Spider Man goes on to destroy the enemy always remembering those words.

Tim Aikey
global studies
Why are the many bad?

The word “bad” according to Merriam-Webster is “something that is bad.”, also “an evil or unhappy state”(Merriam-Webster). To be bad I think is an easier task then being good. Generally when your being good more is expected of you then when your being bad. In this way Plato also agrees with me, “For Surely bad is more opposed to good than to not-good”(The Republic of Plato, Line 491 d). Here Plato is saying that something not-good is more appealing then something that is good.

The easy way out or just the easy way is generally the bad or evil way of doing things. For example, if someone wants to become the president of the United States he can in theory achieve this in two different ways. One way you can do it is by going state to state talking to people going to rallies and advertising in the media. This way is the good way to achieve presidency. On the other hand you can do the evil thing, and give yourself extra votes and paying people off. In this example if you have the money you can easily become president, and it is almost guaranteed that you will become president if you pay people off to vote for you and give yourself extra votes. If you want to win the presidency the good way then it requires a lot of effort. As I have explained it is very easy to do whatever you want if you take the bad or evil route.

I think that it is in human nature that we always want to take the easiest way to a problem, after all, who wants to take the long route, everyone it seems is interested in the fastest, high tech quick, easy, simple equipment. For example for some people a phone line connection isn’t fast enough, so they get some kind of cable connection or T1. This is basically why I think so many people are bad. “It has been truly said that good people are known by the fewness and bad people by the multiplicity”(EarthLight Magazine)

Works cited:
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary copyright © 2002 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated

The Republic of Plato, translated by Allan Bloom.

EarthLight Magazine; We The People Vs The Business Corporations -- Who Is The Sovereign?;by James F. Berry;

Rachel, I was wondering what you mean when you say they CONQUER, in the passage: "In Plato’s Republic (Book 6) they conquer the issue that philosophers are the ones who have the knowledge."
Why are the many bad?
-Rachel Smith

“Since philosophers are those who are able to grasp what is always the same in all respects, while those who are not able to do so but wander among what is many and varies in all ways are not philosophers, which should be the leaders of a city?” –Plato (484 b)
The word and term philosopher means “lover of truth or wisdom.” In Plato’s Republic (Book 6) they conquer the issue that philosophers are the ones who have the knowledge, and in which some of them are useless, while the other ones are vicious. So this means, we are all philosophers in our own way, but most of us (in the just city) are useless. However, the ones who are left of being “good” are now still considered useless because society has changed their ways and standards to a correct ideal.
Plato brings up the story of an owner of a ship who has a lack of hearing, and can’t see very well. His sailors argue about who should take over, although none of them know how to navigate. Whoever did become in charge, would be called the “captain”, or “ship leader” but everyone else would be useless. So what does this story prove? Nobody has an idea or care about the real knowledge that you must have. They use the unjust tricks to get ahead of everyone else. Socrates then points out that it takes one ruler- philosopher, who is educated in the right way to help make things right, but I don’t agree. I think it takes a group of people, a group of educated rulers to run things.
They also thing that all philosophers strive on the truth, and have no real concern about money and pleasure. But Plato thinks the just man loves truth, but also desires pleasure. I’m sure people want the real truth, but we are all greedy for the pleasure of being unjust. They say that reason dominates every unjust part, but not everyone can give you a reason for things that they do. People just aren’t like that. Although, there is obviously a reason for everything, people don’t necessarily think before doing. Thus, we have many “bad” people in the society. The philosophers, Plato quotes are supposed to “love with that learning which discloses to them something of the being that is always and does not wander about, driven by generation and decay.” (485 b)
Plato continues on saying that the most important subject of a Philosopher is the “Form of the Good.” This form takes upon the responsibility of all knowledge and truth. However Socrates explains that this form cannot also be what exactly IS the good. The Good is the existence of Forms and “The sun not only provides what is seen with the power of being seen, but also with generation, growth, and nourishment although it itself isn’t generation.” (509 b)
Although there is no real answer to the question of “Why are people bad?” I think the answer strongly lies on the way society is run today. Most people in the world take everything for granted. In some lives, people are pretty much handed and spoon-fed everything to them, and never have to work or worry about a thing. People want to be truthful and justful, but there is a simple little pleasure of being greedy, and having these “pleasures” given to you, no matter how you got them. In general, people care more about themselves, then trying to run a “Just city.” Some people live in a illusion, and have no beliefs, and so they give up on faith, and give up on doing any good for the world. Whose fault is it exactly? There are all different cases. This “Form of Good” is supposed to be responsible for all knowledge, but if this one form, and this one ruler of philosophy is true, then isn’t that asking us to not take responsibility for ourselves and let someone else be in charge? I think people choose to be bad, because this world and society we live in, gives us everything we need, and thus, we don’t think about the consequences all the time. We are totally pampered. (By the way, I’m talking in general about middle class)We take clothes, blankets, and food for granted, because it is so easy for us to just walk into a store, put our hand in our pockets, pull out money, and walk away. It’s like a robotic thing for us. It’s natural.
A philosopher is supposed to love truth. Well, as quotable as this sounds, some people just can’t handle the truth.

Powered by Blogger