HUMS 2000 12/09/2011

Reason and Revelation

Exam: Short answer describe e! terms "t!#icall! latin and $ree %& Short answer ex#lain what's $oin$ on in a #artic(lar #assa$e Essa! to#ic will be $iven ahead o) time *osmos com#letel! connected and com#lete whole Each thin$ is b! nat(re s(ited to a tas + each thin$ has a #lace in the (niverse& ,his #lace is #re-a##ointed )or it&

M!thos vs& .o$os M!thical thin in$ re/(ires a )i$(re "be it a #erson or a text% which ex#lains how !o( thin & 0h!1 2eca(se he said so& .o$os a wa! o) thin in$ which exists within #hiloso#h!& 0h!1 2eca(se it can be #roven based on a #remise that ever!one can a$ree on+ and be ded(ced and in)erred )rom these (niversal #remises& 3n!one in #rinci#le+ o) so(nd mind+ can consent to a #hiloso#hical #ro#osition #hiloso#h! is democratic and (niversal& However+ #hiloso#hical thin in$ is o#en to criticism and o#en ended thin in$& 4hiloso#h! can be a so(rce o) )reedom+ however&

How is it that we can now the (niverse1 0h! is it that the lo$os in o(r mind re)lects or corres#onds to realit!1 0h! is the order accessible to (s1 ,he )(ndamental ass(m#tion o) #hiloso#hers is that the (niverse is not alien to (s+ it has a connection to (s+ and so+ we can now it& 3ll thin$s were made thro($h o(r mind& ,here)ore the #rinci#les o) all thin$s are the same as the #rinci#les in o(r mind 5(r minds are re)lections o) a mind that did create all thin$s+ and that's wh! there is an a))init! between o(r minds and ob6ects& 17/09/2011 8n 999 2*+ Socrates went aro(nd c(rro#tin$ the !o(th with all sorts o) #hiloso#hical /(estions Man! #eo#le became his st(dents 5)ten these in/(iries revealed that the rhetoricians and so#hists ex#osed themselves as nowin$ nothin$+ and (nable to 6(sti)! their #ositions ,ho($h Socrates didn't intend to riddic(le+ b(t that's how it came o)) to his )ollowers 0hen he as ed a /(estion+ a sim#le answer was never eno($h :2eca(se it was how it was done in the #ast; was not $ood eno($h 0hen he as ed to 6(sti)! their o#inions+ the! o)ten co(ld not+ loo in$ )oolish in )ront o) ther

#eers& 8t also became a##arent that Socrates had more /(estions than answers+ and his (nrelentin$ /(estions tended to brea down the cit! bric b! bric His /(estions made him seem as someone c(rr#ot and dan$ero(s+ and (nderminin$ the order o) the cit! 4lato wants (s to be aware that #hiloso#h! is dan$ero(s+ beca(se it o##oses an!thin$ limited or )inite+ which incl(des the cit! wihto(t which there is no li)e&&& Man! o) the tentions in 3thens had been (nder$ro(nd ,his is what constit(ted the threat o) the cit! Socrates created no tensions+ b(t he did in)lame them Socrates o)ten s#ea s o) eros s(ch as the eros o) the so(l& <(st as the bod! see s wholeness+ so does the so(l& 8n dialectic+ Socrates bro($ht )orth little s#eeches+ the s#eeches o) #hiloso#h!+ 6(st as the bod! brin$s )orth babies& 8t's eros has the same h(nt )or satis)action and #leas(re as does the bod! Sa!s that there is a #arallell to the bod! and the so(l 0e search )or what is bea(ti)(l and $ood+ and when we )ind it+ want it to be )orever =eath+ however+ ta es awa! s(ch thin$s 0e overcome mortalit! o) the bod! b! #rod(cin$ babies+ and the mortalit! o) the so(l is overcome b! s#eeches 3(thorities o) the cit!+ saw Socrates as a threat to the cit!+ "wo(nded #ride1% Socrates o(t o) s!nc )rom his )ellow citi>ens+ a c(rr#tor o) the cit!+ a 'holier than tho(' #erson& 3 cit! m(st ass(re law and 6(stice+ show homa$e to the $ods that #rotect the cit!+ and the cit! concerns itsel) b! enco(ra$in$ )reedom+ and the love o) hono(r+ thin$s im#ortant to the )(cntion o) the cit! 3 tension between the cit! and #hiloso#her+ that the #hiloso#her tells noble lies+ ens(rin$ that the cit! is stable so that the! can thin within it& 5n the o(tside+ the #hiloso#her s#ea s )or the cit!+ b(t on the inside is the search )or nowled$e and the #ro$ression o) their own a$enda& "?reemasons1% Socrates has a ind o) 'esoteric' teachin$+ beca(se he reali>es how im#ortant #hiloso#h! is+ b(t it can have a terrible corr(#tin$ existence+ beca(se the love o) wisdom can never be act(ali>ed& Socrates hides thin$s& ,he wisdom he teaches t(rns o(t to be that !o( can #roceed toward wisdom+ !o( can $et #ieces o) it+ b(t !o( can never com#letel! $ras# ,r(th& ,here are the wise and (nwise+ and nothin$ is $oin$ to chan$e it& ?or Socrates+ what is all im#ortant is to )ind #eace and o#enness so that he can #hiloso#hi>e& 2(t all he has is the cit!& Socrates also doesn't thin he is wise& ?rom the #ers#ective o) the cit! he was seen as stran$e+ s(bversive& ,he cit! needs to #rovide law+ 6(stice+ #rotection+ homa$e to the $ods ,he #hiloso#her cannot be an accom#lice+ s#o es#erson o) the cit!+ witho(t havin$ to com#ete with the cit!+ and #artic(larl! those #eo#le who have ta en on a(thoritative roles in the cit!+ and see Socrates as a threat+ and a madman& ,he relationshi# with the cit! is com#licated& Socrates also needs to (se rhetoric to s(##ort his ar$(ments+ which ma es him ironic&&&and that

#isses #eo#le o))+ beca(se we want sincerit!& 2eca(se o) the ris to the #hiloso#her and the ris to the cit!+ he does not tell the com#lete tr(th ?(ndamental distinction between the man! and the one 4hiloso#her needs the cit! beca(se o) the re/(irements o) ever!da! li)e+ and #eo#le who he can teach and mo(ld& 4lato in all o) his 2@ dialo$(es does not #ortra! Socrates tal in$ with another #hiloso#her& Role is reserved to the ver! )ew Rival to reli$ion beca(se it re#laces belie)s with nowled$e

Socrates and E(the#hro "s#1% Socrates has been char$ed with c(ro#tin$ the !o(n$+ and not believin$ in the cit!'s $ods+ and ma in$ (# his own ones& E(th!#hro claims he has some ind o) nowled$e& 8t ma es one sense that E co(ld be an acc(ser o) Socrates+ beca(se he himsel) is not )amo(s )or his #iet!& ?or E+ onl! revelation reveals h(mans as the! tr(l! are& 0itho(t revealed nowled$e+ li)e is incom#lete E is abo(t A0!rs old+ brin$in$ a char$e a$ainst his )ather abo(t an event that too #lace A!rs earrlier& 5ne o) his servants had become dr(n and illed a slave& His )ather had him bo(nd+ and he as ne$lected and died& E had onl! recentl! become a seer+ and had all the enth(siasm o) a convert& He $ives no sense that he has an! sense o) #olitics 5bsessed/#reocc(#ied with the im#iet! o) illin$+ so m(ch so that he's ta in$ his )ather to co(rt& E doesn't now that Socrates has been char$ed& E is a Bealo(s #erson+ and he seems (ns(re o) what exactl! he is #rosec(tin$ his )ather )or& He ma! have had an entirel! #ersonal motive )or his actions He claims to now somethin$+ which enables him to $o a$ainst certain thin$s&&&&li e $oin$ a$ainst his )ather& Socrates #ro#oses to become E's st(dent& Socrates is made visible+ remainin$ still+ immobile+ whereas E is ver! mobile+ and sa!s that his words are the 'stat(e o) =eadal(s'& Socrates com#ares E to 4rote(s who contin(all! chan$es his sha#e& Socrates is driven b! a #ractical intent a demonstration o) #hiloso#h! at wor & 3 love o) wisdom "zetesus%+ o) searchin$&&&& Unwillin$ to acce#t sol(tions that #rod(ce #olitical a$itation Socrates attem#ts to (se #hiloso#h! to order E's so(l& Socrates in action is comin$ (# a$ainst these !o(n$ a$itators who co(ld ver! easil! s(bvert the cit!+ and he attem#ts to silence them+ o)ten with con)(sion .i)e is in constant motion Section A= 10-11 5))ers a de)inition o) #iet! )ollowin$ the law+ immitatin$ the $ods& Be(s who #(nished his $(it! )ather Socrates $oes what 8 want is one idea o) #iet!+ not exam#les and illistrations+ he wants an ar$(ment+ a rational acco(nt o) what #iet! is& 0ants the essence o) #iet!

0hat ma es a thin$ #io(s1 E is ver! literal+ so )or him+ the above is tr(e #iet!& 8n #latonic dialo$(es+ we are o)ten as ed whether Socrates is char$ed correctl! in corr(#tin$ the !o(n$&&&well+ he does& Revelation relies on h(man 6(d$ement+ insi$ht+ and so on&&&& Cod's commandments+ there is disa$reement between $od's commandments& 4hiloso#h! is the onl! alternative to reveelation& 0e can ac/(ire nowled$e o) the $ood thro($h reason alone Socrates ,he #io(s believer thin s that #hiloso#h! is vicio(s ,he #hiloso#her sa!s that the reli$io(s believer chooses to con)orm to the $ods in blind decision& Socrates draws E into a disc(ssion abo(t #iet! in a #hiloso#hical manner to tr! and #rove to him otherwise& Socrates $oes on to correct E's o#inion+ ac nowled$es that #iet! con)licts with )ilial #iet!+ and this is wh! revelation has to be s(#er-seeded with #hiloso#h! 3ll #iet! can be meas(red and corrected thro($h nowled$e E's ex#ectations are an ex#ression o) his sel)ishness and sel) interest& ,r(e #iet! lies in not )ollowin$ the $ods+ b(t sittin$ in /(iet contem#lation and (nderstandin$1 Ma!be #hiloso#hi>in$ is the tr(est )orm o) #iet!& 0hat is dear to the $ods seems arbitrar! to h(mans ,he action that he's embar ed (#on is im#io(s& <(stice is not merel! en)orcin$ the law+ )ollowin$ the $ods& 4iet! is not sim#l! ex#ectin$ the love and care o) the $ods )or o(r (se&&& 5ri$in o) the $ood thin$s whether thin$s are $ood and hol! beca(se the! are commanded b! the $ods+ or the! are hol! and $ood beca(se the! are commanded1 ,here is an order which onl! #hiloso#h! can #rovide+ can let (s now what is hi$her& 0hat does #iet! demand1 ,he obli$ation o) #er(sin$ 6(stice has ex#anded+ and the #(rs(it o) #iet! has been absorbed into 6(stice& 8n E he shows how m(ch Socrates reall! does corr(#t the !o(n$ Socrates will claim he did not corr(#t the !o(n$+ b(t the !o(n$ are corr(#ted b! the cit! b! leavin$ citi>ens too low+ or too hi$h with no need )or laws and constit(tions ,he 6(d$ement that !o( need to develo# to be a $ood citi>en is within !o(rsel)+ and not within the r(les or the $ods& =iscover this thro($h the lan$(a$e o) #hiloso#h!+ and discover $ood )rom bad+ tr(th )rom (ntr(th&

4it! D ortho#rax! 3risto#hanes' *lo(ds 4hidi##iddes nows Socrates 3rro$ant son who $ambles ?ather wants to $o to Socrates' thin -tan + and his st(dents be$in to reveal thin$s& Stre#siddies 6oins into the art o) $eomoetr! and astronom!

Socrates above+ m(st have air! tho($hts to discover thin$s how the! are& *lo(ds are $oddesses who can ta e on an! a##earance and mor#h ,he! woshi# the vortex who is in$ 4leased that there are no costs to crime1 Stre#sidies is ca#tivated Be(s has been ex#elled b! Eortex ,he clo(ds bribe the 6(d$es brin$in$ lawlessness to ever!thin$ descent into shamelessness 8n the last violation o) the mother+ who is beaten+ Socrates had a thin er! in 3risto#hanes+ a #erson who had $reat concern abo(t Socrates ,here was a view that Socrates ta($ht somethin$ occ(lt+ and somehow en$a$ed 'cathonic' )orces+ dee# dar )orces+ which he somehow was able to em#lo! and (se& ,he thin er! is shown to be an extremist $ro(# o) #a$anists& 4eo#le thin that Socrates is (# to ma$ic+ and (# to im#io(s means to live a li)e o) com#letel sel) ind(l$ence& 8n this thin er!+ these )orces that Socrates live b!+ are all e))orts to overcome law+ re$(lation+ moral restraint+ #olitical order ,his is the main theme o) the *lo(ds 8) !o( are $oin$ to loo )or reli$io(s li)e+ it becomes con)(sin$ whether this li)e #raises the void+ the vortex+ in)inite #ower&&&how does that clic with the notion o) a well-ordered so(l that is #art o) a lar$er cosmos1 Microcosm o) the cosmos1 ,hat is maintained and ed(cated thro($h the virt(es& ,he #oint o) time is where 3thens is $ettin$ bored&&&& 3thens is wantin$ to stir the #ot+ brea o(tside the barriers o) convention+ to ind(l$e vices more& ,!rann! is wanted almost& ,he! wanted to ex#lore the dee#est m!steries that con6oined violence and radical trancendance and dee# disorder&&&& Socrates and 3ristotle both have to )i$ht this #henomenon ?or the ancient $ree s+ the bi$ #roblem was the emer$ence o) t!rants+ who wanted to ass(me that there is no cosmic order& 0e can recreate the conditions o) realit! and the so(l+ what constit(tes ha##iness+ ,his #la! #rovides a startlin$ insi$ht into what is the boredom in 3thens+ the boredom with orthodox! and tradition Ex#ressed thro($h a love o) t!rann! and a re$ection o) the cosmic order

MF G5,ES 5G EU,HF4HR5 E(th!#hro and Socrates meet in )ront o) the 'a$ora'+ the central mar et#lace o) 3thens+ in )ront o) what seems to be a co(rtho(se o) sorts& ,he! $et to tal in$+ and E learns that Socrates has been char$ed with corr(#tin$ the !o(n$+ and Socrates learns that E has )iled a case a$ainst his )ather )or the "accidental% m(rder "m(rder b! ne$lect% o) a slave+ who in t(rn is a m(rderer himsel)+ havin$ illed a servant in the ho(sehold& E(thr!#hro seems to see himsel) and Socrates in the same level 2oth in recei#t o) divine int(ition+ and both at the ridic(le o) the #(blic

E is ver! adamant on his #osition+ thin in$ that his '#io(s 6(stice' m(st be carried o(t re$ardless o) whom the o))ender is ,he sin is all the worse when it's !o(r own )amil!& He seems to thin that he is #(ri)!in$ himsel) b! #rosec(tin$ his )ather& Socrates comes to the concl(sion that beca(se E is $oin$ so )ar as to #rosec(te his )ather+ then his nowled$e o) '#iet!'+ and what it means to be #io(s+ m(st tr(l! be a $ood and acc(rate one E a$rees sa!in$: :8 sho(ld be o) no (se+ Socrates+ and E(th!#hro wo(ld not be s(#erior to the ma6orit! o) men i) 8 did not have acc(rate nowled$e o) all s(ch thin$s; Socrates wants to become his #(#il to learn what #iet! is ,hin s that b! learnin$ the tr(e de)inition o) #iet!+ it will hel# him win his own case wherein he is acc(sed o) creatin$ his own $ods 3$ain+ a demonstration o) how Socrates does not consider himsel) wise 8n this case+ (nli e other dialo$(es+ he seems $en(inel! willin$ to listen to E+ and to learn what the other man has to sa! he is not testin$ o(t one o) his own ar$(ments/ideas which he has alread! tho($ht o(t in advance Sincerit! in his s#ea in$ :,ell me then+ what is the #io(s and what the im#io(s+ do !o( sa!1;

E(th!#hro's =e)inition o) 4iet! ,o #rosec(te the wron$doer+ des#ite the )act that said wron$doer ma! be related to !o( ,o not #rosec(te is im#io(s Uses the exam#le o) Be(s+ the hi$hest o) $ods+ who illed his )ather as a )orm o) #(nishment Socrates' Examination Seems to disre$ard E's exam#le o) Be(s+ beca(se one cannot now the $ods 3s s his /(estion a$ain+ beca(se E's answer was limited onl! to his own sit(ation :&&&!o( did not teach me ade/(atel! when 8 as ed !o( what the #io(s was+ b(t !o( told me what !o( are doin$ now+ in #rosec(tin$ !o(r )ather )or m(rder+ is #io(s&; Ma es the #oint that there are di))erent inds o) #io(s actions that are not ta en into acco(nt in E's )irst de)inition Geeds a broader+ more (niversal de)inition o) #iet!+ one not limited+ and 6(sti)!in$ onl! one #erson's actions Sa!s that he didn't as E what one or two #io(s actions are+ b(t the form which ma es all #io(s actions #io(s+ and all im#io(s actions im#io(s E(thr!#hro's Second =e)inition 0hat is dear to the $ods is #io(s+ what is not+ is im#io(s Socrates' Second Examination Sa!s that E has now answered in the wa! that he wanted "in a more (niversal wa!%+ b(t is (ns(re o) whether his words are tr(e or not& E m(st now 6(sti)! his de)inition :&&&show me that what !o( sa! is tr(e&; Ma es the #oint that the Cod's are at odds with each other& 8) men were at odds with one another on sa! the s(b6ect o) n(mbers "which n(mber is bi$$er%+ the! wo(ld co(nt to see which was bi$$er+ and so the #roblem will be solved

Similarl!+ i) men di))ered abo(t which was bi$$er+ and which was smaller+ the! wo(ld resort to meas(rement to $ive them an answer 8) two men were ar$(in$ abo(t which thin$ was heavier+ the! wo(ld resort to wei$hin$ to $ive them the tr(e answer ,he above to#ics can all be resolved with somethin$ (niversal+ somethin$ that cannot be ar$(ed with& 2(t what abo(t somethin$ more s(b6ective s(ch as bea(t! vs& ($l!1 <(st vs& (n6(st1 Cood vs& 2ad1 Since 'little' #roblems s(ch as heav! vs& li$ht can be solved with somethin$ (niversal+ the $ods can't #ossibl! be )i$htin$ abo(t that :&&&)or the! wo(ld not be at odds with one another (nless the! di))ered abo(t these s(b6ects+ wo(ld the!1; ,here)ore+ the $ods m(st be di))erin$ over s(b6ective thin$s s(ch as bea(t! vs& ($l!& 0hat is seen as bea(ti)(l to one+ ma! be seen as ($l! to another ,here)ore+ what is #iet! to one $od ma! be seen as im#io(s b! another :,he same thin$s then are loved b! the $ods and hated b! the $ods+ and wo(ld be both $odloved and $od-hated&&&3nd the same thin$s wo(ld be both #io(s and im#io(s accordin$ to this ar$(ment; E concedes to this #oint ,h(s+ 'doin$ what is dear to the $ods' cannot be #iet!+ beca(se what is dear to one $od+ ma! not be to another& E(th!#hro res#onds b! sa!in$ that that $ods wo(ldn't disa$ree with one another on the matter o) (n6(st illin$& :&&&that whoever has illed an!one (n6(stl! sho(ld #a! the #enalt!&; Socrates mentions that a iller wo(ld not thin his actions (n6(st+ and wo(ld tr! to avoid #(nishment/tr!in$ to #a! the #enalt! )or his actions ,here is dis#(te then in man not between #(nishin$ the wron$doer+ :&&&b(t as to who the wron$doer is+ what he did+ and when;& Cods do the same thin$ while one mi$ht sa! one has wron$ed the other+ the other sa!s that it was done 6(stl!& Socrates as s )or #roo) 0hat #roo) does E have to consider that he is correct on the matter o) his laws(it a$ainst his )ather1 Socrates' $oes on to #ost(late that #erha#s+ what all $ods love is consider to be #io(s+ and what all $ods hate is considered im#io(s+ and what some love and others hate "or vice versa%+ is neither #io(s nor im#io(s& "9-c% E a$rees& 0ords cannot be ta en at their )ace val(e+ so the! m(st examine the above statement to determine whether or not it is tr(e&

0hat all Cods .ove is 4io(s+ 0hat 3ll Cods Hate is 8m#io(s An Examination 8s the #io(s bein$ loved b! the $ods beca(se it is #io(s+ or is it #io(s because it is bein$ loved b! the $ods1 8n other words+ are thin$s #io(s )rom their own virt(e+ or are the! #io(s beca(se the $ods

deemed it to be1 ,he two statements are di))erent in the same sense that 'led' is di))erent )rom 'leadin$' and 'carried' is di))erent )rom 'carr!in$'+ and 'seen' is di))erent )rom 'seein$'& ,here)ore there is somethin$ 'loved' and somethin$ 'lovin$'& ,he thin$ bein$ led is led beca(se it is led+ and not )or an! other reason be!ond that ,he thin$ bein$ seen is seen beca(se it is seen+ and not the other wa! aro(nd 8t is somethin$ carried beca(se it is bein$ carried+ not beca(se it is a thin$ carried& :&&&i) an!thin$ is bein$ chan$ed or is bein$ a))ected in an! wa!+ it is not bein$ chan$ed beca(se it is somethin$ chan$ed+ b(t rather it is somethin$ chan$ed beca(se it is bein$ chan$ed&; Socrates is ar$(in$ that o(tside in)l(ence de)ines these thin$s as what the! are& External )orces de)ine thin$s to be what the! are+ not internal& Somethin$ is loved beca(se it is bein$ loved by something. Someone has to love a thin$ )or it to be a loved thin$& ,here)ore+ bac on the matter o) #iet!&&& 8s it bein$ loved beca(se it is #io(s+ or )or some other reason1 E(th!#hro sa!s that it is loved )or no other reason 4iet! is bein$ loved then beca(se it is #io(s+ b(t it is not beca(se it is loved& Somethin$ is $od-loved beca(se it is loved b! the $ods ,here)ore bein$ loved b! the $ods is not the same as bein$ #io(s+ beca(se i) it were+ then #iet! is loved b! the $ods beca(se it is $od-loved+ and not beca(se o) itsel)+ it's own virt(e+ and this has alread! been #roven not to be the case& ,here)ore the #io(s bein$ loved b! the $ods is onl! an as#ect o) being #io(s+ not it's tr(e nat(re& Got the thin$ that ma es #iet! what it is& 2! this time E is $ettin$ )r(strated beca(se each time he #(ts o(t an answer to :0hat is #io(s;+ it is $ettin$ shot down& Socrates is com#ared to =aedal(s+ his mentor+ who did similar thin$s to him as Socrates is doin$ to E(th!#hro Socrates claims to be clever witho(t wantin$ to be+ beca(se he wo(ld act(all! #re)er )or E's words to remain as the! are He wants an answer+ wants the tr(th+ b(t beca(se o) his desire )or tr(th+ he has to examine E's words+ e))ectivel! #rovin$ them to be )alse and not well tho($ht o(t&

2ac to the 3r$(ment Socrates #ost(lates - :8s all that is #io(s is o) necessit! 6(st1; 8n other words+ is all thin$s #io(s+ 6(st as well1 E(th!#hro a$rees Socrates: :3nd is then is that is 6(st #io(s1 H8&e& =oes 6(stice D #iet!1I 5r is all that is #io(s 6(st H8&e& 3re all thin$s #io(s+ 6(st as well1I+ b(t not all that is 6(st #io(s Hnot all thin$s that are 6(st are #io(sI+ b(t some i) it is+ and some is not1; E(th!#hro: Mind D blown Socrates tries to ex#lain himsel)+ in his (s(al ro(ndabo(t wa!& He starts o)) b! /(otin$ a #oem: :You do not wish to name Zeus, who had done it, and who made all things grow, for where there

is fear, there is also shame. Socrates sa!s he disa$rees with the above: 2ein$ a)raid o) #overt! and disease is not shame)(l 5n the other hand+ bein$ ashamed o) somethin$ also ma es !o( a)raid H?or instance+ i) !o( do somethin$ shame)(l+ !o('re scared o) #eo#le )indin$ o(t& Sa! !o( have sex be)ore marria$e+ which is considered shame)(l in most reli$io(s )amilies& Fo( are then afraid o) !o(r #arents )indin$ o(t&I He (ses the above to #rove that one thin$ is not necessaril! a #art o) the other in one set wa!& ?ear is not necessaril! a #art o) shame+ b(t more o)ten that not+ shame is a #art o) )ear ,o relate this bac to the #iet! ar$(ment: Socrates ar$(es that where there is 6(stice+ there is not alwa!s #iet!+ )or the #io(s is a part o) 6(stice& H<(stice is all-encom#assin$+ and #iet! is a #art o) 6(stice& ,here)ore+ b! bein$ #io(s+ !o( are bein$ 6(st+ b(t b! bein$ 6(st+ !o( are not necessaril! bein$ #io(sI& So+ i) #iet! is a #art o) 6(stice+ we need to now which #art o) 6(stice it is& ?or instance+ i) !o( as someone what an even n(mber is+ the! wo(ld be correct in sa!in$ that an even n(mber is a n(mber divisible b! two+ while an odd n(mber cannot be divided into two e/(al #arts Socrates wants to a##l! the above lo$ic to 6(stice and #iet!+ so what #art o) 6(stice is #iet!1 E(th!#hro res#onds b! sa!in$ that the #art dedicated to the care o) the $ods is #iet!+ while the #art concerned with the care o) men is the remainin$ #art o) 6(stice 0hat does he mean b! care1 --Socrates Got ever!one nows how to care )or horses+ b(t a breeder does ,here)ore horse breedin$ is the care o) horses Got ever!one nows how to care )or do$s+ b(t the h(nter does ,here)ore h(ntin$ is the care o) do$s Similarl! cattle raisin$ wo(ld be the care o) cattle+ and so on and so )orth ?ollowin$ the above lo$ic+ to 'care' )or somethin$ is to ma e it better& :&&&it aims )or the $ood o) the ob6ect bein$ cared )or&; Horses bein$ cared b! horse breeders become better+ as to do$s who are cared b! h(nters So+ #iet!+ which is the care o) the $ods+ be ma in$ $ods better1 2! doin$ somethin$ #io(s are !o( ma in$ one o) the gods better1 GoJ So+ then+ what ind o) 'care' was E tal in$ abo(t1 :,he ind o) care+ Socrates+ that slaves ta e o) their masters&; ,here)ore+ 'care' wo(ld mean 'service' to the $ods ,he service o) a doctor achieves health ,he service o) a shi#b(ilder is the b(ildin$ o) a shi# ,he service o) a ho(seb(ilder is to the b(ildin$ o) a ho(se 0hat is the achievement then+ or service to the $ods1 0hat is it then that the Cods achieve b! (sin$ h(mans as their servants1 :Man! )ine thin$s; 2ad answerJ Cenerals $et that too+ b(t their main ahcievement is victor! in war+ n'est pas ?armers also achieve man! )ine thin$s+ b(t their main aim is to #rod(ce )ood )rom the earth E claims that #io(s actions s(ch as nowin$ what to sa! and do what is #leasin$ to the $ods

at #ra!er and sacri)ice are $ood )or both the ho(se and the state+ b(t im#io(s actions which are the o##osite to the above can destro! ever!thin$ So then+ is #iet! sim#l! the nowled$e o) how to sacri)ice and #ra!1 Since sacri)icin$ is $i)tin$ the $ods+ and #ra!in$ is be$$in$ the $ods+ #iet!+ there)ore is nowin$ how to $ive to+ and be$ )rom the $ods& 2(t then+ what is this service to the $ods1 ,o be$ is to as )or thin$s we need+ and to sacri)ice is to $ive thin$s that the! need )rom (s 4iet! then+ is a tradin$ s ill between $ods and men& 2(t then+ what bene)it to the $ods $et )rom the sacri)ices o) man1 0e $et $ood thin$s )rom them+ b(t how do o(r sacri)ices hel# the $ods1 E claims that the $i)ts we $ive them are hono(r+ reverence ,here)ore the #io(s wo(ld be #leasin$ to the $ods& 0E'RE 23*K ,5 ,HE S3ME 3RCUMEG,J ,he de)inition o) #iet! is once a$ain 'what is dear to the $ods'& 2(t that was alread! dis#roved .ame Socrates as s him a$ain what #iet! and im#iet! is+ and #oor E(th!#hro with his mind com#letel! blown to bits+ esca#es b! sa!in$ that he's late )or somethin$ and has to $o&

MF G5,ES 5G 4.3,5'S 345.5CF 3#olo$! D apologia D de)ence 4lato is de)endin$ himsel)+ not apologizing )or an!thin$&

19/09/2011 3risto#hanes' !louds 8s the character Socrates in the !louds historicall! acc(rate1 5r is he a com#osite o) a whole b(nch o) #hiloso#hers and a satirical stretch1 8t is clearl! a #ersonal attac + des#ite the reasonin$& 8t is one o) the bi$ )actors behind his bein$ bro($ht to trial+ and ma! lead to his death& Even tho($ht 3risto#hanes isn't a #hiloso#her+ the #la! does raise some /(estions/themes that we'll be loo in$ at in this class: what is 6(stice/nat(re/the state 3re the state's laws $ro(nded in nat(re or are the! #(rel! conventional1 0e now little abo(t 3risto#hanes' bio$ra#h! He a##ears to be rather conservative in his views on reli$ion and Cree c(lt(re in $eneral&

4olitical and Historical 2ac $ro(nd o) 3risto#hanes ,he a$e o) 4ericles 3thens' $olden a$e ?rom the end o) the #ersian wars+ to the #elo#enissian 4ericles was the most #rominent #olitical )i$(re o) the da! Rose to #ower with his wit and oratorical #rowess

S(rro(nded himsel) with the bri$htest stars o) all )ields *arried o(t a bea(ti)ication cam#ai$n o) 3thens+ )(nded )rom trib(te #aid to 3thens b! the =elion .ea$(e =elion .ea$e was a lea$(e that 3thens was a #art o) as #rotection a$ainst 4ersia 3thens /(ic l! rose to #ower and demanded thin$s )rom the others+ r(lin$ mercilessl! the members o) the =elion .ea$(e 8t cr(shed an! sort o) ins(rrection a$ainst it 4ower was ta en )rom the ma$istrate to the assembl! com#rised o) 3thenian citi>ens& 3thens was a radical democrac! 8) !o( were a citi>en+ !o( were allowed to vote on le$islation+ and s#ea in the assembl! *iti>en D ad(lt male who have (nder$one the necessar! militar! trainin$ 3ll ma6or matters o) the state were debated in the assembl! and settled b! a vote Ever!one "in #rinci#le% had a ri$ht to vote+ b(t not ever!bod! showed (# Moreover+ even amon$ those who did show (# there were those ca#able o) 6(d$in$ a #iece o) le$islation+ and those ca#able o) )orm(latin$ it 4ericles 8) !o( were an e))ective s#ea er+ !o( co(ld $ain a lot o) #ower 8) !o( co(ld #ers(ade !o(r )ellow assembl! members o) thin$s+ !o( co(ld e))ectivel! $ain control o) 3thens 4elo#onnesian 0ar Starts in 791+ #ittin$ 3thens and his allies a$ainst S#arta Escalated into the worst bloodbath the Cree s had ever seen 4roved extremel! costl! )or 3thens 3thens wo(ld event(all! re$ain some o) it's #ower and #resti$e+ b(t never to the levels that it was be)ore 4la$(e bro e o(t in 790+ illin$ tho(sands& Ever!one had to be bro($ht into the sec(rit! o) the cit! walls+ and made the o(tbrea worse ,he 4la! is sta$ed in 729+ where the catastro#hic conse/(ences aren't a##arent !et+ b(t it is clear that the )ate o) 3thenian societ! han$s in the balance& ,he #la! han$s in the balance between the conservative+ traditional )orces and the martial )orces

,he 4re-Socratics 5ne $ro(# within the #re-socratics+ the cosmolo$ists+ who emer$ed and #roli)erated in the @th cent(r! *osmolo$ists on one hand+ and on the other+ the So#hists ,he b(l o) the #re-socratic theories were cosmolo$ical in nat(re+ meanin$ that the! o))ered re)lections concernin$ the (ltimate nat(re o) realit!& Red(ce what !o( see in the world to some ind o) )(ndamental #rinci#le ,he! loo ed )or somethin$ #ermanent which (nderla! and #ersisted thro($h the chaos which existed in nat(re ,he term that the! (sed to re)er to this )(ndamental #rinci#le is arche. ,o as )or an arche "or archai%is to as )or an answer to one o) the )ollowin$ /(estions: 0hat is the (niverse made (# o)1 0hat is it's )(ndamental #rinci#les1 0hat ma es them be the wa! the! are1 0h! are the! not otherwise1 ,he cosmolo$ists answered this /(estion in the )ollowin$ sort o) wa!: ,hales believed that the (niverse was made (# o) water& Heraclit(s tho($ht it was made o)

)ire& 3nax!mines said it was air& Materialism& 4ointed to matter+ and the void& ,he whole o) the (niverse can be red(ced to the movement o) atoms "indivisible entities%+ which are indistin$(ishable )rom each other+ and can onl! be determined )rom the str(ct(re the! )orm to$ether& ,he! also had a nat(ralistic acco(nt "loo in$ within the )orces o) nat(re% to ex#lain the $enesis o) nat(re 3ll there were was atoms )allin$ in the void+ and d(e to a com#letel! random and chance swervin$ o) one o) the atoms+ it #rod(ced a trainwrec + domino e))ect+ and atoms started )ormin$ com#osite wholes which )inall! created the (niverse .e(ci##(s and =emocrit(s 3nax!mander at )irst all that there was was an apeiron o(t o) which emer$ed )(ndamental o##osites "hot/cold+ wet/dr!% *reates a cosmo$on! to describe the $enesis o) the (niverse 8t doesn't 6(st assert one thin$ )rom another+ he tries to acco(nt )or one thin$ emer$in$ one another& ,ries to $ive the arche )or it& 0h! F had to come )rom " and that it was nat(ral and co(ldn't be avoided ,he #re-socratics were cosmolo$ists and nat(ralists+ and were im#ortant )actors in a #rocess o) dem!tholi>ation Res#onsible )or the tro(blin$ wanin$ o) belie) in the 5l!m#ian $ods+ and the traditional ex#lanation o) the creation o) the world+ and the basis o) #olitical order ,he 4re-socratics re#laced traditional m!tholo$ical acco(nts with acco(nts that rel! excl(sivel! on nat(ral ca(ses 3s determined b! excl(sivel! rational investi$ation ,he s(n isn't 3#ollo's chariot+ the s(n is a red-hot stone+ or a b(rnin$ $aseo(s clo(d

,he h(manistic t(rn o) the thin ers in Ath cent(r! 2* 3n examination o) h(man nat(re anthro#olo$ical+ ethical+ and #olitical /(estions are as ed St(died in the same wa! rel!in$ excl(sivel! on reason ,(rn isn't the best wa! to describe this+ beca(se what some o) these thin ers did was draw o(t the im#lications o) the nat(ralists 2(t some o) them denied the thin in$ o) the nat(ralist thin ers ,he cosmos is lo$os+ and so can be com#rehended ,he two ma6or initiators o) this are the So#hists and Socrates ,he So#hists 0h! the t(rn1 ,wo reasons: ,he! tho($ht that the wa! o) thin in$ o) the nat(ralists were too extreme 4arminades denied motion entirel!+ and the chan$e o) time Fo( need ex#erts on matters o) the state+ #eo#le who now what a h(man bein$ is+ and what ma es a $ood h(man bein$+ and what a state is+ and how !o( ma e a $reat state charitable view *!nical view assembl! members reali>ed that their #ower was com#letel! #redicated on their #ower to swa! the assembl!& Fo( need oratorical s ills

So#hist wasn't ori$inall! a #e6orative term+ it 6(st meant a wise #erson Event(all! it t(rned into disre#(te beca(se the! char$ed )ees )or what the! ta($ht+ and some became extremel! wealth! 8ntelect(al harlots ,ravelled the land and ta($ht a wide ran$e o) to#ics s(ch as $rammar+ )orensic rhetoric+ and the! )loc ed to 3thens 0h!1 3thens was totall! obsessed with liti$ation )rivolo(s laws(its+ and a democrac! 0hat did the so#hists teach+ #hiloso#hicall! s#ea in$1 ,he nomos # physis debate 3 debate which ra$ed in Ath cent(r! 2*+ re)lectin$ a lar$er s#irit(al crisis "#(ttin$ into /(estion all o) the s#irit(al belie)s involvin$ 6(stice% $omos % convention+ (sea$e+ what is c(stomar!& 3lso means law& &ata nomos % accordin$ to law $omos thetes % le$islate 'hysis % Gat(re+ in two sense& 2oth the entities in nat(re+ also nat(re as a matrix o) $eneration "the #rimal so(rce o(t o) all thin$s emer$e+ and bac to where the! $o%& &ata physein - accordin$ to the ri$ht)(l order o) nat(re ,o the so#hists there was a dichotom! between nat(ral ri$ht+ and civil ri$ht& *ivil ri$ht bein$ what is the case b! c(stom+ #ositive law+ that someone decreed at a #artic(lar time and #lace Gat(ral ri$ht is what is accordin$ to nat(re+ what is #rescribed b! nat(re ,heir acco(nt o) physis was as )ollows: Ever!thin$ emer$es o(t o) chance and necessit! Gothin$ is #re-intended b! an! sort o) $od+ not meant to ha##en+ it ha##ens+ b(t ever!thin$ else ha##ens o(t o) necessit! "clinamen the ori$inal swervin$ atom% ,he (niverse as we now it is an accident Cood and evil+ and ever! sort o) moral cate$ories+ are not a##licable to nat(re Gat(re o) itsel) is devoid o) inherinet will ,here is nothin$ we are s(##osed to be doin$ b! nat(re+ laws $ro(nded in nat(re Ri$ht and wron$+ wisdom+ 6(stice+ are all 6(st names+ #(rel! convention+ arbitrar! and contin$ent& Established b! men+ not divinel! ordained Established b! men with nothin$ to $(ide them beca(se $ood and evil are not inherent b! nat(re ,he will has no transcendent nat(re ,his is wh! laws di))erent )rom #lace to #lace and time to time& Moral relativists =rew )(rther im#lications 3s ed themselves: i) nat(re is devoid o) all moral val(es+ i) it is be!ond $ood and evil+ then what is there to $(ide (s1 0hat is to orient o(r will1 0hat is o(r basis )or decision1 0hat is o(r standard1 ,he! made nat(ral inclinations )or )ood+ )or sex+ etc&+ the standard )or their decisions& ?ollowin$ !o(r #assions and instincts is viewed b! them as the onl! thin$ that is (ata physein and ri$ht& Hence+ So#hists+ were acc(sed o) bein$ deba(ched+ immoralists+ or at least o) incitin$ the

3thenian !o(th to this sort o) deba(cher! ,heir view o) #ositive law+ as it is decreed b! someone was: 3n instr(ment b! which the le$islator )(rthers his/her/their interests 3 tool the! (se to #romote their a$enda .aw is the means b! whcih the wea $et to$ether and #rotect themsleves a$ainst the stron$/ambitio(s+ who the! wo(ld otherwise )all #re! to 5ther So#hists thin that .aw is a means o) controllin$ the wea L Still others tho($ht o) law+ as convention ?ollowin$ !o(r im#(lses+ #assions+ desires+ is what is accordin$ to nat(re Un)o(rt(natel!+ i) ever!one does this+ and nat(re is 6(st law o) the 6(n$le+ and !o(r ri$ht extends as )ar as !o(r #ower+ that is an im#ossible+ (nlivable sit(ation Even i) !o('re the stron$est #erson on the bloc + !o( have to slee#+ and while !o( slee#+ !o( co(ld be illed 3s a ind o) second-best+ the! a$ree to relin/(ish their #ower to do whatever the! want+ on condition that ever!one else do the same& 8n that wa!+ at least the! ee# some o) their st())+ and satis)! some o) their desires Reli$ion is 6(st a tool+ similarl!+ to $overn the masses& ?ear o) retrib(tion in the a)terli)e ee#s #eo#le in chec ,he so#hists were also relativists when it came to nowled$e+ and the #ossibilit! o) nowled$e Man is the meas(re o) all thin$s 8n that context+ there are no )acts+ 6(st inter#retations+ #ers#ectives on thin$s which can be m(t(all! excl(sive 3ll is 6(st in the e!es o) the beholder ,his+ when co(#led with their views on moral val(es+ $ets !o( to a #lace where !o( can (nderstand !louds 5n ever! iss(e+ there is the #ossibilit! o) two sides+ #er)ectl! com#ellin$ and )avo(rable s#eeches on both sides o) an or$ani>ation *oncl(sion: so#hists are both the contin(ation and endin$ o) the cosmolo$ical theories *ontin(in$ the view o) '$od is dead' 5n the other hand+ there was never esca#in$ doxa % o#inion

3risto#hanes' !louds ,he #la! is abo(t the s#irit(al crisis in 3thens at the time o) the #la!+ which was a clash between traditional c(stoms and )ormal ed(cation+ and the new ed(cation o) the #hiloso#hers Socrates+ somehow+ com#ared to the socrates in the #latonic dial$o(es+ is #ortra!ed as an emblematic )i$(re )or all o) these new a$e )i$(res& 3risto#hanes ma es him the embodiment o) ever!thin$ he hates in the new intellect(als ,he #la! o#ens in the wa! that all 3risto#hanes's #la!s do& ,he main character is wrac ed b! a #roblem Stre#siddes is )aced with enormo(s debts the can't #a! "well+ his sson has ammased debts% 3 #lan is #(t )orward to solve this #roblem He's $oin$ to esca#e his creditors b! sendin$ his son to Socrates' thin er! Stre#siddes has heard how Socrates has made the wea er "worse% ar$(ment the better& 8&e& How to win an! sort o) le$al debt& 0ith his son's hel#+ he can $et o(t o) his debt tro(ble S identi)ies that the traditional )orms o) ed(cation are obsolete+ and won't $et !o( what !o(

want& 3lso nows that the new )orm o) #ower is rhetoric !o( need to be able to o(ts#ea !o(r o##onent 3lso nows that the ed(cators who teach this new )orm o) nowled$e is Socrates and his associates at the thin er! S's wi)e and son clin$ to the old val(es+ are a #art o) the traditional val(es S is a b(m# in 2(shJ S $oes to the thin er!+ and is $reeted b! a sic l! loo in$ st(dent who tells him how Socrates has discovered man! thin$s "(seless thin$s%& Uselessness con)irmed b! how the! have no ade/(ate )ood or shelter Enter Socrates swinin$ )rom some sort o) crane thin$& *ontem#latin$ the m!steries o) the (niverse which is misinter#reted b! S to be :attac in$ the m!steries o) the $ods; S im#lores Socrates to ma e him a $reat orator so he can $et o(t o) debt Swears b! the $ods ,he Socrates o) the #la! reb( es him and sa!s that the $ods are no lon$er (se)(l here+ the! have been deb(n ed Be(s doesn't ca(se rain or th(nder& Socrates sa!s the! are ca(sed b! the clo(ds+ whcih he introd(ces as his #atron saints Socrates draws the same sort o) im#lications that the so#hists do ,here is no 6(stice or divine retrib(tion in nat(re :Be(s' li$htnin$ hits the wic ed and the $ood e/(all!; ,he clo(ds are moved b! the vortex& S #artiall! (nderstands and sa!s: :Be(s is dead and Eortex has ta en his #lace on the throne;& ,he clo(ds as the #henomenon o) nat(re "ironic beca(se the! are transient and sha#eshi)ters+ which were exactl! what the so#hists were% ,hird $od is the ton$(e& 0hat the so#hists (sed to $ain advanta$e over others& ,he clo(ds #romise S that he'll be the best orater in town so lon$ as he stic s to the re$ime ,oo obt(se to remember an!thin$+ and is ic ed o(t o) the thin er! Coes bac home and convinces his son to ta e his #lace&

21/09/2011 3risto#hanes' *lo(ds Gat(ralists Endeavo(rin$ to develo# a #(rel! rational acco(nt o) the (niverse Red(ce the m(lti#licit! o) the (niverse we observe to one common element ,he!'re called cosmolo$ists beca(se to them+ cosmos D lo$os Gat(re as a whole is str(ct(red accordin$ to rational #rinci#les+ and that order is accessible to the lo$os o) the mind *ontrib(ted heavil! to a disenchantment o) nat(re Rain is no lon$er ca(sed b! 4oseidon/Be(s+ it is ca(sed b! )(ndamental nat(ral reasons

So#hists ,a($ht+ )or a )ee+ the lin$(istic s ills that wo(ld #ers(ade others So#hists were s e#tics when it comes to the #ossibilit! o) ac/(irin$ nowled$e ,he s#here o) the mind+ the )inite #ers#ectives o) $ainin$ access to thin$s as the! are .an$(a$e isn't a ne(tral medi(m li e it was )or the cosmolo$ists+ )or the tho($hts in o(r mind+ which themselves re)lect the order o) the (niverse *osmos D lo$os "both s#eech and reason% )or the cosmolo$ists )ogos indiathetos and logos piophori(os So#hists didn't believe in this ,he! tho($ht that lan$(a$e sha#ed !o(r tho($hts+ it determined what !o( can thin .an$(a$e in)l(ences !o(r tho($ht =istortin$ in)l(ence and intere)eres with o(r abilit! ,here are no )acts+ meerl! inter#retations+ which are rooted in o(r )inite #ers#ectives o) thin$s ,here)ore it is #ossible to de)end an! #osition+ and to create a #ers(asive ar$(ment to ar$(e an!thin$ Go ob6ective realit!+ onl! con)lictin$ inter#retations Go ,r(th+ b(t #revailin$ in ar$(ments ,r(th is (niversal+ and it doesn't ma e sense in tr!in$ to o(tdo someone in it& Martial+ bellicose Moral relativists ,oo over the #osition o) the materialists li e .e(ci##(s and =emocrit(s 8n nat(re+ there is no #(ll o) #(r#ose+ or somethin$ nat(re wills+ 6(st the #(sh o) atom b(m#in$ into atom+ etc& Etc& !linomen 8n terms o) nomos )or the so#hists moral laws have no basis in nat(re Gat(re doesn't s(##ort or $ro(nd moral laws ,hat's wh! laws var! )rom #lace to #lace+ and )rom one #eriod to the next 8) this is !o(r view o) nomos then what's le)t to base !o(r decisions on1 Gat(re as it's ex#ressed in o(r will+ (nderstood as br(te #assions and desires 0e sho(ld )ollow o(r desires+ that is what is in accordance with nat(re ,he!'re hedonists+ #leas(re sho(ld be maximi>ed+ and that sho(ld be it& ,here)ore the! were acc(sed o) licentio(sness and deba(cher! and bein$ corr(#tors ,HE *.5UUUUUU=S ")inall!% Stre##siades )orces his son 4hidi##ides to $o to the thin er! in his #lace Socrates is bein$ cast as an athiest+ someone who dismisses the traditional acco(nts o) the $ods and nat(ral #henomenon S and 4 arrive at the thin er! S im#lores Socrates to teach his son the wron$ ar$(ment so that he can #(ll one on all his creditors He wants his son to be ta($ht in the new lin$(istic rherotical ed(cation Socrates retires and (shers in the wron$ and the ri$ht ar$(ment who wo(ld carr! o(t the debate

,he =ebate 3t )irst the! h(rl mindless ins(lts at each other ,here is one tellin$ exchan$e at the be$innin$ Ri$ht boasts that he'll win when he #(ts )orth the idea o) 6(stice 0ron$ sa!s there is no 6(stice Ri$ht: 6(stice lies with the $ods 0ell+ i) 6(stice lies with the $ods+ wh! was Be(s not #(nished )or chainin$ his )ather and ta in$ #ower1 ,he onl! re#l! )rom the ri$ht ar$(ment is '!o( ma e me want to #( e' Si$ni)icant+ wh!1 ,he #oint is that as soon as ri$ht en$a$es in this dis#(te+ as soon as the! ri$ht ar$(ment a$rees to dis#(te+ he's lost )rom the $et-$o+ beca(se he's seeded his #ro#er terrain ,he ri$ht ar$(ment can't #ossibl! have an! rational ar$(ment )or itsel)+ wh!1 0ithin it's own #aradi$m "accordin$ to it's own standards% )or what co(ld )or 6(sti)!in$ and validatin$+ it's a(thorit! 8t's a##eal to the a(thorit! o) o(r ancestors+ the #riests who tell (s what the $ods want and what the $ods are Ri$ht ar$(ment is indi))erent to reason Ri$ht can onl! rel! on ab(se+ on #h!sical dis$(st and intolerance Ri$ht ar$(ment o#erates on the level o) o#inion+ doxa& 0ithin its own standard+ within it's own )ramewor + that's )ine& Ri$ht stands )or traditional views o) ed(cation ,he debate is between traditional learnin$+ and the new ed(cation 3)ter this #reliminar! debate+ the! are as ed to #resent their views on ed(cation+ and 4hiddi#ides is as ed to choose which one his #re)ers Ri$ht is dressed #ro#er+ while 0ron$ ar$(ment is #ro6ected to have an im#ish $rin+ insolent+ and has ton$(es embroidered on his clothin$ 3ccordin$ to the ri$ht ar$(ment+ the old ed(cation #rod(ced+ modest!+ #iet!+ sel) control+ res#ect )or a(thorit!+ and bodil! vi$o(r& 4raises chastit! and modest! 4raises it in a wa! that shows that he's #edo#hile 2! contrast+ the new ed(cation ma es the e))eminate+ )labb!+ and lets the bod! atro#h! "beca(se some so#hists loo ed on the bod! with contem#t%+ and others let it $o bad b! #ers(in$ their basest desires 2! contrast+ the )labb! new ed(cated !o(th+ the men who won in marathons were stron$ 8m#lication bein$ that i) athens $oes down+ the new ed(cation will be to blame ,his time the wron$ ar$(ment ta es over and (ses t!#ical tric s to win ,he baths o) Heracles were hot baths+ and so hot baths can't be a bad thin$ 0ron$ ar$(ment's )irst ma6or+ im#ortant claim was that the old ed(cation is (seless 8t doesn't brin$ !o( ha##iness in terms o) the satis)action o) bodil! #leas(res Ri$ht's belie) and #raise o) nomos and law is $ro(ndless $omos has no )o(ndation in physis 4roo) o) this is the )act that vice is not #(nished+ and virt(e is not rewarded .i$htnin$ stri es the wic ed and the #er)ectl! 6(st "b! the old scheme o) val(es% 3nother wa! o) #(ttin$ this is that the (niverse is not a cosmos

8t ma! have a rational str(ct(re/order inso)ar as the behavio(r o) atoms and matter is )(nctionin$ rational law 2(t we h(mans don't have a #lace in the cosmos+ we )all o(tside o) it 0e don't have a law that $overns (s 0e can't loo at a cosmic order to tell (s what to do 8) that is the case+ what's to be done1 He #raises (nbridled physis En6oines ever!one to #ers(e the #rom#tin$s o) nat(re nat(ral desires 0hatever their #assions tell them to do+ beca(se that is the onl! wa! in which h(man bein$s are rooted in the cosmos Fo( sho(ld see to maximi>e !o(r #leas(re 0ron$ (r$es the !o(th to c(ltivate the ton$(e 8t is thro($h the (se o) lan$(a$e that the! will obtain what the! b! nat(re desire Mani#(late others thro($h rhetoric ,hat wa! !o( can satis)! all the desires that traditional ed(cation will de#rive !o( o) 0ron$ ar$(ment's claim is that it is in accordance with nat(re 0ron$ ar$(ment is the ar$(ment that allows !o( to #(rs(e !o(r desires and )(l)il them in an (ninhibited )ashion ,he laws are )or ch(m#s+ !o( obe! it i) !o('re a )ool $omos is im#ortant to so#hists onl! as a chec to the wea ,he ar$(ment ends with Ri$ht de)ectin$ to 0ron$ 0h!1 3risto#hanes doesn't tell (s ,he )act that he de)ects shows that all alon$ his #raise o) virt(e+ his embracin$ the traditional ed(cation+ his ar$(ments )or that has been (tilitarian He wasn't #raisin$ virt(e or embracin$ it )or their own sa e LL*r(cial in the Re#(blic 8n the Re#(blic+ Socrates ar$(es that !o( need to #(rs(e virt(e )or its own reward 0asn't #raisin$ traditional virt(es in themselves re$ardless o) their conse/(ences He was bein$ virt(o(s onl! beca(se it was $ettin$ him somethin$+ and ma in$ himsel) loo $ood+ hi$h #osition+ and the mone! that $oes with it 3t this #oint the *lo(ds (tter a dire warnin$ 4hiddi#ides emer$es #ale )aced )rom the thin er!+ #ale and scrawn! Stre#siddes is over6o!ed at the a##earance o) his son& Fa!J He became a #hiloso#her ,otall! mis(nderstood the corrosiveness o) this teachin$+ and how it threatens to (ndermine the social order 4hiddi#ides is able to send awa! some o) the creditors *lo(ds #redict his down)all 4hiddi#ides has (nderstood the so#hist ed(cation+ better than his )ather Understands that thro($h o) this ed(cation+ is be!ond $ood and evil ,here are no bo(ndar! mar ers )or his actions now 4hiddi#ides has come to reco$ni>e how arbitrar! and contin$ent the nomoi are+ the civil laws ,he! were made b! men+ and h(man bein$s+ and so can be (ndeone and chan$ed b! h(man bein$s 4 starts beatin$ his )ather+ and his 6(sti)ication: ever! law was made b! a h(man+ so wh!

can't he ma e a new one1 Ste# c(rses the clo(ds 0hen the inversion o) the social order s(ited him+ ever!thin$ was $ood 2(t now that new ed(cation has ceased to bene)it him+ it's at that #oint he t(rns bac to the real $ods+ and c(rses the new $ods+ the clo(ds 3risto#hanes' concl(sion is ambi$(o(s Got s(re i) he is an (#holder o) the old laws+ beca(se he is )(ndamentall! sel)ish 3nd that #roves the new ed(cation

SE,U4 ,5 ,HE 345.5CF Socrates' de)ence a$ainst the char$es a$ainst him 3$ainst the acc(sations that have been levelled a$ainst him )or a while now+ and the new char$es that have been #(t )orward to him ,he text was made #(blic shortl! a)ter the trial 8t wo(ldn't have served its #(r#ose o) vindication i) it was a )abrication ,his is the closest thin$ we have to Socrates s#ea in$ in his own voice+ Socrates re)lectin$ on his own li)e and the #(r#ose o) his own li)e =e)endin$ and assertin$ the $oodness o) his #hiloso#hical vocation Apologia % reasoned de)ence 0hat we're $ettin$ here isn't reall! a rational ar$(ment a$ainst the #hiloso#hical wa! o) li)e 8t's not a reasoned ar$(ment+ that we $et in the Re#(blic 8t's the boldest #ossible declaration o) the $oodness o) the #hiloso#hical vocation ,he (nexamined wa! o) li)e is not worth livin$ ,o not examine !o(r wa! o) li)e+ !o(r belie)s that )orm the core o) who !o( are and !o(r identit!+ is a li)e o) death Historical 2ac $ro(nd to the ,rial 999 2* ,hin$s have $one down the drain )or 3thens Cone )rom bad to worse ,he slander that 3risto#hanes #(t )orward in his #la!+ wh! the! wo(ld be somethin$ closer to a mere 6o e in 729 than in 999& Even i) 3risto#hanes co(ldn't stand Socrates+ his intention was not to $et him illed 721 is the si$nin$ o) the tr(ce in the wa! thro($h a si$nin$ ,he #eriod )rom then to 999 is basicall! the end o) 3thens' $lor! 3thens dis#atches a )leet a$ainst Sicil! 2@/09/2011 ,he 3#olo$! 5#inion D doxa Knowled$e D episteme 0hat de)ines o#inion isn't it bein$ tr(e or )alse+ b(t it's bein$ s(cce#table to bein$ either tr(e or

)alse 8t's a #ro#osition <(stice/virt(re is x .iable to be either tr(e or )alse 0hat we $et in this dialo$(e is a tr(e o#inion re$ardin$ the val(e o) the #hiloso#hical enter#rise 0h! are we still at the level o) o#inion1 2eca(se we still don't now Still s(b6ect to do(bt Hasn't been tied down Knowled$e+ however+ is more s(bstancial+ more concrete Knowled$e can $ive !o( the why 0h! sho(ld !o( believe x1 Cives !o( a #roo)+ rel!in$ on #remises that ever!one can a$ree on Sel) evident =erives )rom those #remises a #roo) )or the o#inion in /(estion ,he satirical Socrates in the *lo(ds #ortra!s him as a nat(ral #hiloso#her and a so#hist li el! a 6o e Socrates calls these slanders+ and claims that the! are lar$el! res#onsible )or the acc(sations 2etween 729-999 is t(m(lto(s ,hin$s $o )rom bad to worse in the 4eolo##insian wars 3thens s())er a strin$ o) de)eats ,hin$s $et worse when S#arta allies itsel) with 4ersia+ and to$ether the! )orm all sorts o) revolts a$ainst 3thens' colonies ,he naval battle in 70A 2*E mar ed the end o) the war ,he re#roc(ssions were wides#read #overt! and )amine+ a$ainst the bac dro# o) heav! war+ and a #la$(e S#arta sets (# a #(##et re$ieme in 3thens called the 90 ,!rants ,he enemies o) this #(##et re$ime are sent into exile or exec(ted 3##x 1A00 #ro-democrats were m(rdered (nder the 90 ,he re$ime was overthrown b! an exiled Ceneral in 709 2*E 4oint1 ,he vibe in 3thens was not the same as it was in 729 3thens is a shadow o) what it once was 8n 999+ democrac! was onl! recentl! restored+ and those who restored it are ver! anxio(s to sa)e$(ard it& 3s in an! other #eriod o) national crisis+ there is a ind o) conservative movement Hei$htened concern )or traditional val(es+ conservatism+ and con)ormit! S#eci)ic bac lash a$ainst those #erceived to be anti-democratic+ #eo#le who have coll(ded with the 90& 3mnest! had been $ranted to #eo#le involved with the 90+ o(tside o) the 90 themselves 3thenians in $eneral are now loo in$ )or a sca#e$oat )or their increasin$ sense that 3thenian societ! is in decline =emocrats in #artic(lar+ and those who s())ered (nder the 90+ are loo in$ )or reven$e 4lato's (ncle+ and Socrates' )riend *ritas 5ne o) the most violent t!rants 3lcibiades Soctates' beloved #roto$ee

0ell born+ had tremendo(s #otencial as a #olitical )i$(re ,as ed with a naval ex#edition to Sicil! ,he ni$ht be)ore the )leet is to set sail+ stat(es are desecrated and 3lcibiades is blamed He de)ects to S#arta's side when he learns that he was called to trial+ and $ives (# militar! secrets ,here)ore+ the )act that Socates is associated with other shad! ")rom the #ers#ective o) the democrats% #eo#le+ doesn't hel# his case ,he 6(r! was h($e b! o(r standards+ A01 #eo#le ,ho($ht to re#resent the will o) the #eo#le beca(se it was so lar$e 8m#ortance o) the trial dictated the n(mber o) 6(rors 3thenian co(rt seemed to be (nr(l!+ with no )ormal 6(d$e ,he 6(r! co(ld s#ea (# at an! #oint+ etc& Most im#ortantl!+ the le$al /(estion )or 3thenians was di))erent )or what we (nderstand it to be 4(r#ose wasn't so m(ch to )i$(re o(t whether the de)endant had act(all! carried o(t the s(##osed acc(sations+ b(t is the defendant a net benefactor for the city. Civen the sit(ation as it stands+ what co(rse o) action is li el! to have the most #ositive conse/(ences )or the comm(nit! as a whole1 ,he! cared i) !o( did the crime or not+ b(t it was m(ch more secondar! com#ared to a modern da! trial 4lato #ic s (# Socrates' acco(nt ri$ht a)ter the #rosec(tion )inishes readin$ their enditement a$ainst him Socates starts with a disclaimer Un)amiliar with the co(rt+ and )orensic rhetoric+ and the tools and tric s ,he stoc elements that will ma e a $ood de)ence Sa!s he will s#ea in m! c(stomar! manner+ the wa! 8 tal with #eo#le in the mar et#lace Got condemnin$ rhetoric+ #er sa! *ondemnin$ the s(bordination o) tr(th to rhetoric He has no #roblem with bein$ called a clever s#ea er+ so lon$ as it is in the context o) s#ea in$ the tr(th Some #eo#le believe that he is bein$ insincere here "claimin$ not to now is a tool o) the rhetorician% *laims that the new acc(sations a$ainst him are derivatives o) the old ones+ and that the! are com#arativel! beni$n 4rett! con)ident that he'd be able to $et o)) i) it were 6(st the new ones 0orried abo(t the older ones& 0h!1 ,he!'re older+ and th(s+ dee#-seated& ,he 6(r! members have heard abo(t them since their !o(th+ and it'll be harder to remove them )rom the minds o) the 6(rors& 2eca(se the!'re the real dan$er+ Socates is $oin$ to start with them+ and s#end little time on the new acc(sations 3nother di))(lt! he cites with the old acc(sations is that the! are anon!mo(s+ nameless and )aceless 0ill have to )i$ht a$ainst shadows&&&with one ma6or exce#tion 3risto#hanes =oesn't ex#licit cite him+ b(t it's #rett! clear that he means 3risto#hanes and the *lo(ds

*ites him as the so(rce o) the slanders a$ainst him C(il! o) wron$doin$ and st(d!in$ thin$s in the s ! and below the earth+ ma es stron$er the worse ar$(ment+ and that he teaches how to do this in the others we see all o) this in the clo(ds Gote+ when he re:states these slanders a$ainst him+ he adds a )o(rth+ which is im#licit in the )irst that he doesn't believe in the $ods& 8) !o( acc(se someone o) bein$ a nat(ral #hiloso#her+ !o( are acc(sin$ them o) bein$ an atheist+ the two were s!non!mo(s& Civen that these are the three ori$inal acc(sations+ it ma es sense to cite 3risto#hanes Socrates' )irst tar$et is there)ore $oin$ to be the claim "decades old b! now% that he is a nat(ral #hiloso#her Socrates vehementl! denies that he has an!thin$ to do with it+ that he has an! #art within it =oesn't have contem#t )or it+ b(t doesn't #ractice it =e)ies the 6(r! to #rod(ce an! de)ence o) it Man! believe that his is another case in which Socrates is bein$ insincere 4haedo Socrates admits to bein$ an nat(ral #hiloso#her 4assa$e )rom the 4haedo doesn't s(##ort this+ beca(se he doesn't sa! that he has never st(died it+ he 6(st doesn't an! more& Ever since he stri es (# ta in$ with the 3thenians+ he has i$nored it Said he didn't have the brains/talent )or it+ and he was disa##ointed in it+ beca(se it didn't teach him an!thin$ Socrates' h(manist t(rn is d(e 3#olo$! Socrates ma es it clear that he is ver! m(ch )amiliar with the wor s o) 3naxa$oras+ who was a )amo(s nat(ral #hiloso#her Cot interested in him onl! beca(se o) his idea o) nous that nat(re was ordered b! the mind+ and so he tho($ht that it m(st be ordered )or the best and the $ood ,here)ore the st(d! o) nat(re wo(ld be able to tell (s how best to do thin$s 2(t+ 3naxa$oras didn't ma e the (se o) mind+ and mentioned )or the ca(ses air+ ether+ water+ and other stran$e thin$s ,he! dwelt on 'e))icient' ca(ses Ex#lained thin$s b! loo in$ at #recedin$ ca(ses+ as o##osed to identi)!in$ the purpose o) it ha##enin$+ what is the aim o) it1 2! )oc(sin$ on the e))icient ca(ses+ he looses si$ht o) the $ood in nat(re ,his dissatis)action acco(nts )or Socrate's h(manistic t(rn& He reali>es that nat(ral science can't teach (s how to live M Gow attac s the claim that he is a so#hist "made the worse ar$(ment the better% =oesn't ex#licitl! address this =e)ies an!one to attest to the )act that he ta es mone! )or his teachin$s So#hists were $iven mone! )or their teachin$s beca(se the! "or their sons% wanted to be made better 8) the so#hists are to be tr(sted teachers o) virt(e or h(man excellence+ the! have to be #osessors o) ex#ert nowled$e as to what a $ood h(man bein$ is+ and how to ma e a h(man bein$ $ood+ and how to ed(cate one #ro#erl! Socrates em#haticall! denies havin$ s(ch ex#ert nowled$e He does not now how to ed(cate one to be a $ood h(man bein$+ and so cannot+ in $ood

conscience+ char$e an!one )or this Have to examine Socrates' acco(nts )or the ori$ins o) these slanders this ori$inal ne$ative #ortra!al is when he sa!s the )irst controversial "and seemin$l! im#io(s%thin$ Knows he's $oin$ to be cast as im#o(s )or this *hiro#hon as in$ the =el#hic 5racle : :8s there an!one wiser than socrates1; Socrates is #(>>led b! this+ beca(se he nows that he doesn't now ver! m(ch So sets o(t to investi$ate the meanin$ o) this oracle Examines those re#(ted to be wise+ )ind #eo#le nown to be wise to re)(te the oracle Some commentators sa! that this is im#io(s behavio(r+ beca(se he sa!s )rom the start that it wo(ld not be le$itimate )or the oracle to lie S#ea s )or a desire to #rove the oracle irre)(table Coes o(t to noc down #ossible inter#retations o) the oracle the 5racle was notorio(sl! cr!#tic+ and o)ten chastised #eo#le )or ass(min$ that their initial inter#retation o) their answer 3ccordin$ to Socrates+ it is his #io(s d(t!+ consistent with the 5racle+ to set o(t and )ind it's tr(e meanin$ 8n his own mind+ he is on a mission )rom Cod Socrates sets o(t to /(estion ever!one who is wise to )i$(re o(t what the =el#hic oracle mi$ht mean Starts with the #oliticians who claim to now what 6(stice and a $ood h(man bein$ is Socrates sets (#on them and as s them /(estions li e what is virt(e/6(stice+ with his )avo(rite method elenchus "rational en/(ir!% Usin$ this+ he ex#oses their i$norace 0hile the! a##ear to be wise+ the! are not 0hat the elenchus ass(mes+ is that to now somethin$ is to be able to de)ine it *a#t(re the invariable thin$ that ma es the thin$ the sort o) thin$ that it is& 0hat is it abo(t the thin$ that ma es it the t!#e o) thin$ that it is1 ,o ma e it belon$ to the class o) thin$s that it belon$s to1 ,o $ive a reasoned acco(nt )or what it is ,o verball! ca#t(re the essence o) what it is Aperia % im#asse ,he! have exha(sted all #ossible de)initions witho(t #rod(cin$ an! sort o) nowled$e in the end nowled$e as in (niversal de)inition

Socratic Method ,he Means and the Ends o) 4hiloso#h!+ 3ccordin$ to Socrates Elench(s is the )irst #art o) the means to the end he has in mind 0hat is the aim o) #hiloso#h!1 Hel# his interloc(tors t(rn the e!es o) their so(ls to the tr(th ,(rn the e!es o) their so(ls to the nowled$e that the! alread! have access to+ alon$ as the! attend to it 8n other words+ his aim is to hel# his interloc(tors $ive birth/act(ali>e/#rod(ce the tr(th that alread! lies dormant within them+ that the! #ossess witho(t nowin$ ,he!'re #re$nant with this tr(th+ and his method is that o) a midwi)e "maieutic method%& 3ssists the birth o) the nowled$e that the interloc(tor is #re$nant with

Socrates' doctrine o) recollection ,o come to now nowled$e is a #rocess o) recollectin$ the nowled$e !o( alread! have within !o(+ b(t !o( are not aware o)& Each o) Socrates' interloc(tors have to thin it thro($h themselves+ Socrates can't sim#l! #o(r the nowled$e into them ?irst ste# is that Socrates m(st meet his interloc(tors where the! are in terms o) nowled$e Has to hel# them identi)! and remove their )alse nowled$e+ or their tr(e o#inions with nowled$e Has to start b! dis#ellin$ his interloc(tors do(ble i$norance ,he! most o)ten don't now+ and don't now that the! don't now 2eca(se the! don't now that the! don't now+ the! can't even $et the #rocess o) develo#in$ nowled$e within them+ $oin$& ,he! can't come to desire nowled$e beca(se the! don't now that the! lac nowled$e ,he elenchus shows Socrates' interloc(tors that the! don't now ,he elenchus isn't an end in itsel) His #(r#ose isn't to $o aro(nd re)(tin$ #eo#le+ he wants to hel# them develo# nowled$e 4ositive )li# side to the elenchus 8t doesn't alwa!s have to lead to an aporia % nowled$e ,here)ore another de)inition )or elenchus is dialectic ,o tie it all to$ether i) !o( don't on some level alread! now what !o('re loo in$ )or in searchin$ )or somethin$+ then how will !o( now that !o('ve )o(nd it 8) nowled$e isn't somethin$ that !o( in some wa! alread! #osses+ how can !o( desire to loo )or it in the )irst #lace1 How can !o( now !o( want it i) !o( don't alread! now that !o( want it1 5n some level !o( need to have an (nconscio(s nowled$e o) it+ co(#led with the )act that !o( don't have it&

2N/09/2011 ,he 3#olo$!+ ctd ,he elenchus is de)initel! 4lato's version o) the Socratic method Some believe that all o) the dialo$(es than end in an im#asse that is the historical socrates' method He's 6(st a radical sce#tic ,hese dialo$(es are earlier+ beca(se he's still (nder the in)l(ence o) his master He then later develo#s a broader method Ste# 1: =is#el )alse o#inion in order to reb(ild Socrates started to investi$ate those who tho($ht to now 4olticians 2eca(se the! (#hold the traditional notion o) 6(stice 4oets 2eca(se the! teach the traditional acco(nts o) 6(stice *ra)tsmen 2eca(se the! claim to "and do seem to be able to now% how to #rod(ce thin$s

*an $ive !o( an acco(nt o) wh! what the! do wor s 8ncidentall!+ also claim to now where 6(stice and virt(e come )rom ?irst Socrates tells (s that the #olticians and the #oets )all short ,he!'re ex#osed not to have nown what the! claim to have nown ,his is im#ortant beca(se their )(nctions de#end on them havin$ this ind o) nowled$e 4olticians need to now what 6(stice is to cond(ct it Socrates' brand o) wisdom is not do(bl! i$norant 3t least he nows that he does not now 8t t(rns o(t that the elenchus demonstrates that the! do now a )ew thin$s *an ex#lain wh! the! do some o) the thin$s the! do ,he! can #rovide a theor! to #rovide wh! the! do what the! do 2eca(se the! now the theor! behind what it is the! do+ the! can also teach it to others ,he trades#eo#le have ex#ert nowled$e+ cra)t nowled$e+ which is certain+ ex#lanitor!+ and teachable Stands (# to the acid bath o) reason "the elenchus% 2(t+ the! also claim to now what 6(stice/virt(e is 2(t nowin$ how to b(ild a ho(se is not relevant to their claim Knowled$e o) these human thin$s are most im#ortant 0h!+ we don't now !et 5#inion D concl(sion witho(t #remises "not tied down% assertion o) a concl(sion witho(t the #remises to s(##ort it 8) we ass(me this is the most im#ortant ind o) nowled$e+ then Socrates' wisdom is still s(#erior 0hat is Socrates' ex#lanation )or the ori$ins o) the ori$inal slanders said o) him ?irst: He's #issed a lot o) #eo#le o)) 8) !o( $o aro(nd ex#osin$ #eo#le to be i$norant+ and i) their #osition de#ends on them not loo in$ i$norant+ it's rather embarrassin$ )or them 8n demolishin$ #eo#le's belie)s+ it's the nat(ral in)erence to believe that Socrates must now abo(t the ind o) thin$s he's 6(st deconstr(cted the belie)s o) others abo(t He nows that the leis(rel! aristocratic !o(th too #leas(re in watchin$ him ,he! be$an to imitate him+ further #issin$ #eo#le o)) 3nd the #eo#le that the!'ve 45'ed+ blame Socrates+ the model )or their behavio(r Socrates' interloc(tors )re/(entl! don't care )or their so(ls+ 6(st their re#(tations ,he elenchus can have two e))ects: =is#els the interloc(tors do(ble i$norance+ and then desires to com#lete himsel)/hersel) thro($h the acc(sation o) nowled$e *an lead to the ac/(isition o) tr(e nowled$e 5r it can bac )ire+ and 6(st #iss the #erson o))+ and ca(se them to hate the #erson who has 6(st ex#osed their i$norance 8t is on behal) o) those n(mero(s ambitio(s violent #eo#le that Soctates have o))ended that Melet(s "on behal) o) the #oets+ a##arentl! he was a reli$io(s )anatic and was tho($ht to have bro($ht other ##l on trial )or im#iert!%+ 3n!t(s "on behal) o) the #oliticians+ #ro democrat+ exiled+ and lost all his wealth when the S#artans too over H(sed to own a )actor!+ so re#resents the cra)tsmen to some de$ree as wellI+% and .!con "orator% has bro($ht )orth the )ormal char$es a$ainst him Melet(s' sworn de#osition:

Socrates corr(#ts the !o(th Socrates does not believe in the $ods that the cit! believes in ,hat he believes rather in other s#irit(al thin$s/activities Socrates' co(nterchar$e: Melet(s is )rivolo(s+ irres#onsible+ witho(t ever havin$ reall! tho($ht o) the meanin$ o) the words that he's (sin$ in his acc(sation Socrates deals with the )irst #art )irst corr(#tion 2asicall! sa!s that i) Melet(s nows who corr(#ts the !o(th+ then he nows who bene)its him Melet(s sa!s that onl! Socrates is corr(#tin$ them Melet(s hasn't tho($ht abo(t this st()) be)ore+ and rather rec less in brin$in$ s(ch a serio(s acc(sation )orward Socrates $ets Melet(s to a$ree to the )ollowin$ two #remises Go one willin$l! harms himsel) 8t's better to live s(rro(nded b! $ood #eo#le 2ad #eo#le will harm !o( So+ $iven the two #remises+ he comes to the concl(sion that he can't be deliberatel! be ma in$ the !o(th bad 0h!1 He has to be livin$ amon$ the !o(th So+ i) he is corr(#tin$ the !o(th he lives with+ then he's willin$l! harmin$ himsel)+ which is bad 2ased on that concl(sion+ he sets (# a dis6(nction ,hen either he doesn't corr(#t the !o(th 5r+ 8 don't do it willin$l!/(nintentionall! Either wa!+ Melet(s+ !o('re l!in$& 0h!1 ,he char$e is that he willin$l! corr(#ts the !o(th+ deliberatel! does it Civen this dis6(nction+ sho(ld he be #(nished1 Go& 8nstead+ he sho(ld be instr(cted+ ta($ht to now better s(ch so that he doesn't corr(#t He doesn't have the intent )or the crime *rime has to be committed behind a moral a$ent+ otherwise it isn't a crime+ it is an accident 4roves that he believes in the $ods+ and ma es Melet(s sa! that he thin s that Socrates doesn't believe in the $ods at all 0ell+ i) the )ormal de#osition sa!s he believes in s#irit(al thin$s+ then he m(st be believin$ in either $ods+ or the children o) the $ods+ there)ore+ he m(st believe in $ods Socrates $oes on to $ive a s#eech )or the val(e o) the #hiloso#hical vocation ,he soverei$nt! o) virt(e He is abo(t to ex#lain how his #hiloso#hical vocation is a #io(s activit!

,he Soverei$nt! o) Eirt(e ,he claim made b! Socrates that all other thin$s are secondar! in val(e to virt(e Eirt(e in itsel) is an absol(te $ood 3ll other $ood thin$s are meerl! s(bordinate $oods 0ealth

Re#(tation Sens(al #leas(res ,he!'re $ood onl! in relation to virt(e as the absol(te $ood ,here's two wa!s in which the! relate is b! enablin$ the absol(te $ood o) virt(e+ inso)ar as the! enable the absol(te $ood+ then the! are $ood themselves 8) the! are exercised b! or (sed b! a #erson o) virt(e 0ealth+ in itsel) is ne(tral+ neither $ood nor bad .i)e itsel) is a secondar! $ood 8) it means com#rimisin$ !o(r virt(e+ !o( sho(ld die 8t is better to )ace death than to live wron$l! ,he whole #oint o) the Re#(blic is to demonstrate the above rationall! 8n that sense+ the Re#(blic can be seen as the contin(ation/)(l)illment o) the a#olo$! the real #hiloso#hical vindication )or the #hiloso#h! o) virt(e 0hat the Re#(blic is $oin$ to #rove+ is that the ha##! #erson is the 6(st #erson+ even i) the! are re#(ted to be com#letel! (n6(st+ and #ersec(ted even beca(se o) that )alse o#inion Secondl!+ is Socrates' #hiloso#hical vocation #io(s1 Eirt(o(s1 8n battle+ he oba!ed the order o) his s(#eriors ,here)ore+ it wo(ld be shame)(l )or him to not obe! the $ods+ 3#ollo+ who has tas ed him with this #hiloso#hical mission to interro$ate his citi>ens and ex#ose their i$norance Got doin$ so wo(ld be im#io(s ,he oracle declared him wisest amon$ h(mans beca(se he alone reco$ni>es that he is not wise How does that s/(are with the doctrine that he #(ts )orth abo(t the Soverei$nt! o) Eirt(e1 He seems to thin that disobedience is (n6(st and wron$+ etc& 0ell+ Socrates isn't claimin$ that h(man's can't now+ #eriod He ma! 6(st be claimin$ that h(man wisdom+ as val(ed b! 3#ollo is a #er#et(al h(milit!+ abo(t one's tr(th claims 3lwa!s s(b6ect to do(bt+ and we can err+ beca(se we are h(man 5(r nowled$e is nothin$ com#ared to the in)init! o) thin$s we don't now Socrates' concl(sion is that 5racle is ma in$ a de)lationar! comment abo(t h(man wisdom 5(r ca#acit! to achieve nowled$e is ver! limited indeed Socrates claims that the $od has bid him to contin(e #esterin$ the citi>ens even tho($h he has deci#hered his meanin$ So wh! does he contin(e1 How can Socrates claim to receive this mandate )rom the Cods1 8nscri#tions on the walls o) the =el#hic oracle Hate h(bris Know th!sel) ?ear a(thorit! 2ow to the divine ,he! were all directed to h(milit! ''''''''''''''''''''';;;;;;''''';;;;;;''''''';;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''';'';;;'';'';I 8n sa!in$ that Socrates is the wisest #erson on the #lanet+ the 5racle is ma in$ a val(e 6(d$ement *loset im#eratives 5)ten when as ed who was $reat+ the 5racle wo(ld #oint to some low level #erson+ not $reat achievers

8t is better to be h(mble Socrates is hel#in$ to brin$ abo(t what the $od 3#ollo commends Ex#osin$ in$orance in order to brin$ h(milit! 4io(s service to the $ods ,hat's wh! once he (nderstood the oracle+ he too it as a mission )rom $od+ and to contin(e Socrates hasn't demonstrated the (ltimate val(e o) his vocation He sim#l! a##eals to traditional a(thorit!+ even tho($h he is seemin$l! s(##ortin$ the new ed(cation Socrates claims that he is a $ad)l! sent b! the $od to ro(se his cit! and )ellow citi>ens )rom their sl(mber 5(t o(r their (nconscio(s vices+ ma e them reali>e that the! have ne$lected to search )or what is most im#ortant ,he!'ve ta en the traditional val(es at )ace val(e+ and that's that Socrates believes that )ar )rom bein$ a bli$ht )or the cit!+ he is a $i)t )rom the $ods to the cit! He doesn't s(bvert or (ndermine it+ he im#roves it+ he bene)its the cit! ,he care o) the sel)+ what Socrates as a $ad)l! is doin$+ that ind o) care o) the so(l is vital to the care o) the state ,he onl! health! state is when the r(lers are virt(o(s+ and the citi>ens are 6(st "have tended to their so(ls% non virt(o(s r(lers will set (# laws )or their own bene)it a state in which a cit! is (n6(st+ then the! won't last ver! lon$& ,he!'ll )ear death more than vice Socrates is exaltin$ himsel) as the model )or citi>ens ,here)ore i) the cit! chooses to ill him+ the! will be doin$ themselves $reat harm ,his brin$s (# Socrates' #olitical en$a$ement 8) all o) this is tr(e+ then wh! haven't !o( addressed the assembl!1 0h! have !o( lived an a#olitical li)e1 His daimon+ his #ersonal conscio(sness+ has told him that he sho(ldn't do that 2eca(se i) he s#ea s tr(th to #ower+ he's $oin$ to $et illed 8) !o( chastise the masses and tr! to ee# them )rom doin$ bad thin$s+ he'd be illed 4roves that Socrates doesn't have a death wish =oesn't do beca(se he thin s theres another wa! where he can be o) service to the state 3 #olitical li)e in #rivate He's been #oliticall! en$a$ed when necessar! Cone to war Stood (# a$ainst the ,hirt! ,!rants He didn't do that beca(se the elenchus+ the #hiloso#hical li)e+ doesn't wor a$ainst the masses+ a$ainst a collective 8t wor s onl! a$ainst individ(al so(ls 4er#et(all! en$a$in$ in rationall! scr(tini>in$ conversation Hel#in$ the cit! b! hel#in$ individ(al citi>ens b! reco$ni>in$ their so(l ,hat the! don't now what virt(e is b(t the! sho(ld come to now Socrates is #roven $(ilt! b! onl! 90 votes Socrates' answer: !o( sho(ld $ive me )ree hero's meals in the bi$ ho(se "cit! hall%

8) he honestl! believes that he's o) s(#reme bene)it to the cit!+ he won't sa! that he sho(ld be illed More #eo#le vote to have him illed than the! did to exonerate him 4ro#hesies that 3thens is $oin$ to hell in a handbas et

09/10/2011 ,he Re#(blic 2oo 1 5#enin$ scene s(##osed to s!mboli>e the entire boo Socrates has come down to the 4irae(s )rom the hei$hts o) 3thens #ro#er "s#ecial em#hasis on down% 4irae(s is a #ort town connected to 3thens with a wall and #athwa! Fo( can satis)! an! desire )or a #rice here at this rowd! #ort down ,own be$ame associated with #olitical s(bversion 4assions r(n am(c =iversit! o) o#inions 3nd the trans$ression o) established order Fo( $o her to #aaarta! and leave behind !o(r inhibitions Stran$e #lace to have a #hiloso#hical conversation ,his disc(ssions in the Re#(blic are all $oin$ to distance themselves )rom traditional 3thenian belie)s *omes down to observe the introd(ction o) a new $od to the #lace ?oreshadowin$+ beca(se Socrates is $oin$ to introd(ce a new '$od' as well+ the Cood ?or which he was acc(sed o) aetheism 3lso a ind o) )oreshadowin$ beca(se he #raises both the ,hracian #rocession and the 3thenian #rocession S!mboli>es the #ers#ective that Socrates is $oin$ to introd(ce into the cit! Fo( don't #raise thin$s sim#l! beca(se o) some blind attachment to blood and soil+ to c(stom and what's !o(r own He's $oin$ to introd(ce the #ers#ective o) Reason Fo( embrace+ love+ and #raise that which is in accordance with Reason+ and )or no other reason than that Socrates start ma in$ his wa! bac up towards 3thens with Cla(con and he's #(lled b! a slavebo! )rom behind and orders him to sto# 3 threat o) )orce+ a command Sta! beca(se m! master 4olemarch(s and his ento(ra$e is comin$ (# behind+ and the! want him to sta! 4olemarch(s is bein$ cast as someone who o#erates on o#nion+ and Socrates is bein$ cast as someone bein$ able to discern between $ood and bad o#inion 0hat's $oin$ on in boo one is an examination o) athenian belie)s on <(stice 3thenian moral val(es are rotten to the core Socrates+ #rove #h!sicall! stron$er than (s+ or !o( have to sta! 4olemarch(s a$ain is bein$ cast )rom the start as someone with o#inions and someone with

desires+ and will resort to )orce to $et these desires Socrates re#lies what i) we can #ers(ade !o( to let (s $o1 4olemarch(s $oes what i) we don't listen1 How can !o( #ers(ade (s i) !o( don't listen <o e the!'re )riends+ b(t meanin$)(l S!mbolic re#resentation o) what this boo is abo(t ,his boo is abo(t ma in$ the cit! sa)e )or #hiloso#h!+ ma in$ it res#ective )or #hiloso#h! 0hat does that mean1 ,he 4irae(s is the e! 8ma$e o) the cave which is the ima$e itsel)+ which is there to ex#lain the #rocess in which we esca#e )rom the realm o) o#inion and $ain nowled$e o) tr(e realit!& 4irae(s realm o) o#inion+ and a #lace where cor#oral desires are the sole motive )or action ,he realm in which )orce is (sed to satis)! the desires+ which are themselves a )(nction o) o#inion 3s a res(lt+ a realm in which h(man relations ta e the )orm o) an all o(t war R(thless com#etition o) material $oods 8) the #hiloso#her comes down into the cave+ he's (nli el! to be listened to 0hat's more+ he's ver! li el! to be illed+ beca(se he'll be #erceived as a n(isance Socrates+ who has $one down into the 4irae(s+ has been threatened #h!sicall!+ and he's been told that he will not be listened to S!mbolic o) the basic #olitical #roblem that it addresses ,o create a tr(e #olitics+ one which isn't 6(st war wa$ed b! other means 4olemarch(s+ 3deamant(s+ Cla(con+ each o) them are either wealth! medics+ or aristocrats ,he medics move in the circles o) the (##er cr(st ,!#icall! #eo#le li e this see to ac/(ire as m(ch mone! and #ower as #ossible to satis)! their bodil! needs ,his is a )orm o) com#etition between them How do !o( ma e #eo#le li e that listen to #hiloso#h! Some o) Socrates' interloc(tors are too old to be reed(cated and to allow their o#inions to be /(estioned ,here are others whose ed(cation is at sta e+ whose o#inions havenOt been )ixed irrevocabl! "Cla(con+ 4olemarch(s+ 3deaman(s% Socrates' b(rden is to convert them to #hiloso#h! 2(t this boo is abo(t more than that 0hat is #ossible to now1 3nd what is the h(man so(l/nat(re1 8) !o( consider the )irst /(estion i) ever!thin$ is 6(st a matter o) #o#inion+ and there is no (niversal tr(th+ then !o('re st(c in the cave 8) that's the case+ then we better 6(st scramble and )i$ht tooth and nail to be to# do$ in the cave+ which is what the so#hists believe 8n the second /(estion i) all that's in the so(l is base a##etites+ )or sens(al #leas(res+ then a$ain+ there's no esca#in$ the cave+ and a$ain+ we'd better )i$ht tooth and nail to $et o(r desires 5rJ 0e better arbitraril!+ arti)iciall!+ set (# a s!stem o) 6(stice which will allow (s to satis)! some desires+ and ee# the chaos (nder control Some so#hists said the above too ,his is what's at sta e in this dialo$(e

Socrates is tem#ted to sta! with a cool torch race on horsebac in the dar + and second+ there are #eo#le who'll listen to !o( Socrates is a lover o) conversation and so he sta!s ,he elenchus is the )irst ste# o) the mie(tic method to t(rn the so(l's e!es inward 8) he holds )alse o#inions then Socrates m(st re)(te them 8) the! have tr(e o#inions+ then Socrates' 6ob is to hel# them $et to the tr(e nowled$e within them ,his is exactl! what Socrates is doin$ in boo one o) the Re#(blic 0e'll see a wholesale condemnation o) 3thenian belie)s ,he!'re wides#read belie)s+ and that's wh! its si$ni)icant that Socrates is re)(tin$ them ,hese r(les are also *e#hal(s is an old b(t rich man who is a resident alien who ma es shields "3thens is still at war at this #oint% 4olemarch(s *'s son+ and the! move in the same circles as the hi$h-born aristocrats *el#ha(s sa!s that he's too wea to $o up to the cit! 4hiloso#her m(st come down beca(se the i$norant are too wea to $et o(t o) the cave Eve!thin$ he sa!s isn't tr(e beca(se as soon as the! start havin$ a conversation+ the! leave 3s s * how he li es bein$ old Sa!s he doesn't reall! mind+ beca(se his desires have calmed down+ and that his desire )or logoi have increased 3ll(ded to a t($ o) war between #assions and reason More im#ortantl!+ *e#hal(s also sa!s that he doesn't mind it+ b(t his )riends do+ beca(se the! can't #h!sicall! cater to their #assions an!more 5ld a$e isn't a b(rden to *e#hal(s Socrates #oints o(t that #erha#s * is o a! with it beca(se he's rich *'s re#l! is that !es+ old a$e witho(t riches is rotten+ b(t the!'re not a s())icient condition to ma e it bearable Riches in themselves are ne(tral+ and beca(se he has a $ood character+ he (ses his riches well ,he! allow him to+ in his old a$e+ not worr! abo(t the a)terli)e+ beca(se he'll be $oin$ there nowin$ that's he's re#aid all o) his debts to both the h(mans and the $ods 3llows him to be 6(st and #io(s Moreover it allows him to be honest+ beca(se he doesn't have to cheat #eo#le o(t o) mone! in order to #a! o)) his debts *e#hal(s acts virt(o(sl! accordin$ to the traditional conce#tion o) 6(stice 8m#ortantl!+ he doesn't act(all! now what 6(stice is He does have a tr(e o#inion o) the #ro#er val(e o) s(bordiante $oods+ and the tr(e o#inion o) hierarchical relations )rom #assion to reason+ and he does have a tr(e o#inion o) 6(stice as well 2(t he's $otten these tr(e o#inions where1 ?rom m!ths+ the acco(nts o) the $ods+ the a)terli)e+ what !o( have to do to avoid a reall! shitt! one+ and his ancestors He's able to act well wiitho(t nowin$ what virt(e is He can onl! contin(e to act well i) he doesn't #lace this tr(e o#inion he has into /(estion+ i) he doesn't rationall! examine it

2eca(se as soon as Socrates challen$es his de)intion+ he leaves and $oes to sacri)ice to the $od *el#hal(s' accidental de)inition o) 6(stice $ivin$ to each what is owed to them Socrates #o(nces on this as tho($h it were a de)inition that *e#hal(s wanted to #(t )orward as a tr(e de)inition *o(nter exam#le i) !o( borrowed a wea#on )rom a )riend and he $oes #ostal+ !o( sho(ldn't $ive it bac *on)licts the idea that one m(st alwa!s ret(rn what is owed to them His son 4olemarch(s intervenes+ and he 'inherits' the ar$(ment *omes in to tr! and de)end his )ather's de)inition o) 6(stice Si$ni)icant *e#hal(s is satis)ied with o#inion+ not interested in see in$ tr(th with reason 0hat ha##ens when the rational 6(sti)ications don't satis)! them1 3ll that he'll have le)t are his #assions to $overn him dan$ero(s ,he onl! ho#e )or 4olemarch(s and the !o(n$ ones are )or the Socratic method to s(cceed and enable them to come to a rational ar$(ment as to what 6(stice is+ and wh! one sho(ld be 6(st 4olemarch(s a##eals to a traditional a(thorit! #oet Simonides 3##ealin$ to the traditional )o(ndation )or traditional Cree c(lt(re Socrates #oints o(t that the meanin$ o) the #oem is not sel) evident+ and reason m(st be (sed to tell (s what the $ods mean to tell (s )rom the mo(th#iece o) the 4oets Reason is bein$ elevated to the standard Gothin$ is revealed tr(th (nless it is consistent with reason 4olemarch(s concedes this 4olemarch(s' reinter#retation is that 6(stice is hel#in$ )riends and harmin$ enemies Re)lects traditional 3thenian belie)s abo(t 6(stice+ es#eciall! amon$ the elite ,he! conceive the world as a #er#et(al str($$le over the )inite scarce material $oods that ever!one wants+ b(t not ever!one can $et Fo(r )riends are those #eo#le who hel# !o( $et st()) Enemies are then all #eo#le who stand in !o(r wa!

*riticism o) 4olemarch(s' 4osition 0hat emer$es o(t o) this interro$ation is to ma e 4olemarch(s reali>e that we need to now what exactl! is d(e to #eo#le 0hat the $ood o) a h(man bein$ is& 0hat a h(man bein$ is and what a h(man bein$ needs He hasn't tho($ht at all abo(t whom !o( sho(ld bene)it+ and wh! !o( sho(ld bene)it some+ and harm others ,he criticism o#erates thro($h a #arallism between the arts "techne % cra)tsmen now a #artic(lar t!#e o) o#eration to ma e the thin$ well% 3 doctor nows what bodies are+ and what a thin$ needs 8) 6(stice con)orms to this cra)t idea+ then it is correct ,he /(estion has become what ex#ert nowled$e is 6(stice1 ,he #roblem is that 6(stice doesn't seem to be an! o) the cra)ts =oesn't seem to have an! #artic(lar s#here o) o#eration Fo( $o to a doctor have !o(r bod! healed not beca(se the doctor is 6(st that he bene)its !o(r bod!+ b(t it is beca(se he is a doctor =oesn't seem that 6(stice has an! #artic(lar s#here o) o#eration

4olemarch(s comes (# with a lame s#here o) o#eration to ex#lain 6(stice wars and alliances <(st #erson won't betra! !o( ,his con)licts with another o#inion beca(se 6(stice is still (se)(l in #eacetime 4olemarch(s tries a$ain 3 6(st #erson is $ood with mone! 6(st #erson will ee# !o(r mone! sa)e 4roblem we also have this o#inion accordin$ to which is that it bene)its !o( when !o( want to act well+ not inactivit! So+ i) it's $ood when !o( want to ee# it+ then its (seless when !o( want to act on it+ con)icts with the o#inion that 6(stice is to act well 4olemarch(s doesn't now what he's tal in$ abo(tJ =oesn't even now what bene)itin$ means Fo( need to now what that thin$ is+ and what it needs 3nd so he hasn't tho($ht o) what a h(man bein$ is+ and what it needs+ how !o( ma e a h(man bein$ better ,echne then+ is ne(tral 8) a doctor nows what is best )or bodies+ then he'll now what's bad )or them too So+ i) a 6(st #erson nows how to $(ard mone!+ then the 6(st man co(ld also be a reall! $ood robber/thei)+ beca(se i) !o( now how to ee# it sa)e+ !o( now how to steal it 4oint show that 4olemarch(s doesn't now why !o( sho(ld be 6(st 0h! the 6(st #erson sho(ldn't be a thie) 4olemarch(s hasn't tho($ht o) to whom !o( $ive bene)it either 0ell+ we don't alwa!s now who o(r )riends and enemies are So is 6(stice harmin$ !o(r enemies even i) the! t(rn o(t to be enemies1 3nd hel# !o(r )riends even i) the! t(rn o(t to be enemies1 4olemarch(s insists (#on his initial de)inition and modi)ies it onl! sli$htl! 6(stice is hel#in$ act(al )riends and harmin$ act(al enemies Cood #eo#le are !o(r )riends+ and bad #eo#le are !o(r enemies ,here)ore+ !o( sho(ld do $ood to $ood #eo#le+ and bad to bad #eo#le ?riends are act(all! $ood #eo#le+ which ma! incl(de act(all! $ood #eo#le who !o( thin are !o(r enemies+ and 6(stice is harmin$ enemies "(nderstood as bad #eo#le%+ incl(din$ those !o( ma! thin are !o(r )riends 4oint who are $ood #eo#le1 0e don't now+ no criterion )or determinin$ this 4olemarch(s sho(ld care abo(t this+ b(t doesn't& *oncl(din$ criticism i) 6(stice is $ivin$ what is d(e to all "$ood to the $ood to act(al )riends+ and bad to the bad+ ones act(al enemies% 2(t+ does the 6(st #erson ever harm an!one1 5nce a$ain this is answered b! loo in$ to the cra)ts+ beca(se i) 6(stice is a cra)t+ then it m(st have the $eneral str(ct(re as a cra)t 8nso)ar as a doctor is a doctor+ does he or she ever h(rt an!one1 So+ is !o(r doctor reall! bein$ a doctor i) he's h(rtin$ !o(1 GoJ 2! de)inition+ a doctor is someone who heals bodies+ who bene)its bodies+ b! nowin$ what the! are+ and what the! need ,here)ore an!one harmin$ bodies doesn't con)orm to the de)inition o) bein$ a doctor& ,he moment a doctor starts harmin$ the! sto# bein$ a doctor 3ll arts do $ood to the ob6ects over which the! are set 8) !o( want to harm somethin$ within the s#eci)ic o#eration within the arts+ its b! not #racticin$

the art 8) !o( want to ma e someone (nm(sical+ !o( do it b! not #ractisin$ the art o) m(sic So+ i) 6(stice is ass(med to be an art+ can it ever be the case that a 6(st #erson harms someone1 GoJ 2eca(se it has to con)orm to the idea o) bene)actor and bene)iciar! 3ll arts bene)it that over which it a##lies ,here)ore 4olemarch(s' #osition doesn't hold (#+ beca(se he's de)ined 6(stice as harming enemies How do !o( bene)it someone1 How do !o( ma e a h(man bein$ $ood1 8t t(rns o(t at the end o) this conversation that !o( ma e someone better "virt(o(s a $ood exam#le o) whatever it is that !o( are% b! ma in$ that #erson 6(st& 8) 6(stice is an art and th(s con)orms to the $eneral str(ct(re that arts exhibit+ then it can't be the case that 6(stice ma es #eo#le less 6(st+ and there)ore harms them 2(t+ i) the analo$! o) the arts hold (#+ it is b! doin$ the o##osite o) 6(stice that !o( ma e #eo#le (n6(st and harm them

5UR 434ERS Use M.3 or *hica$o st!le

0A/10/2011 ,he Re#(blic 2oo 1 4art 2 Enter ,hras!mach(s Game means ')ierce in battle' 4ortra!ed as a ind o) animal "wol)% *alls Socrates a cheat beca(se he nows that it's easier to #o e holes in ar$(ments than de)end one rationall! He doesn't reall! mean this+ he 6(st wants Socrates to #(t )orward and ar$(ment so he can #(t one )orward and win what he sees to be a battle 8t's a battle+ not a conversation that is m(t(all! bene)icial 4er)ectl! consistent with his de)inition o) 6(stice he em#lo!s )orce Uses so#histical tric s s(btle )orce+ violence ,hrac!mach(s is a so#hist relies on s#eeches and resists the elench(s bein$ #er)ormed on him ,ries to leave as soon as Socrates tries to re)(te him ,hrac!mach(s 6(stice is the advanta$e o) the stron$ Socrates immediatel! as s: #h!sicall! stron$er1 =is$(sts , who sa!s that Socrates is attac in$ his ar$(ment in the wea est #oint "acc(ses him o) bein$ a so#hist % ,hat wasn't what he was doin$+ he was sim#l! tr!in$ to clari)! the terms , means stron$er as in #oliticall! stron$er r(lers+ the re$ime in #ower His claim is that ever! re$ime #asses laws that are in their best interest 3 democratic $overnment #asses democratic laws+ an oli$archic $overnment #asses

oli$archic laws R(lers r(le with their interest in mind and the laws that the! establish )(rther their interest+ not o) those whom the! r(le over 0hat is the #roblem with this1 3re !o(r r(lers in)allible , sa!s no+ the! can ma e mista es 0hat's a mista e1 ?or a r(ler to #ass a law that isn't in their interest+ that isn't to their advanta$e 0hat ha##ens when the! do ma e a mista e1 3 contradiction arises , sa!s it's 6(st to obe! the laws "to advanta$e o) the stron$er% 0hat ha##ens when the citi>ens obe! laws that are mista en1 3nd don't serve the interest o) the r(lin$ class1 ,hen it's both 6(st and (n6(st to obe! the laws& Resolve dilemma b! (sin$ the term r(ler in the strict sense Reintrod(cin$ the analo$! o) the cra)ts R(lin$ is a cra)t "ex#ert nowled$e/art% He's basicall! shot himsel) in the )oot here 0hat is an art1 3 bod! o) nowled$e involvin$ the bene)it o) a #artic(lar s#here o) o#eration 3s s(ch+ a cra)tsman+ b! de)inition+ never ma es a mista e ,he moment he does+ he sto#s bein$ a cra)tsman e&$& 8) a doctor )ails to bene)it the bod!+ then the! cease to con)orm to the de)inition o) their art+ and i) the! )ail+ the! can't be called 'doctor'& 2ecomes a doctor in name onl! .i ewise+ r(lin$ is the nowled$e o) havin$ what laws to #ass s(ch as to bene)it themselves ,here)ore+ a r(ler that )ails to do that isn't act(all! a r(ler in the strict sense o) the term R(ler in name onl! 8t will alwa!s be 6(st to obe! the laws that rulers #(t )orward+ beca(se the!'ll alwa!s be to the advanta$e o) the r(lin$ class 2eca(se b! de)inition+ the! don't ma e mista es abo(t these thin$s

,he Re)(tation ,'s de)inition has been 'salva$ed' or so he thin s 0e start b! determinin$ what is essential to each cra)t 2! divestin$ )rom the cra)ts all that is external to them+ that doesn't constit(te their essence 3ll that is accidental 8n the case o) the art o) medicine we have the #erson who cond(cts the art+ and the one over which the art is set 8n this case+ which one be)its1 ,he #atient+ the ob6ect o) the art ,ho($h the doctor ma! bene)it thro($h the mone! he $ets )or his services+ it doesn't co(nt beca(se it isn't inte$ral )or a doctor to be #aid 3 doctor can still #ractice art witho(t $ettin$ #aid mone! )rin$e bene)it 5r+ in sailin$ a shi#+ !o( have the ca#tian+ and the sailors to which the art a##lies *a#tainin$ is the art in which the ca#tain hel#s the crew $et bac to sa)et!

8nso)ar as he's a sailor+ he bene)its+ b(t i) the ca#tain is remote controllin$ )rom the shore& ,hen he's still a ca#tain+ and so an! bene)its he accr(es it is accidental ,here)ore+ in a cra)t relationshi#+ it is the thin$ over which it controls it what bene)its Gow+ which one is stron$er1 ,he art or the artist1 Socrates sa!s that art in itsel)+ in theor!+ is the com#lete bod! o) nowled$e re$ardin$ how best to bene)it the ob6ect in its #artic(lar s#here o) o#eration Sel) s())icient inde#endent o) an! other art+ and is not in need o) an!thin$ So+ what abo(t the bodies bein$ healed1 ,he!'re in need o) healin$ de)icient+ not sel) s())icient 8n need o) somethin$ external So which is stron$er+ the art or the ob6ect (#on which it is bein$ a##lied1 ,he art+ beca(se the ob6ect is sic ,he sense o) stron$er has to be the same as the sense , is (sin$ it in 8n what sense do we mean that the art is stron$er than the ob6ect to which it a##lies Stron$er in the sense o) r(lin$ over same sense , is (sin$ How does the #ractitioner o) the art as the #ossessor o) the art r(le over the ob6ect1 =octor #rescri#tion+ a command+ bod! will be healed i) it allows itsel) to be r(led ,he sailors are bene)ited in the sense that the! are bein$ r(led and that's wh! the! ma e it sa)el! to shore ,'s de)inition is e))ectivel! noc ed down 8) 6(stice is art+ it has to con)orm to the str(ct(re o) arts+ and there)ore it has to bene)it the ob6ect over which the! r(le ,here)ore the citi>ens bene)it over the r(lers ,hrac!mach(s $ets #issed 979b-977d Haven't !o( heard o) the she#herd and the shee#1 *laims that Socrates is a )ool )or thin in$ that she#hers are thin in$ o) doin$ an!thin$ other than )attenin$ their shee# )or eatin$ <(stice is harm)(l )or one who obe!s and serves ,he 6(st don't do what is to their advanta$e+ b(t do what is to the advanta$e o) the r(ler 3 6(st man $ets screwed+ and the 6(st #erson $ets $ood st()) 8n a contract+ the 6(st one $ets screwed ,axes a 6(st man $ets screwed beca(se the (n6(st evade the tax D# ,hose who re#roach in6(stice do it beca(se the!'re a)raid+ b(t beca(se the!'re wea lin$s ,here's no reason to be 6(st+ and it is $ood to be (n6(st+ and best to $o all the wa! in the in6(stice Ha##iness is to )(l)il !o(r nat(re whatever it m(st be 2! 6(stice , means the advanta$e o) another+ the (n6(st #erson+ not the 6(st one 3t this #oint Socrates tells him that inso)ar as a she#herd is a she#herd+ he ta es care o) his shee# and ma es s(re the!'re sa)e and so on 8t's the b(tcher that ills the shee# He wants to drive home the #oint that has become clear in ,'s s#eech Fo( sho(ldn't #ractice the art o) r(lin$+ !o( don't want to bene)it !o(r citi>ens+ !o( want to r(le

as to bene)it !o(rsel) Fo( want to $ras#+ ac/(ire #ower+ $ain it and exercise control Fo( don't want to r(le in the strict sense 8m#lication 0ell+ r(lers want to r(le ri$ht1 ,he! do so willin$l!1 , !eah+ o) co(rse ,his is where the! $o over the thin$ o) mone!ma in$ R(lers in the strict sense don't want to r(le+ the! do so (nwillin$l! R(lers #racticin$ the art o) r(lin$ that we've seen bene)it the r(lers 4recisel! wh! the! need to be #aid com#ensated )or #ractisin$ the art+ beca(se inso)ar as the! r(le the!'re not bene)itin$ themselves Cood r(lers wo(ldn't want !o(r mone! so !o( have to threaten them to ta e it 0hat is the worst threat1 0hat is that com#els them to r(le1 ,he tho($ht o) bein$ r(led b! someone else+ someone worse than them ,hrac!mach(s at this #oint is not convinced 0hat is best in li)e is sie>in$ #ower and actin$ (n6(stl! as to $et #ower !o(rsel) 8n6(stice is virt(e ,'s conce#tion o) h(man nat(re is that we are solel! $(ided b! o(t a##etites+ and virt(e+ which is o(r nat(re+ is )o(led b! in6(stice 3t the most we have an instr(mental calc(lation reason+ b(t it is s(bordinate ,ells the a##itites how to $et what the! want that's wh! he's #ortra!ed as an animalJ Gothin$ else distin$(ishes (s )rom animals witho(t reason

,he second Re)(tation <(stice is a ind o) virt(e o) nowled$e plaenexia % s(r#assin$ 0hat , thin s is best in li)e 5(tdoin$ is what it's all abo(t Screw and ill Socrates as s , will a 6(st #erson see to o(tdo an (n6(st #erson 0ell !es+ the 6(st #erson thin s that thin$s are (n)air ,he 6(st #erson will see to $et more than (n6(st #eo#le+ b(t the 6(st #erson will not see to $et more than an (n6(st #erson 4ro#ortional e/(alit! ,he (n6(st #erson+ on the other hand+ he see s to o(tdo 6(st #eo#le beca(se that's the #ointJ 5bvio(sl!+ the (n6(st #erson will see to o(tdo other (n6(st #eo#le+ beca(se once a$ain+ the whole axis o) eval(ation is: can 8 $et more than ever!bod!1 0e're tr!in$ to )i$(re o(t whether the 6(st #erson or the (n6(st #erson is wise1 So+ what ind o) #erson does a wise man corres#ond to1 3 6(st or (n6(st #erson1 3s o(tlined b! this notion o) o(tdoin$ others =o #eo#le who have ex#ert nowled$e tr! to o(tdo #eo#le who have other ex#ert nowled$e1 Go ,wo doctors with com#lete nowled$e loo in$ at a #atient wo(ld li el! have the same answer and so wo(ldn't be com#etin$ with one another

5r+ inso)ar as !o('re a mathematician "i) !o( now that 2P2 D 7%+ we don't tr! to o(tdo one another in !o(r (nderstandin$ o) 2P2 So+ a wise #erson will not tr! to do better than another wise #erson 2(t+ a doctor will tr! to do better than an (nwise #ersno "one who isn't a doctor% So+ what abo(t the (nwise #erson1 5ne who doesn't have ex#ert nowled$e1 0ill see to o(to both wise and (nwise #eo#le+ beca(se the (nwise #ersno whom he's tr!in$ to beat will not now 0ill see to beat ever!one So how does his ma# onto o(t de)enition o) 6(st and (n6(st #eo#le1 3 6(st man see s to be the same as other 6(st men+ and see s to o(tdo other (n6(st men 3 6(st #erson that corres#onds most closel! to the wise #erson ,here)ore+ it ma es more sense to claim that it is a 6(st #erson who is wise+ and in6(stice is act(all! a )orm o) i$norance , is still not convinced ,he onl! thin$ !o( sho(ld listen to is the voice o) !o(r a##etites 3##etites it's the onl! thin$ that is reall! essential to (s 3nd the! $o on

5#enin$ to 2oo 2 Cla(con comes into the scene =oesn't believe in the acco(nt o) 6(stice he's heard )rom ,+ b(t nor is he #ers(aded b! Socrates' de)ence o) it He )inds that it relies too m(ch on wea nesses in his o##onents #osition+ and hasn't #(t )orward a #ositive claim He thin s 6(stice is better than in6(stice+ b(t doesn't now wh! 3s s Socrates what ind o) $ood do !o( thin 6(stice is1 ,hree t!#es thin$s that are $ood in themselves "6o!% ,hin$s that are both $ood in themselves and brin$ $ood thin$s ,hin$s that are not $ood in themselves+ b(t $ood in what the! $ive !o( "instr(mental $oods% 3ren't desired )or themselves+ b(t desired )or what the! $ive !o( Coin$ to a dentist ,he third is is what most #eo#le thin 6(stice is li e an onero(s b(rden+ onl! $ood )or its reward+ in itsel) it is o) no val(e 8) !o( can $et those $reat thin$s wihto(t bein$ 6(st+ then there is not reason to be 6(st+ it wo(ld be st(#id to be 6(st So wh! be 6(st1 Cla(con tells (s that he'll do three thin s ,ell (s the nat(re and the ori$ins o) 6(stice 2ased on that notion o) 6(stice+ no one is 6(st willin$l! 3nd de)end his o#inion with the

Cla(con's acco(nt o) 6(stice ,o satis)! as man! o) !o(r bodil! a##etites as #ossible 0h!1 2eca(se this conce#tion o) 6(stice relies solel! on a##etite Maximal in6(stice is what is accordin$ to nat(re ,here's a catch - we all desire to be maximall! (n6(st b! nat(re to $et st()) we want 0hatever we ac/(ire in this com#etition is #recario(s+ in dan$er o) bein$ lost 0e need to slee#+ and then someone wea er than (s can come alon$ and ill (s and ta e o(r st()) 3nd so+ we com#rimise what wo(ld be 'best' to be the to# do$ 0e see that it wo(ld be in o(r interest to set (# an arti)icial s!stem o) 6(stice 8'll sta! awa! )rom !o(r st()) i) !o( sta! awa! )rom (s 0e trans)er (nlimited ri$hts to a third #art! that we desi$nate the soveri$n+ someone to r(le over (s Kee# in chec o(t #assions which are bo(ndless and lead to con)lict and war ,his arti)icial s!stem is 6(st that contrar! to nat(re 0e're im#osin$ shac les (#on o(rselves+ st()) that we've ac/(ired law)(ll! 2(t+ man! o) o(r desires are $oin$ to $o (n)(l)illed+ as so we cha)e at o(r sha les 4roo) o) second best the rin$ that ma es !o( invisible Even the most 6(st #erson will not be able to resist the tem#tation to carr! o(t in6(st acts with im#(nit! 12/10/2011 rawwwwr im in a ra$e

*i(aiosyne % 6(stice <(stice #ercieved aro(nd Cla(con's lines are contrar! to nat(re <(stice is not somethin$ !o( do willin$l! 8t is $ood onl! instr(mentall! $ood beca(se o) somethin$ it !ields "e&$& $oin$ to the dentist% 0hat Cla(con's challen$e to Socrates is to show that 6(stice is $ood in itsel)+ an absol(te $ood+ not a relative $ood Unconditionall! $ood How is Socrates $oin$ to do this1 .et's stri# 6(stice o) ever!thin$ that it !ields 8ma$ine someone who is s(#remel! 6(st+ b(t this #erson (n)o(rt(natel! has a re#(tation o) s(#reme in6(stice ,ort(red+ exiled+ etc& Etc& 3nd that #erson is )inall! exec(ted ,his is how !o( ma e s(re that 6(stice isn't $ood )or its own $ood 4rove that even this #erson is act(all! ha##! ,o answer this challen$e Socrates m(st demonstrate that !o('re ha##! when !o(r nat(re is

satis)ied 8) it t(rns o(t to be the case that !o( are essentiall! a##etite+ then ha##iness will be the ac/(isition o) #ower to satis)! bodil! desires Socrates has to re)(te their acco(nt o) h(man nat(re =oes that b! showin$ that there's more to (s than a##etite 0e are not re#etitive creat(res Cla(con has $iven the acco(nt o) the nat(re o) 6(stice b! b(ildin$ a cit! Socrates m(st do the same thin$ 0h!1 He needs to demonstrate that there's more to (s than mere a##etite He needs to examine h(man nat(re and what's in the so(l How does he do that1 ?(ndamental #res(##osition that all the #arties a$ree on the cit! as a whole is an ima$e+ it corres#onds to+ is a re)lection o) the so(l ,here)ore 6(stice in the cit! is 6(stice in the so(l 5nl! it will be written in 'lar$er letters'+ bi$$er in the cit!+ and easier to discern in the lar$er thin$ this is wh! the conversation o) 6(stice veers o)) into the establishment o) a cit! in lo$os ,he $(idin$ #rinci#le o) the cit!/what's the #(r#ose o) a cit! to satis)! o(r needs S#eci)icall! needs )or necessar! thin$s that we cannot $o witho(t ,hin$s that ever! h(man bein$ desires o(t o) necessit! ?ood+ sa)et!+ clothin$ --Q what the cit! needs to #rovide He's $oin$ to be $(ided b! nat(re b(ilt accordin$ to nat(re Socrates is $oin$ to )ollow h(man nat(re in the b(ildin$ o) his cit! He is $oin$ to loo to what h(mans are and what the! need ,he cit! is $oin$ to be b(ilt s(ch as to cater to those needs ,he )irst thin$ we have to )i$(re o(t: Sho(ld ever!one ma e all the thin$s that the! need1 0ell+ that's not e))icient More e))icient i) the labo(r is divided+ and some tas s won't wait at !o(r leis(re Second reason is that b! nat(re we are not all e/(all! s(ited )or the same tas s =i))erent a#tit(des in h(man bein$s 8) o(r cit! is $oin$ to be accordin$ to nat(re and wor with it+ it better res#ect the diversit! o) a#tit(des that !o( dis#la! 5ne #erson+ one art Each #erson will do what the! are s(ited to do Some #eo#le are $oin$ to be cobblers+ others labo(rers+ etc&&& Socrates calls it the true city 3ll basic needs are catered to So wh! doesn't the boo end here1 0hat's missin$1 .(x(r! Cla(con+ who is #ortra!ed as a #erson who desires "also a co(ra$eo(s #erson%+ an erotic #erson+ #oints o(t that there are no l(x(ries+ 2! nat(re we also desire thin$s that are b! de)inition+ s(#er)l(o(s and (nnecessar! 2! thin$s in /(alitative terms and /(anitiativel! 0e desire more o) thin$s which are necessar! than are in )act necessar!+ and thin$s that are

(nnecessar! So i) this cit! is b(ilt b! o(r nat(re+ it better satis)! o(r desire )or s(#er)l(o(s thin$s ,his desire )or (nnecessar! thin$s is bo(ndless and limitless ,o cater to these desires we need to introd(ce a whole b(nch o) other #eo#le to cater to them: 0H5RESJ 3nd doctors1 2eca(se !o('re $oin$ to have a lot o) (nhealth! #eo#le now 2! nat(re we can desire thin$s that don't a$ree with o(r nat(re/that are bad )or (s+ and so !o( need #eo#le who can com#ensate )or that Fo('re also $oin$ to need soldiers+ wh!1 4eo#le will want other #eo#le's thin$s and their land Fo('ll need to con/(er other #eo#le's lands beca(se !o(r s(#er)l(o(s desires are bo(ndless+ and o(r reso(rces are )inite *an the citi>ens who have other occ(#ations "s(ch as cra)ts#eo#le% can the! also be soldiers1 ,he #rinci#le o) nat(re which has $(ided the establishment o) the cit! so )ar is that !o(r role in the cit! is what !o( are nat(rall! made to )(l)il 5ne thin$ ,he #rimar! reason that the soldiers constit(te a se#arate class is that what ma es a soldier a soldier is somethin$ (ni/(e to them ,he s#ecial thin$ that soldiers need is /(ite di))erent )rom desire ,he! have this other s#ecial thin$ that allows them to cater to the cities desires+ not a s#ecial desire that ma es them (ni/(el! /(ali)ied to be soldiers So what to soldiers have1 S#irit D thymos MMMMMMMM#oo#///////// S#irit: Fo(r )ortit(de+ !o(r braver!+ what ma es !o( stand )ast in the )orce o) dan$er+ and ri$hteo(sness indi$nation 0hat ma es !o( )eel shame in the )ace o) de)eat 8t is not desire )or material $oods+ beca(se it does not a))ect !o(r ca#acit! to ac/(ire material $oods 0hat is $ettin$ (#set in !o( when someone beats !o( is !o(r thymos, !o(r s#irit Ri$ht awa! !o('ve shown that Cla(con and *o&'s acco(nt o) h(man nat(re is )alse beca(se there is somethin$ more to h(mans ?armers and cra)tsmen don't need this+ b(t soldiers do Soldiers are li e do$s+ and there)ore li e #hiloso#hers <(st li e do$s+ the! have to be both )ierce and $entle Seemin$l! #aradoxical in nat(re <(st li e do$s the!'re $oin$ to be )ierce to enemies+ b(t $entle to those the! now "#recisel! beca(se the! now them% ,here)ore the! are li e 4hiloso#hers+ beca(se the! now+ and love what the! now& 8) the! were 6(st )ierce+ the! co(ld t(rn their )erocit! on their own #eo#le+ and i) the! were 6(st $entle the! wo(ld s(c as soldiers Soldiers have to see the cit! as somethin$ to $(ard and #rotect 8t's seemin$l! im#ossible b(t it is not a$ainst in nat(re+ it exists in do$s and other animals+ and th(s it can exist in h(man bein$s as well 8t is #ossible to ma e soldiers #rotectors and $(ardians rather than t!rants

So+ to create this class+ !o( have to identi)! those who are reall! )ast and stron$+ and those who have hi$h s#irit+ and those who are #hiloso#hers 2(t nat(re alone doesn't s())ice ,here m(st be ed(cation o) the $(ardians+ bec(ase that is what ma es them $(ardians b! ta in$ their nat(ral dis#osition and t(rnin$ them to de)end the cit! 3 #eo#le who see the $ood o) the cit! as their own $ood 3n attem#t to ed(cate #eo#le to identi)! with the cit!+ and establish a rationall! ordered cit!+ a model o) a $ood cit! ,here)ore we are brin$in$ them (# to identit)! with reason ,rain their thymos to #(t it to the command o) reason ,h!mos is channelled in s(##ort o) thin$s that bene)it the cit! En)orce the actions that are consistent with the cit! 0e achieve this b! tellin$ them stories and b! sin$in$ these stories in the a##ro#riate rh!thms and modes "consistent with the content o) the stories that we're tellin$ them% Medi(m is #art o) the messa$e Epithumia % desire+ and thymos are nonrational in the sense that the!'re ca#able o) develo#in$ an ar$(ment )or a #artic(lar action and the! are not ca#able o) rationall! $ras#in$ ar$(ments in )avo(r or a$ainst #artic(lar actions ,h(s !o( have to ind(ce desire and s#irit to lend its )orce to rational means Fo( are not reasonin$ with it+ instead !o('re s(rro(ndin$ the individ(als that !o( want to ed(cate+ !o( want to s(rro(nd them with ima$es o) reason 8ma$es o) the t!#es o) behavio(r that !o( want them to carr! o(t 8ma$es can either be vis(al or a(ditor!+ an!thin$ ,he stories and the rh!thems and the modes that the son$s are s(n$ in+ and the #h!sical exercies that the!'re $oin$ to do ,he r(lers o) the cit! are $oin$ to set down #atterns or models o) all the cra)ts+ and all o) them have to con)orm to the models ,he! can't 6(st b(ild thin$s an! wa! the! want Models will ma e the res(lt harmonio(s 0h!1 Fo( want children to be s(rro(nded b! these #rod(cts+ which are ima$es o) reason+ and so ma e their own so(ls reasonable and harmonio(s+ s(ch that the!'ll be rece#tive to reason Reason bein$ what establishes this order Even i) the! are not (nderstandin$ o) reason+ the! will at least be rece#tive to reason Even o(r architect(re has to conve! a certain messa$e *ensorshi# o) the stories that are to be told to children: 3bo(t the $ods *ensorshi# o) m(sic 4h!sical exercise+ the re$ime that will corres#ond to the stories we want to tell them

*encorshi# o) the stories and #oems Stories we want children to hear s(ch as the! become $ood $(ardians S(ch as the! have the virt(es necessar! to have the )(nction o) a $(ardian ,he!'re $oin$ to be hearin$ these stories )rom their !o(n$est a$es =ee#l! entrenched So !o( have to be care)(l beca(se !o( want the messa$e in these stories to be the belie)s that the! hold as ad(lts

so+ i) that means we have to lie to them+ then that's o a! ?alsehood as s(ch is not that bi$ o) a deal+ so lon$ as it is o) the t!#e o) nobilit! and (se 4rod(ce a stor! that on the s(r)ace is literall! )alse+ b(t the core o) the stor! is $ood and tr(e So+ what do !o( want ids to thin abo(t the $ods1 ,he $ods are $oin$ to be models to the children and m(st be #ortra!ed as exem#lars o) virt(e+ so can't be deba(ched or licentio(s or hatin$ each other ,he $ods are $ood and there)ore the! can't be the ca(se o) an!thin$ bad 8) the! are the ca(se o) an!thin$ bad we'll sa! that those bad thin$s that the $ods ca(sed are act(all! ri$ht)(l #(nishment )or wic edness ,hose t hat the $ods #(nish are not made wretched thro($h the #(nishment b(t its )or their own $ood+ and the! now that 3nd so+ since the $ods are b! de)inition $ood+ the! can't chan$e+ beca(se i) the! chan$e the!'ll chan$e )or the worse ,here)ore the! are (nchan$in$ and imm(table+ and so can't be sha#eshi)ters and (sin$ dis$(ises to sed(ce h(mans+ etc& ,he #rinci#le o) it what we want to create in them is a s!m#ath! )or orderliness and limits 3 sense o) ri$ht)(l limits and bo(ndaries and a resolve "willin$ness+ desire% to res#ect and en)orce limits 0hat this class is $oin$ to be called (#on to do is to im#ose limits (#on bo(ndless desire Kee# in chec the class o) the cra)tsmen who are r(led b! bo(ndless a##etites 3nd we don't want to raise o(r soldiers so that the! obe! )or the sa e o) obe!in$ ,he art o) r(lin$ abilit! to #ass laws that im#ose the best #ossible order in a state/cit! "maximall! em#owerin$ )or its citi>ens% 3 $ood r(ler nows how to do this+ whereas a t!rant is a #erson who doesn't #ractice the art o) r(lin$ R(les 6(st b! decree ,!rann! is a disordered #lace beca(se a t!rant is r(led b! his a##etites which are in t(rn (nreliable and disorderl! ,he ed(cation in m(sic and #oetr! and $!m are meant to inc(lcate a sense o) order and a love o) order in the soldier class So when the r(lers sa! somethin$ is $ood+ the!'ll obe! and en)orce that decree ,he im#ortant thin$ that Socrates stresses is that m(sic and #oetr! $oes hand in hand with $!mnastics+ beca(se it alone over c(ltivates the thymos and i) !o('re 6(st ed(cated in m(sic and #oetr!+ !o('re $oin$ to be so)t ,he /(estion now arises: who is to r(le1 Ri$ht now !o( have an arm!+ and an arm! o) cra)tsmen 0ho's to r(le the solider class1 ,he best o) the C(ardians So what set o) critera are we $oin$ to establish to determine who the best are1 0e have to loo at the essential )(nction o) a solder and th(s we'll determine which ones are $ood 3 $(ardian's essential )(nction is to re$ard the cit!'s $ood as their $ood *om#letel! embrace and identi)! with the order o) the whole+ and don't see their own $ood and their own needs as se#arate 3nd it ma es sense to test them accordin$l!

0hich ones best #reserve this belie)1 0hich ones maintain this identi)ication with the cit! in the )ace o) death and dan$er and tem#tation1 0hich ones never betra! the cit!+ never choose their own interests over the cit! ,hose who (n)ailin$l! #reserve this are best to r(le Gow the soldiers are s#lit into two: C(ardians and 3(xiliaries "don't do best in these exams as the C(ardians do% ,his is when we tell them a noble lie Socrates doesn't reall! ex#lain wh! tho($h So what is the lie that is told to a(xiliaries cra)tsmen and $(ardians1 ,he! have 6(st now s#r(n$ (# )rom the soil o) the cit! and all their memories are 6(st im#lanted in !o( ,he m!th is tellin$ these #eo#le that the! are literall! born o) the soil o) the cit! and will have the most #ower)(l identi)ication with the cit! as #ossible "mother+ and brother-sister relationshi# between the citi>ens% 2(t the! have di))erent metals in their so(ls ,he C(ardians have $old mixed in their so(ls 3(xiliaries have silver+ and the cra)tsmen have co##er/iron 0hat is the #(r#ose o) this lie1 0e want them to believe that their )(nction is what the!'re nat(rall! s(ited )or ,he! can and sho(ld be nothin$ else than what the! are 8t is a noble lie in one sense beca(se literall! s#ea in$ it is not tr(e+ b(t meta#horicall! s#ea in$ it is tr(e+ beca(se the cit! is established accordin$ to nat(re and each #erson is $oin$ to )(l)ill the role in the cit! that the! are meant to )ill 2(t the lie m(st be told Some #eo#le wo(ld ma e reall! bad $(ardians+ b(t the! wo(ld ma e bad $(ardians beca(se the!'re too st(#id to reco$ni>e that the! wo(ld be bad $(ardians So we have to tell them the stor! which convinces them at their level Goble lie beca(se it serves a $ood #(r#ose b! #reventin$ class env! =on't want #eo#le to #it! themselves beca(se the!'re bron>e+ etc& =on't want the cra)ts#eo#le to env! the $(ardians+ etc& 0e want them to identi)! with their res#ective roles and )ind )(l)ilment in them 0e also don't want the cra)ts#eo#le )or thin in$ that the $(ardians are (s(#rers and that the! co(ld do 6(st as well .ivin$ *onditions o) the C(ardians Militar! barrac s+ no #rivate #ro#ert!+ wives and children in common ,he! are #ortra!ed as havin$ no a##etites+ which ma es sense since the cra)ts#eo#le are the ones with a##etites 8) the a(xiliaries and $(ardians' a##etites weren't controlled+ the! wo(ld become t!rants ,heir thymos wo(ld becomes s(bservient to their a##etites 0e don't want the cra)ts#eo#le to env! the C(ardians+ to thin that the! bene)it )rom them bein$ r(lers in the sense that the cra)ts#eo#le (nderstand bene)it 3c/(irin$ $oods

2oo 7 Ever!one com#lains ,hat's the shittiest cit! 8've ever heard o) Fo('ve $iven the cit! to the $(ardians beca(se the!'ve $ot the $(ns and the! don't $et an!thin$ o(t o) it #re#ostero(s Fo('ve de#rived them o) $oods 3cc(sation that Socrates hasn't made these #eo#le ha##! Socrates' re#l! #rimar! concern is not ma in$ each class ha##!+ b(t the whole cit! ha##! 0e've constr(cted a theoretical cit! that it is a bi$$er ima$e o) the so(l Ultimatel! !o( want to determine the nat(re o) 6(stice to see i) it in itsel) will ma e itsel) ha##! 8) the cit! as a whole is ha##!+ then the h(man bein$ are $oin$ to be ha##! 2(t Socrates also sa!s that the C(ardians will be ha##! too 2eca(se the! are )ollowin$ their nat(res ,he C(ardians are not #rimaril! a##etitive 8n theor!+ the ideal cit! has been established+ and now the #oint is to )ind 6(stice in it ?ind the )o(r cardinal virt(res <(stice 0isdom Moderation/tem#erance *o(ra$e/)ortit(de 0e ass(me that the!'re all in the cit! somehow beca(se the!'ve a$reed that it is a $ood cit! and i) the $ood cit! mirrors the so(l+ it'll have all the virt(es that the h(man so(l has 0isdom is in the r(lin$ class ,he!'re the ones who now the $ood o) each class is and what the $ood o) the whole is ,he! ma e 6(d$ements re$ardlin$ the $ood o) the whole and the #arts 3nd these 6(d$ements have to be $ro(nded in nowled$e *o(ra$e is )o(nd in the a(xiliaries ,he r(lin$ class iss(e commands+ and the a(xiliaries en)orce it *o(ra$e/)ortit(de is what allows !o( to stand !o(r $ro(nd and not bac down in the )ace o) adversit! Holdin$ onto the convictions !o( now is ri$ht re$ardless o) the sit(ations !o( )ind !o(rsel) in 8n the cit! co(ra$e is $oin$ to be )o(nd in the (#holdin$ o) the commands o) the r(lers b! the a(xiliaries R(lers sa! this is 6(st+ and the a(xiliaries obe! and en)orce that edict ,hat's what the #h!sical and m(sical trainin$ is s(##osed to achieve ,o ma e them rece#tive to the commands o) the r(lers and (#hold them Moderation/,em#erance 8mmoderation is characteristic o) a##etite that is (n$overned+ and insatiable ,em#erance is a limit+ a chec on desires 3##etite in itsel) is limitless+ and cannot s(##l! its own limits ,here)ore tem#erance has to be the reco$nition on the #art o) a##etite+ the acce#tance o) the limit s(##lied )rom elsewhere "reason% 8ntem#erance is a s(bversion o) the nat(ral hierarch! that exists in the cit! and in the so(l 8n the so(l+ it is when desire #laces s#irit and reason at its command

8t s(##lies the aims and ma es reason calc(late how best to achieve those thin$s .i ewise in the cit!+ intem#erance is a s(bversion o) the nat(ral hierarch! "when those who tr! the r(le+ who aren't s(##osed to% <(stice ever!one )ollowin$ their own nat(res as the! are s(##osed to ,he #rinci#le that the cit! has been )o(nded on

1R/10/2011 End o) 2oo 7/ 2e$innin$ o) 2oo A 3ss(m#tion cit! on the whole is a bi$$er ima$e o) the so(l as a whole ,here)ore i) we loo to the bi$$er thin$+ we'll (nderstand 6(stice in the whole 8) the cit! on the whole is ha##!+ then the so(l is ha##! when !o( are 6(st *ardinal virt(es: 0isdom C(ardians ,he!'re the ones who now the nat(res o) all thin$s and there)ore now what the $ood o) each class is and o) the cit! as a whole as well 8n the so(l it is located in reason 0isdom is the virt(e o) reason ,he rational #art o) the so(l ,r(e nowled$e *o(ra$e standin$ )ast in the )ace o) dan$er beca(se o) the conviction that it is best Unwaverin$ #reservation in a belie) 3(xiliaries not rational+ #er sa!+ the! don't )orm(late the laws+ b(t the!'re the ones who+ when told that it is the law+ the! obe! it "the rational commands%+ and (#hold and en)orce them 4reserve convictions and belie)s and en)orce them on the cra)tsmen ,r(e belie) ,em#erance a##etite and bodil! desires bein$ limited .imited b! reason+ and (#held and im#osed b! thymos 3$reement/harmon! between all the #arts o) the so(l Got located in one #artic(lar #art o) the so(l/cit! 3$reement accordin$ to which that the r(lers r(le+ and those who are r(led+ obe!& 8ntem#erance in the cit! is a s(bversion o) the nat(ral order/a$reement+ s(ch that the lower classes tr! to (s(r# the r(lin$ role and become r(lers themselves 8n the so(l+ it means that reason and thymos will be made s(bservient to desires Reason becomes instr(mental reason desire orders+ and reason calc(lates 6(st how best to $o abo(t it <(stice doin$ what !o( are s(ited b! nat(re to do 8t is in )act the #rinci#le o) nat(re which had $overned the constr(ction o) the cit! +he #rinci#le o) a cit! <(stice is )or each #erson to occ(#! the station and )(l)ill the role that each is nat(rall! s(ited to )(l)ill 8n the so(l it means that ever! #art o) the so(l carries o(t the #arts the! are s(##osed to carr! ,h!mos embraces the commands o) Reason+ and 3##etite is docile+ and is in accordance

to the limits im#osed (#on it b! +hymos and directed b! Reason <(stice is the hi$hest $ood and what ma es !o( ha##!+ how is that1 3ll the interloc(tors a$ree to the )act that !o( are ha##! when !o( are )(l)illin$ !o(r nat(re <(stice is doin$ what !o( are nat(rall! s(ited to do and satis)!in$ !o(r nat(re+ s(ch that the 6(st #erson is a ha##! #erson+ and vice versa Ever!thin$ hin$es now on the nat(re o) h(man nat(re - $ood+ bad+ etc&&& 0e have been revealed to be rational creat(res 0e have come to now that the better #art o) (s that is meant to r(le over thymos is reason Reason is what we are most essentiall!+ and ha##iness will consist in )(l)illin$ that #art o) o(r nat(re ,he 6(st #erson is a #erson )or whom their rational )ac(lt! is act(ali>ed to its $reatest #ossible extent Gote that this has com#letel! overt(rned the distinction that was ex#licit in Cla(con's acco(nt 3 dichotom! and tension between nomos and physis <(stice is an arti)icial chec on o(r desires to control them *ontrar! to nat(re+ im#eeds o(r nat(re+ i) o(r nat(re is a##etite Socrates conce#t o) 6(stice is nat(re itsel) nothin$ is more nat(ral than <(stice+ and since we ar most inte$rall! rational+ 6(stice is )(l)illin$ o(r rational ca#acities ,r(e laws+ $ood laws that r(lers #ass are not com#letel! arbitrar!+ the! are $ro(nded in an (nderstandin$ o) nat(re ,he! have to be in line with o(r nat(re Have to cohere with the laws o) o(r nat(re ,he laws o) the best cit! will be connected to the laws o) o(r nat(re 0e have a nat(re+ we are somethin$+ and $ood laws a($ht to a$ree with it 0hat is the nat(re o) reason1 0hat is that we now when we now1 How is #ossible )or (s to now1 How is it #ossible to ma e someone rational1

2oo A ,he #er)ect cit! has been established in s#eech+ and 6(stice and ha##iness have been established&&&so wh! isn't the boo done1 0ell+ now we loo at how thin$s $et corr(#ted 4olemarch(s and 3edeimant(s #i#e in 0ants to now abo(t the odd laws o) wives in common and shared #ro#ert! ,ho($h Socrates doesn't want to tal abo(t them+ he is com#elled to

5(tline o) 2oo s A-R ,he ,hree 0aves "o) la($hter%: 0omen shall have the same ed(cation and the same 6obs as men 0ives and children will be in common 4hiloso#hers will r(le 3)ter that we $et a descri#tion o) what #hiloso#hers now ,hree analo$ies: s(n+ line and cave .en$th! descri#tion on how to ma e a #hiloso#her

Fo('re ha##! when !o('re nat(re is )(l)illed and we are most essentiall! b! nat(re rational bein$s alon$ with bein$ somewhat a#etitive and thymonic 3 #hiloso#her is a rational #erson a #erson whose rational #ower is )(ll! act(ali>ed 3 #hiloso#her is more nat(ral than an! other #erson 3 #hiloso#her is a #erson who act(ali>ed that which we are b! nat(re 3 #hiloso#her )(l)ills his nat(re b! nowin$ the nat(re o) thin$s ?or this reason+ beca(se the #hiloso#her is more nat(ral and has the $reatest insi$ht into nat(re+ it isn't so m(ch a di$ression to examine #hiloso#hers and what exactl! the! now ,he )irst two waves is a movement )rom what is contrar! to nat(re to what is nat(ral and accordin$ to nat(re 3lso a movement )rom becomin$ to bein$ Same as the movement )rom what is contrar! to nat(re to what is nat(ral

,he ,hree 0aves ,hree #olic! #ro#osals ,ested accordin$ to two criteria: 3re the! #ossible1 3re the! $ood1 ,he ?irst 0ave/4olic! 4ro#osal 0omen will have the same ed(cation and 6obs as men ,he #rinci#le o) 6(stice states that i) !o( have the same nat(re then !o( a($ht to do the same 6ob 8) that's the case then it's $oin$ to be 6(st )or women to have the same 6obs as men i) the! have the same nat(re 3t least in the res#ect o) the 6obs considered+ beca(se each calls )or somethin$ o) a #artic(lar nat(re 0hat are the relevant nat(ral traits )or bein$ an 3(xiliar! and a C(ardian1 3(xiliaries s#irit 3re women s#irited1 Feee& :4 8t is not contrar! to nat(re that women sho(ld be a(xiliaries and there)ore it is also 6(st 8t is 6(st )or !o( to occ(#! the station in the cit! that is s(ited to !o( C(ardian Reason/0isdom 3re women rational1 &&&sometimes&&&Q&Q Similarl!+ it is not $oin$ to be contrar! to nat(re )or women to be $(ardians+ beca(se what /(ali)ies !o( is bein$ rational ,he! can and sho(ld also have the same ed(cation 0h!1 Ed(cation a($ht to be s(ited to the #artic(lar nat(re it is s(##lied to Fo( chan$e !o(r ed(cation accordin$ to the nat(re o) the #erson !o( are ed(catin$ ,here)ore+ i) !o( have the same nat(re+ !o( m(st be consistent and the! sho(ld be ta($ht to be the same 2iolo$ical di))erences are irrelevant 2(t+ this is $reeted with a #eal o) la($hter beca(se it de)ies traditional 3thenian c(stoms 0hatever de)ies social norms is (s(all! $reeted with la($hter 8t is a$ainst social norms+ b(t is it a$ainst nat(re1

Go+ beca(se c(rrent 3thenian c(stoms )or $ender norms are not $ro(nded in nat(re+ and are there)ore arbitrar! and bac ward C!m #art o) ed(cation+ and #eo#le have to be na ed *oncl(sion #ossible+ !es+ $ood+ !es beca(se !o( want the best candidates )or each 6ob+ and it will t(rn o(t that some o) the women are better at reasonin$ than men+ and li ewise )or the a(xiliaries ,his )irst wave has #(ri)ied what is contrar! to nat(re in res#ect to ed(cation and $ender norms

,he Second 0ave *omm(nal women and children ?irst+ is this #ro#osal $ood1 ,he str(ct(re o) this section is a little hard to see ?irst+ he as s to be allowed li e a dreamer and tal abo(t how it's $ood+ not so m(ch how it's #ossible !et E($enicsJ 3 cam#ai$n to have the best #eo#le breed with the best #eo#le and the worst #eo#le not breed at all&&&b(t i) the! have to+ then toss the bab! 5nl! the children o) the best #arents are $oin$ to be raised ,he children will not now their biolo$ical #arents+ and li ewise their biolo$ical #arents will not now their children 8n the a(xiliar! and $(ardian class will re$ard all children born a)ter their co#(lation as their children+ and li ewise the children will re$ard all #arents as their #arents and see the #eo#le born at the same time as them and be their brothers and sisters 5ne ti$htl! nit )amil! ,hat's how it's $oin$ to loo + so is it $ood1 8t is (ltimatel! the same thin$ to sa! somethin$ is a $ood chair and it is a tr(e chair 0h! is that1 8t is )(l)illin$ its nat(re Coodness is #redicated on its essential )(nction ,he de)inition o) what it is to be a $ood somethin$ is the same as the de)inition )or what it is ,he $reatest $ood )or a cit! is that which binds a cit! to$ether and ma e it one ,o be a $ood is to reali>e its nat(re and tr(l! exist as its t!#e o) thin$ 8) that's what it means then $ood is also s!non!mo(s with (nit! ,o be $ood is to be "exist% and to be (ni)ied "to be one% S is S and not not S ,he chair is a chair and not not a chair Sel) identical+ sel)same 8) !o( cho# it in two and it looses its identit!+ it ceases to be& ,here)ore+ a cit!'s $ood+ what ma es it be a cit!+ is its own s#eci)ic de)inin$ (nit! So what is the de)inin$ (nit!1 *omm(nit! 8n the best o) the $ood+ the ideal cit!+ all citi>ens identi)! with one another+ the! are as one ,he! see each other as #arts o) a lar$er or$anism ,he! see their $ood as intrinsicall! lin ed to the $ood o) all others in the comm(nit! "the! are one% 0hat a))ects one ne$ativel! a))ects all

8) a cit! becomes man!+ i) there are )actions in the cit! and war)are+ it ceases to be a cit!+ it becomes man! and not a cit! So+ is this #ro#osal $ood b! the criteria #(t )orward1 Fes+ beca(se )amil! is the most essential #art o) comm(nit!+ and the!'ll re$ard themselves as members o) the same )amil!+ and this is the ti$htest )orm !o( can ima$ine 8n a $ood )amil!+ in6(r! to one is a #ersonal sli$ht 2iolo$ical bonds are dissolved and removed ever!thin$ that is external to the de)inition o) a )amil! "which is de)ined b! comm(nit! and nothin$ else% 2iolo$ical ties are stri##ed in order )or a $reater (nit! Gow+ it is determined to be $ood+ b(t is it #ossible1 Socrates ee#s ramblin$ and Cla(con #oints o(t that he hasn't answered the /(estion ,he answer is in the &&&&

&&&,hird 0aveJ 4hiloso#hers sho(ld r(le Ste# bac + is it #ossible1 0e needed to establish the essense o) 6(stice b! creatin$ a cit! in s#eech ,heoretical model+ rational bl(e#rint o) the best #ossible cit! ,he 6(st so(l is a ha##! so(l Established that to the extent that a )lesh and blood concrete cit! a##roximates the theoretical model+ to that extent it will be ha##! ,o the extent that h(mans con)orm to the theoretical model+ the! will be ha##! Gone o) this was meant to show that it is #ossible ever to )ill! reali>e that theoretical model 4art o) Socrates' answer was that he's as in$ a nonsensical /(estion Socrates casts the di))erence between the model and its realit! as the di))erence between theor! and #ractice ,he cit! will be #ossible when #hiloso#hers r(le and r(lers #hiloso#hi>e 4hiloso#hers are those who now the nat(res o) thin$s and th(s will #ass tr(e laws which are consistent with o(r nat(res 0hat more does the #hiloso#her now in nowin$ this1 ,he #hiloso#her is the lover o) nowled$e 0hat is nowled$e1 Knowled$e in this dialo$(e is a ca#acit!+ a )ac(lt!+ the #ower to do somethin$ 8t is de)ined b! what it does and what it is set over 0hat is the ob6ect o) nowled$e which it is set over1 2ein$ ,he ob6ect is bein$+ the ob6ect o) nowled$e is what is+ what is the case So+ what is bein$1 0hat thin$s ma! be tr(l! said to be1 2ea(t! is o##osed to ($liness+ and there)ore the! are two+ and each is one 2ea(t! is one thin$+ and ($liness is a second thin$ 2ea(t! mani)ests itsel)+ and a##ears as man!+ as man! bea(ti)(l thin$s+ and so does ($liness 2(t we've shown that bea(t! and ($liness itsel) are one So what is this one1 ,he essence o) nat(re which is instantiated in the man! bea(ti)(l thin$s which #artici#ate in this nat(re

,he mani)estations o) the essence o) bea(t! So the 5ne is the form o) bea(t!+ the rational archet!#e o) bea(t!+ the ideal o) bea(t! Eidos % idea+ )orm ,he man! bea(ti)(l thin$s+ the man!+ )or exam#le+ instantiations "mani)estations% o) bea(t! are relative "im#er)ect+ ambi$(io(s% ,he man! thin$s which can be said to be bea(ti)(l+ are never solel! bea(ti)(l ,he!'re bea(ti)(l )rom a certain #ers#ective+ in relation to certain thin$s+ b(t not in com#arison to others ?leetin$+ #erishable or everchan$in$ ,he! come to be and the! #ass awa! Sometimes $row more bea(ti)(l and sometimes less 4artic(lar 2! de)inition ,here can be man! o) them Sensible Fo( can $ras# them with !o(r senses whereas+ the ?orm+ the essence+ the archet!#e that the! mani)est in the sensible world "in var!in$ de$rees% are 3bsol(te+ #er)ect ,he )orm o) bea(t! is bea(t! in itsel)+ not a bea(ti)(l thin$+ b(t the ver! nat(re o) bea(ti! itsel)+ what it means to be a bea(ti)(l thin$ 8t is sel) #redicated 8n itsel) it is bea(t! 8t is absol(te+ since it is bea(t!+ while other thin$s are onl! relativel! s#ea in$ ,imeless+ (nchan$in$ ,he nat(re o) what it is to be a bea(ti)(l thin$ does not come to be and #ass awa! Universal ,he nat(re/essence that the man! thin$s o) a #artic(lar t!#e share or have in common ma es them thin$s that ma e it what it is ,he )orm o) bea(t! is the intelli$ible essence that ma es the man! bea(ti)(l thin$s we see+ bea(ti)(l 8ntelli$ible "(nderstandable+ can be (nderstood as o##osed to sensed% 3ren't $ras#ed thro($h the senses 3ll the senses deliver to !o( are a sensor! mani)old o) colo(rs+ or #(re #ointillism Fo( don't literall! see a cat+ !o( see a )ield o) colo(rs and it is !o(r mind is what allows !o( to distin$(ish it to be a cat

19/10/2011 2oo A Since we are rational creat(res+ it stands to reason that the #erson to whom reason is ex#ressed most )(ll! "ie& ,he #hiloso#her%+ sho(ld r(le ,he #hiloso#her is a h(man bein$ in the )(llest #ossible sense 3t the end o) boo )o(r+ Socrates wants to $et into the wa!s cities can be corr(#ted 4olemarch(s+ #arallelin$ how he )orce)(ll! )orces Socrates to sta! in the be$innin$+ com#els him to dwell on a )ew intri$(in$ thin$s he's said in #assin$

2e)ore Socrates can $et to where he wants to+ he has to embar on this lon$ di$ression to seemin$l! #lease 4ol!march(s and 3ediamant(s 2(t+ not so m(ch a di$ression beca(se it describes what a #hiloso#her is and what he nows Ma es sense to investi$ate what reason is+ and what exactl! a #hiloso#her nows ,hat's what $oes on )rom the third wave all the wa! (ntil the end o) boo R ,he )irst two waves are not (nrelated to the third Movement )rom what is contrar! to nat(re to what is nat(ral "accordin$ to nat(re% 3lso a movement )rom becomin$ to bein$ 4re#are socrates' interloc(tors to acce#tin$ the notion and th(s #re#arin$ the readers to acce#tin$ that there's somethin$ be!ond the sensible material world 2e!ond what !o( can $ras# with !o(r senses ,his is act(all! what is most real 8t will t(rn o(t that that is what the #hiloso#her m(st now ,he )irst wave is the #ro#osal that women shall have the same 6obs as men that s(##ortin$ the #ro#osal relies on determinin$ whether women have the same abilities as men+ in terms o) the nat(res re/(ired )or a(xiliaries and $(ardians 5(r senses re#ort biolo$ical di))erences 5(r senses #rovide (s with a mani)old o) data "e$& colo(rs% Even $oin$ abo(t !o(r dail! b(siness in the world+ !o( need to a##eal to somethin$ be!ond !o(r senses Fo( need to $ras# what 'same' and 'di))erent' are+ beca(se we don't literall! see them Cras# the conce#t 3lso+ !o( don't see so(ls+ so !o( have to thin abo(t it ,he second wave #ro#osin$ that women and children be held in common 3bolishin$ the biolo$ical )amil! Extendin$ s(ch that the whole o) the a(xiliar! and $(ardian classes will re$ard themselves as one whole+ ti$htl! nit )amil! Riddin$ the )amil! o) all that's accidental to it+ and allowin$ the essence o) )amil! to ex#ress itsel) in s(ch a wa! that a(xiliaries and $(ardians will more closel! corres#ond to what it is to be a )amil! *omm(nit! (nit! which belon$s to both a cit! and a )amil! ,raditional )amil! (nit "mother+ )ather+ siblin$s% )alls o(tside o) the de)inition o) )amil! ,hird wave #hiloso#hers sho(ld r(le on the basis that the! now the t!#es o) thin$s that were stated in the )irst two waves ,he! now the essence o) thin$s 2(t what is it to now1 0hat is nowled$e1 Knowled$e is a ca#acit!+ #ower+ )ac(lt! which are de)ined b! what the! do+ what the!'re set over and what their ob6ects are 0hat nowled$e does as a #ower/ca#acit! is to now 0hat is the ob6ect o) nowled$e1 0hat is Fo( can't now what is not beca(se what is not is nothin$+ and not nowin$ is i$norance 4hiloso#hers now being in other words 2ea(t! and ($l! are o##osed to one another and are there)ore two se#arate thin$s+ and there)ore the! are o##osed+ and are two ones+ two individ(al thin$s 2ea(t! is one& U$l! is one&

2(t we see man! bea(ti)(l and ($l! thin$s ,he 5ne ,hin$ is the ?orm o) bea(t! 0hat it is )or bea(ti)(l thin$s to be bea(ti)(l+ the essence o) bea(t! itsel) Meanwhile+ all other bea(ti)(l thin$s are onl! so )or the virt(e o) #artici#atin$ in what it means to be bea(ti)(l+ )or #artici#atin$ in the )orm 5n the basis o) anal!sis o) attrib(tes+ whcih one can be tr(l! said to be1 ,he man! or the one ,he man! are: Relative+ im#er)ect+ ambi$(o(s ,he thin$s we see are bea(ti)(l in com#arison to other thin$s+ or )rom a certain #ers#ective 3mbi$(o(s the! are never )(ll! one thin$ as o##osed to the o##osite ,he thin$s we call 'strai$ht' are never #er)ectl! strai$ht+ it also #artici#ates in its o##osite 'c(rved'& So bea(ti)(l thin$s can be ($l! as well ?leetin$+ ever-chan$in$ S(b6ect to chan$e+ the! come to be and #ass awa! 3t some #oints the!'re bea(ti)(l+ then not+ and ma!be the! are a$ain 4artic(lar 5ne o) man! Sensible Material 0e $ras# them with o(r bodil! senses 0hereas the 5ne+ the ?orms are 4er)ect+ absol(te Sel) #redicatin$ ,he ?orm o) 2ea(t! is bea(t! itsel) and so sel) #redicatin$ ,imeless Eternal as#ect o) the (niverse 3s lon$ as there will be a realit! o) some sort+ there will be the )orm o) bea(t!+ same+ and di))erent ,he )orms don't de#end on bein$ nown 6((6(be !(mmm headache $rrroooooooossss :" QTU := V =: ,T, no#e 3lex disa$rees& 3ll chars ar red& 3nd are #irates+ a##arentl!&&&&W4 ,he )orms are intelli$ible+ !o( don't $ras# them with !o(r e!es+ !o( $ras# them with !o(r mind

,he thin$s we see in the bodil! material world are less real than the ?orms which are the exem#lars o) the materials 0h!1 2eca(se the! are ever-chan$in$+ and are alread! other than what the! are 3ll thin$s are in )l(x Heraclit(s Fo( can never ste# in the same river twice #lato acce#ts this onl! when it is a##lied to the sensible material world

,he river itsel) can't ever be said to be+ beca(se it alread! is somethin$ other than it is+ then it a sense+ it never reall! is + it is alwa!s becoming. ,he instantiations are relative and im#er)ect beca(se the! are instantiations o) the )orms ,he ?orms are what the! are+ the ?orms are their identit! 3 chair onl! is beca(se it $ets its bein$ )rom the ?orm 'chair'& 3s an instantiation+ it can never com#letel!+ #er)ectl! corres#ond to the essence o) chair .i e strai$ht thin$s 8) an! strai$ht thin$ co(ld evert )(ll! reali>e the )orm o) strai$ht+ !o( co(ld onl! ever have one strai$ht thin$ in the world+ beca(se we have alread! said that there is onl! 5ne Strai$ht thin$& ,o be whatever the! are+ is to instantiate the )orm Strai$ht thin$s are less than the )orm o) strai$ht itsel) ,he ?orms are being, and the sensible world is the world o) becoming& 2ein$ is the )orms and there)ore #hiloso#hers now the )orms+ that is their ob6ect ,o now is to now the )orms ,hat is o##osed to the lovers o) o#inion 4hilso#hers lovers o) nowled$e ,hose who believe that all there is in realit! are #artic(lar sensible ob6ects are lovers o) o#inion+ and is an intermediar! between bein$ and non bein$&&& ,he lovers o) o#inion ma! ta e deli$ht in #artic(lar exam#les o) a )orm+ b(t )ail to $ras# what it is that ma es #artic(lar bea(ti)(l thin$ be bea(ti)(l+ or be 6(st+ etc& =en! a #artic(lar realit! other than a sensible realit! 5#inion )ail(re to $ras# a )orm Knowled$e o) the nat(res ")orms% is that which allows a #hiloso#her to r(le ,he #hiloso#her also nows the $ood which allows each thin$ to tr(l! be what it is ,he #hiloso#her m(st now the $ood o) all thin$s+ however+ i) the $ood )or each thin$ is de)ined as each thin$ )(l)illin$ its nat(re+ notice that there are man! di))erent thin$s in na(re ,he $ood then will mani)est itsel) in man! wa!s ,he man! $ood thin$s in this world are instantiations o) the ?orm o) Cood ,he $ood )or each thin$ is )or each thin$ to be what it is ,here)ore the )orm o) the $ood is the #rinci#le )or all thin$s to be what the! are ,his is what #hiloso#hers now the $ood ,hree ima$es describin$ what the Cood is Ultimatel! the! describe what the $ood is and the relation to all o) the thin$s it is the #rinci#le o)+ what the #hiloso#hers now+ and how the #hiloso#her nows these thin$s 8n addition to nowin$ the $ood #hiloso#hers need to be tem#erate+ virt(o(s+ have $ood memor!+ etc&&

,he ,hree 8ma$es ,he /(estion comes (# is that i) the #hiloso#hers have all o) the virt(es+ wh! is the third wave one o) la($hter1 0h! is it so abs(rd1 8t $oes contrar! to c(stom+ the #revailin$ #o#(lar o#inion Cla(con #eo#le are $onna )(c !o( (# )or this 4revailin$ o#inion 4hiloso#hers are (seless and vicio(s 8ma$e o) the Shi# o) State

,he shi#'s ca#tain is the whole o) the cit! *rowdin$ aro(nd the ca#tain and tr!in$ to $ain #ower )rom him are so#hists who don't thin the art o) r(lin$ are o) an! sort o) nowled$ 8) !o( dr($ him+ (se !o(r #owers o) #ers(asion and rhetoric+ then the! can r(le 2(t the!'ll be r(lin$ )or themselves+ drive the shi# wherever the! can drive it to maximi>e their own desires 8) that's how !o( conceive o) r(lin$+ i) someone who comes alon$ and tells !o( abo(t ma#s and stars is $oin$ to loo li e an idiot+ and the so#hists are $oin$ to want to sh(t him (# 0h! most #hiloso#hers are vicio(s 4hiloso#hers have the $reatest nat(ral a#tit(des+ b(t the!'re li e the #ower)(l nat(res in nat(re+ are #otenciall! the worst exam#les o) their s#ecies ,he! most de#end on a #ro#er rearin$/ed(cation/c(ltivation/environment to $row in 8) the! don't $et that+ the! t(rn into the worst inds o) #eo#le 8) the!'re ta($ht that all that exists are sensible thin$s+ and no s(ch thin$ as absol(te norms "6(stice in itsel)% and that what is most in li)e is to satis)! bodil! desires+ then the! will satis)! the #art o) their so(l $eared to material thin$s ,he!'ll circ(mvent norms and s(ch to $et them ,he!'ll become so#hists So#histr! is how the! $ain #ower to obtain these bodil! $oods 0hat #eo#le (nderstand as a #hiloso#her is a bad #hiloso#her+ a so#hist and a charlatan Cood #hiloso#hers will be the savio(rs ?irst Socrates is $oin$ to tell (s what #hiloso#hers now and how the! now it 0hat is the most im#ortant thin$ to now1 ,he )orm o) the Cood 0h!1 ,he nowled$e o) the $ood is the )(ndamental condition )or nowled$e #eriod Fo( cannot now an!thin$ else in certaint! witho(t nowin$ the $ood Secondl!+ we desire ever!thin$ we desire (nder the a(s#ices o) the $ood 2eca(se we thin that the thin$s we desire are $ood R(lers need to now the $ood beca(se nowin$ what is absol(tel! $ood is the onl! wa! the!'ll discover "theoreticall! and ex#eriential% that there's somethin$ better than r(lin$ Ex#loitin$ #eo#le is not the hi$hest $ood 4eo#le who thin that the! don't thin r(lin$ is the hi$hest $ood will be the best r(lers beca(se the!'ll r(le with the #eo#le in mind+ not themselves

,he 8ma$e o) the S(n 4oint to the )act that there is a di))erence between becomin$ and bein$ *onditions )or the #ossibilit! o) seein$: Fo( need a )ac(lt! o) si$ht "e!e% !o( need somethin$ to see "item+ lets sa! its a #erson% !o( need a medi(m in and thro($h which the visible thin$s are act(all! visible+ and the seein$ thin$s come to see ,his medi(m is li$ht which is #rovided b! the s(n ,he s(n is not de#leted b! #rovidin$ li$ht+ it is eternall! the same ,his scenario is s(##osed to be #er)ectl! analo$o(s to what the $ood #la!s in the world o) the intelli$ible

8n the world o) the intelli$ible !o( need a nower+ someone who comes to now+ a rational so(l 8ntelli$ible ob6ects "a trian$le+ also tr(th% 0e need an intelli$ible li$ht here "tr(th% is the medi(m thro($h which intelli$ible thin$s are intelli$ible and a nowin$ thin$ comes to now 4lato is tellin$ (s the nat(re o) the $ood b! tellin$ (s the role it #la!s )or the #ossibilit! o) nowled$e+ "o) nowin$% 8t also involves in ex#lainin$ the role it #la!s in the $eneration o) all thin$s "the ca(se o) all thin$s% ,he s(n enables (s to see b! s(##l!in$ li$ht 8t is also the (ltimate ca(se o) li)e+ the so(rce o) the $eneration and the s(stainin$ o) all livin$ thin$s+ and the so(rce o) all ener$! in the visible realm 11111111111111 U-- 3lex ,he )orm o) the Cood $ives the tr(th o) thin$s nown+ and the #ower to now to the nower& ,he $ood is the (ltimate ca(se o) both the intelli$ible ob6ects tr(l! existin$+ a##earin$ in their tr(th as the! are Cood (ltimate so(rce o) thin$s bein$ what the! are 3lso the ca(se o) the thin$s that (nderstand these intelli$ible ob6ects ,he $ood is the ca(se o) both the )orms and the so(l "rational so(l+ the nower+ act(ali>ed in comin$ to now% 5nl! when the! reali>e their $ood+ act(ali>e their $ood 8ts the )act that the $ood is both the so(rce o) intelli$ible bein$+ and o(r mind "the thin$s that now the thin$s%+ are the conditions )or the so(rce o) nowled$e 8) the! weren't (ltimatel! )rom the same so(rce+ we co(ldn't have access to bein$s Meta#horical dar ness How can we have tr(st/con)idence that the lo$os in o(r minds re)lects the lo$os in realit!1 8) bein$ and that which $ras#s bein$ were not (ltimatel! )rom the same so(rce+ then what wo(ld ens(re that the! mirror each other1 ,he intelli$ible li$ht o) the $ood is the )act that bein$+ and that which nows bein$+ is #roo) that both are o))s#rin$ o) the $ood the nowin$er act(ali>es his #otential+ and th(s reali>es the $ood b! nowin$ the intelli$ible thin$s+ which reali>e their intelli$ible thin$s b! reali>in$ what the! are "b! bein$ accessible to nowled$e+ to the nower% Fo( have to now that both thin$s are )rom the same $ood so(rce to now )or certain that realit! re)lects the mind Since the $ood is the so(rce o) all bein$+ it m(st itsel) be s(#erior to+ or be be!ond bein$& ,he same wa! the s(n is the so(rce o) all li$ht+ and !et be!ond it&

27/10/2011 Govember 29+ 2011 *.3SS *3G*E..E= M3KE U4 *.3SS =ecember R+ 2011 8ma$e o) the .ine ,wo sides o) the .ine .e)t side =e$rees o) 2ein$

Ri$ht side 8ncreasin$ de$rees o) nowled$e/clarit! Ri$ht Side is the ,hin in$ side =ivided into 5#inion+ "doxa% and intellect 3t the ver! bottom+ on the thin in$ side+ !o( have ima$ination 5n the side o) bein$+ !o( have ima$es "ei(ones% 8n the material world+ these are ima$es o) thin$s in closed #ac ed s(r)aces+ #ools o) water+ mirrors+ etc& 5n the one hand+ what !o('re dealin$ with at this level+ what corres#onds to ima$ination are ill(sions+ m!ths+ #re6(dices+ lies+ in the strictest sense ,hin$s seemin$ to be what the! are not 8) !o( loo at !o(rsel) in a mirror+ it isn't he tr(e !o( 3lso e/(ivalent to #ro#a$anda and )alse m!ths+ etc& 4R cam#ai$ns ".i e the brown na# ins that sa! !o('re savin$ the #lanet% ,he next level+ hi$her on the line+ on the thin in$ side+ !o( have belie)/tr(st "pistis% and on the other side obtainable thin$s "to doxaston% ,hese too are ima$es+ o) the )orms the! #artici#ate in 0hat distin/(ishes it )rom the ima$es o) the ima$es "the lowest r(n$ o) this line%+ is that the!'re not l!in$ ima$es ,hese thin$s a##ear to be what the! are ,hese thin$s in the material world+ chairs+ d(c s+ etc+ are to the extent that the! are im#er)ect co#ies o) the )orms However+ as ima$es+ the!'re still some )alsit!+ or line =i))erence between the thin$ that instantiates the )orm+ and the ?orm 5n the 4olitical level+ it wo(ld be the #olitical realit! in the material world ,he act(al state o) a))airs that the ideolo$! mas s Ever!thin$ on the )irst two r(n$s o) the ladder corres#onds to a##earance and becomin$ 4artic(lar thin$s+ which are relative/im#er)ect/)leetin$/corr(#tible/material 0h! does it ma e sense to sa! that on this level+ in terms o) the thin in$ that corres#onds to these ima$es+that there's a ind o) )aith/con)idence1 3t this level+ we sim#l! have a )aith+ that the thin$s that we $ras# with o(r senses are "in the strictest sense%+ what the! seem 3 tree+ is the sensible material thin$ that !o( sense be)ore !o(+ is what it is+ beca(se !o( see it ,he bein$ o) this as is their bein$ b! material+ sensible thin$s ,hin$s that become are in a certain sense+ what the! are+ inso)ar as the! are instantiations o) the )orm 5#inion isn't s!non!mo(s with i$norance 5#inion still wor s on some sort o) $ras# on intelli$ible thin$s Fo( cannot orient !o(rsel) in the world+ merel! in terms o) !o(r senses 2eca(se the! sim#l! #rovide !o( with a mani)old o) colo(rs 0e live in a meanin$)(l world where there are discreet ob6ects+ b(t those aren't $ras#ed with the senses at all+ the!'re $ras#ed with the mind 8) !o( live solel! on o#inion+ !o( live with onl! an (nconscio(s $ras# on thin$s Fo( haven't tested it+ haven't ex#osed the nowled$e to an! tacit )orm+ haven't ex#osed it to the elenchus 0e are now ascendin$ (# the ladder o) nowled$e and bein$ and into to the )irst r(n$ o) the

intelli$ible world which is $ras#ed solel! b! the mind 5n the bein$ side o) the line+ !o( have the! h!#othetical )orms+ (sed as the )irst #rinci#les o) ar$(mentation 5n the other side !o( have disc(rsive reason 5ne wa! !o( can ma e sense o) it is the reasonin$ that $oes in the im#erical science 2iolo$ists+ etc ,he! treat the #henomena that the! observe as ima$es+ instantiations o) the laws that the! ho#e to $ras# in investi$atin$ this #henomena ,he! do reco$ni>e the existance o) intelli$ible essences+ the laws o) o(r res#ective nat(res ")lower+ whale+ etc&% 2(t+ the! in)er "$ras#% these laws on the basis o) re#eated observations o) the #henomena in /(estion Heat water to 100 de$rees+ it boils+ and the! do it a whole b(nch o) times+ and in this #rocess determine that there is a ca(sal law+ #art o) the de)inition o) water 2(t+ their insi$ht into the )orm o) water remains+ and alwa!s m(st remain+ #(rel! h!#othetical 2eca(se !o( can never $ain certainl! o) a ca(sal relation on the basis o) !o(r senses alone Go matter how man! times !o( see that water boils when heated to 100 de$rees+ it will still be h!#othetical and (ncertain *ertain nowled$e is that x is the case+ and it is im#ossible )or it not to be the #lace R(ssel's *hic en ?armer )eeds the chic en ever! mornin$+ and one mornin$ he comes and ills it Fo( don't see the ca(sal relation between the heat and water boilin$+ or between the chic en or the )armer ,his is what dianoia means Got somethin$ that exists materiall! Sti#(late de)initions/h!#otheses concernin$ thin$s Set (# b! convention+ a slew o) h!#otheses+ conventional de)initions+ and (se those as axioms+ as #remisises+ to see what )ollows ?rom the )act that one thin$ is de)ined one wa!+ and another is another+ then lets see what )ollowes 8) we can ass(me that the #remises we are h!#othesi>in$ are tr(e+ then !o( can see what )ollows 2(t the whole time !o('re ass(min$ the h!#otheses 4(rel! sti#(lated convention Fo(r reasonin$ )rom a #res(##osed #rinci#le/#remises "de)initions decided on b! convention% to see what )ollows 8) !o( can ma e it tr(e+ then it will be the case that x e/(als y and z. Still )ollowin$ h!#otheses tho($h+ and there)ore+ isn't nowled$e 3 ind o) nowled$e+ beca(se !o('re )i$(rin$ o(t what will )ollow )rom a set o) #remises i) the! were ass(med to be tr(e+ b(t still not tr(e nowled$e $ous or episteme vs& ,he ?orms "not as h!#othetical )irst #rinci#les+ b(t the ,r(th% 5n to#+ there is the (nh!#othetical )irst #rinci#le "the $ood% 5n this level+ thro($h dialectic + we wor o(r wa! (#+ testin$ o(r h!#otheses+ (ntil we $et to the (nh!#othetical )irst #rinci#le+ then we $o bac down+ derivin$ the )orms )rom the (nh!#othetical )irst #rinci#le+ and it is onl! then o(r nowled$e becomes tr(e

0hat 8s =ialectic 3##lies the elench(s to the h!#otheses "de)initions% themselves with the aim o) either con)irmin$ their tr(th "acc(rac! o) tr(e bein$%+ or dis#rovin$ them .oo s )or the conditions+ )or !o(r h!#otheses to be tr(e Coes (# (ntil it reaches an (nconditioned ca(se )or all thin$s+ somethin$ whcih isn't $ro(nded in #res(##ositions 5nce it $ets to the Unh!#othetical ?irst 4rinci#le+ it shows movin$ )rom )orm to )orm to )orm+ how all the )orms are derived )rom the U?4 ,here is one most $eneral #rinci#le/)orm+ ",he Cood%+ which encom#asses all other+ less s#eci)ic ?orms ,hose ?orms )ollow )rom/derived )rom+ the U?4 .ar$er ?orms are bro en down into smaller thin$s+ so once !o( $ras# the U?4+ !o( can see how the! all )ollow )rom them 8n so doin$+ !o( have conver$ed !o(r h!#othetical $ras# o) the )orms into tr(e nowled$e lol hi wt) How can Knowin$ the Cood a##l! to nowin$ ever!thin$1 How can we now that realit! is ordered+ and ordered s(ch that it is rational and accessible to o(r reason1 ,hat the world is intelli$ible and that the cosmos mirrors logos1 ,o 4lato+ we thin in terms o) (niversals ,o now thin$s is to now (niversals 0e $o aro(nd ma in$ sense o) the world in terms o) (nderstandin$ that it is an instantiation o) a (niversal thin$ 3n instance o) tree "a tree%+ etc& ,o do Science+ it is to loo )or the (niversal laws that obtain between thin$s 8t ma es no sense to claim that !o( have an! nowled$e i) !o('re not loo in$ into (niversal laws 8) it a one-o)) thin$ and !o( can't ex#lain it 0h! wo(ld realit! re)lect the wa! we thin 1 M 0h! isn't there a ind o) meta#horical dar ness between o(r mind and realit!1 0e can have )aith that cosmos mirrors lo$os "that bein$ is accessible to the nower% is that the! both arise )rom the same Cood so(rce+ and both onl! are the thin$s that the! are "the thin$s on the bein$ side+ the )orms% inso)ar as the! #artici#ate in the Cood+ and the so(l is the thin$ that it is+ inso)ar as it #artici#ates in the ver! same Cood #rinci#le+ each in its own wa! 2rid$e between realit! and the mind the! both are what the! are in that the! reali>e the Cood ,he ineli$ible li$ht in terms o) the s(n ,he wa! 4lato ex#lains it+ its as tho($h !o( need to have Cod's (nderstandin$ o) the Cood+ and how thin$s come )rom the $ood+ etc+ to now how thin$s come )rom an!thin$ 3 rather tall order+ and )or dialectic to achieve 3nother wa! o) (nderstandin$ the Cood which dialectic c(limnates in+ which allows U?4 to be converted into somethin$ (nderstandable .oo at the Re#(blic itsel) as an exercise in =ialectic Somethin$ #res(##osed: !o('re ha##! when !o(r nat(re is )(l)illed Cla(con+ wor in$ on what 4ersimach(s and *o are wor in$ on+ #(ts )orward that o(r nat(re is #(rel! a##etite+ and (ses disco(rsive reasonin$ to show what )ollows )rom that Ha##! when !o( $ain #ower to satis)! as man! bodil! a##etites as #ossible

0hat does Socrates do1 He a##lies the elench(s+ en$a$es in dialectic in this h!#othesis =esire is bro en down into necessar! and (nnecessar! thin$s ?ollows )rom the )act that we have (nnecessar! a##etites+ that we have to en$a$e in war+ and !o( need thymos to en$a$e in war+ and there)ore his ar$(ment is invalid: we are more than 6(st a##etite ,hen the elench(s is a##lied to the reasonin$ that we are 6(st a##etite and thymos and there we reali>e that we are rational have $ras#ed o(r Cood+ and is an a##roximate U?4+ not ,he Cood 2(t in li$ht o) this+ we can (nderstand what we were thin in$ abo(t be)ore abo(t a cit! $overned b! 6(st a##etite or th!mos+ beca(se we didn't now abo(t the $ood !et+ or bein$ 0e can $o in in 2oo s N and 9+ to see how h(man bein$s )all short in their nat(re i) the!'re still 6(st $overned b! a##etite or thymos

,he ,hird 8ma$e ,he *ave "=(n d(n d(((((n% 3n ascent )rom the bottom o) the cave to the contem#lation o) the s(n o(tside the cave "ascent (# the divided line%+ and the s(n in the cave alle$or! is the )orm o) the Cood in the ima$e o) the s(n ,he S(n ima$e is #resent in the *ave alle$or! thro($h the ?ire 4eo#le in a cave loo in$ at the bac o) a cave "stra##ed in% 2ehind them there is a )ire+ and a little mo(nd+ and #eo#le wal in$ with vario(s ob6ects Mo(nd+ s(ch that the shadow #ro6ected on the bac o) the wall is onl! the shadow o) the ob6ects and not the #eo#le ,he! tal and the! ma e so(nds ,here is an echo+ s(ch that the #eo#le stra##ed in hear the so(nd o) the #eo#le+ and thin that it is comin$ )rom the shadows 8n terms o) the divided line this re#resents seen images ,he shadows there re#resent the ima$es o) ima$es at the lowest r(n$ o) the divided line *ave sho(ld be tho($ht o) in #olitical terms to "ideolo$!% So+ what ha##ens when !o( remove the shac les and let them see what is $oin$ on+ see the #eo#le trans#ortin$ the ob6ects and the )ire 3t )irst the! are blinded and (tterl! con)(sed 3ll the! have ever been ex#osed to are the shadows which are images o) the real thin$s So how can the! $ras# that the items are the real ima$es that the! were ex#osed to1 4ower o) #ro#a$anda when the ideolo$! $o$$les are removed+ !o( can still )ail to see what's act(all! $oin$ on in !o(r state 8deolo$! ma es thin$s clearer than what's reall! $oin$ on materiall! ,o these #eo#le+ the shadows seem m(ch clearer+ beca(se it's li e a nice stor! So m(ch )or the sensible realm So+ now ima$e that the cave dweller is made to ascend (# the cave into the s(nli$ht ,he!'d be (nable to ma e an!thin$ o(t once the! made their wa! o(t o) the cave 5nce a$ain com#letel! da>>led and blinded ,hat's beca(se the cave dwellers are acc(stomed to a##rehendin$ the world thro($h the senses and thin o) it onl! in material terms ,hat's what the cave re#resents material world+ and that nowled$e can onl! be $ained thro($h the senses 0hat !o( can sense is nowled$e+ and is what is most real

0hat tr(l! exists are #artic(lar chan$able thin$s 2(t the o(tside o) the cave is di))erent+ it is (niversal+ it is atem#oral rather than )leetin$+ it is immaterial Re/(ires an (tter #aradi$m shi)t 8) the cave dweller is to $et his bearin$s in the o(tside world "o(tside o) the material world%+ he m(st (nder$o a slow #rocess o) re-ed(cation

,he 4(r#ose o) Ed(cation "o) 4hiloso#hers+ s#eci)icall!% Ed(cation is not the trans)er o) in)o )rom one so(l to another Rather+ ed(cation is a slow conversion #rocess+ "epistrophe%+ a t(rnin$ o) the e!e o) the so(l awa! )rom the )ixation with the sensible everchan$in$ toward the intelli$ible+ the (niversal+ and there)ore what tr(l! is. ,here)ore+ this t(rnin$ can't ta e #lace (nless in a certain sense !o( have si$ht within !o( So all this ed(cation is meant to do is t(rn the e!e o) !o(r so(l in the ri$ht direction and attend to the thin$s that are alread! within !o(+ b(t which !o( are )ailin$ to attend to with !o(r )ixation with the sensible 0hat is bein$ ass(med here is that the rational so(l cannot be (tterl! )orei$n to+ to the )orms in the ineli$ible realm+ that the! are made to see How can the so(l be made to want somethin$ i) it doesn't alread! now on some level that it needs it and desires to see it1 So(l the child o) penya and poros So(l reco$ni>es that it lac s somethin$+ and this reco$nition is what drives !o( to stride toward it 8t is onl! beca(se the so(l is divine and alread! a in to the )orms and on some level comm(nin$ in them+ or ma!be even is the )orms+ that it can be made to see them and reco$ni>e them when it sees them ,he so(l has )or$otten its inshi# with the )orms beca(se it ceased to attent to these thin$s 2ac to the *ave ,his #rocess o) ed(cation is de#icted meta#horicall! 3ll !o( wo(ld see wo(ld be shadows in the realm o) the intelli$ible+ then ima$es in #ools o) water+ then !o('d loo at the stars at ni$ht+ and then )inall! at the s(n ,he ste#s that the #hiloso#her will be made to $o thro($h Reasonin$ with the mathematical and im#erical sciences "acc(stoms !o( to thin in terms o) intelli$ible ob6ects+ even i) the! are not nown b(t h!#othesi>e% Fo( wo(ld (ltimatel! come to st(d! dialectic+ and !o( wo(ld $o )rom the h!#otheses to the conditions+ to the conditions o) the conditions+ (ntil !o( reach the U?4+ the Cood "the s(n%+ the ca(se o) all that is correct and bea(ti)(l in all thin$s and #rovides tr(th and (nderstandin$ ,he nowled$e o) the $ood+ which the #hiloso#her will be made to achieve is the hi$hest $ood+ the hi$hest ob6ect o) nowled$e Knowled$e 0hat enables (s to )(l)il the hi$hest $ood 2eca(se nowled$e o) the $ood is the hi$hest $ood+ and the #hiloso#hers now this+ directl! and ex#erientiall! in contem#latin$ the $ood+ that the! don't want to do an!thin$ b(t contem#late the $ood once the!'ve reali>ed their /(est )or nowled$e 2eca(se the! now that this is the hi$hest $ood+ the! don't want to r(le 0hat 4lato's $ettin$ is at is that the concem#lation o) absol(te thin$s ma es the contem#lator eternal+ absol(te and (nchan$in$+ the #lentiti(de o) bein$

,he #eo#le who attend to m(ch to the )leetin$ become c(rr(#table+ im#er)ect and )leetin$ *learl!+ i) the contem#lation o) the $ood allows !o( to become eternal+ !o('re not $oin$ to want to do an!thin$ else 4recisel! the #erson !o( want r(lin$ !o(r cit! 2eca(se an!one else will thin$ it is a $ood thin$ to be )leecin$ the cit! )or mone!+ or that sens(al #leas(res are the hi$hest $ood+ or i) !o('re thymonic, to be hono(red is the hi$her $ood 0ill do other thin$s beca(se the! don't now the hi$her $ood 4hiloso#hers will a$ree to r(le+ not beca(se the! want mone!+ b(t beca(se the!'re 6(st+ and the! owe it to the cit! ,he $ood cit! is s(ch which enables them "#hiloso#hers% to )lo(rish 8) the! arise in an! other cit! it is d(e to a #(re miracle 3nd beca(se the! are what the! are beca(se o) the cit!+ the! #a! it bac thro($h r(lin$ it )airl! 3nd when their time is (#+ the retreat to the isles o) the blessed *ontem#lation o) the Cood is the ex#erience+ #ersonall! and directl!

4rinci#le o) Ed(cation ,he! will st(d! the vario(s sciences that t(rns #eo#le )rom becoming to being. Ed(cation is a t(rnin$ o) the e!e o) the so(l ,his is what aritmathic does+ beca(se the st(d! o) n(mber t(rns !o(r e!e to bein$+ to the intelli$ible+ beca(se !o( don't ever see , or - . Fo(r senses are con)(sed beca(se !o( can see man!+ b(t not the conce#t o) the n(mber itsel) G(merac! is a rational st(d! thro($h which !o( a##rehend the vario(s nat(res that a hand holdin$ (# one )i$er is #artici#atin$ in Each has its own distinct de)inition 3nd ee# st(d!in$ each thin$ (ntil !o( reach dialectic 3t the a$e o) 9A !o( $o bac itnot he cave to hold o))ices 3t the a$e o) A0 !o( $o and concem#late ,hen once !o( have com#leted contem#lation+ !o( reenter the cave and ta e (# the throne 5ne e!e on the intelli$ible+ and one e!e on the c(rro#table )orm !o( have been made to $overn 2oo s N and 9 ,he vario(s wa!s in which the re$imes can )all short o) the best Se/(ence 3ristocrac! )rom ,heocrac! to oli$arch! to democrac! to t!rann! ,he im#ortant thin$ to reali>e is the vario(s wa!s that cities can )all short o) the Cood o) a cit! Seen that the Cood is s!non!mo(s with bein$+ so in a sense+ these are wa!s in which cities can )ail to be cities ,here is no )orm )or each o) these cities+ beca(se theses are onl! wa!s in which the! de#art )rom bein$ a cit! ,hese are corr(#t cities inso)ar as the! )ail to be cities Evil is interchan$eable with nonbein$ ,!#ical wa!s in which cities can )ail to instantiate the )orm o) a cit!+ b! bein$ divided Unit! is s!non!mo(s with the $ood and with bein$ 0e ee# onl! the stories o) the #oets which are in accordance with the )orms

M!th o) Er+ #arallels *e#hal(s' acco(nt in the be$innin$ 0hole boo is #!ramid

2@/10/2011 #oo#ie9 U--- Eri a+ )ail& 3ristotle t'Agathos the Cood 2orn in Sta$era Macedonia 9N7 2*E 0asn't even born when Socrates was exec(ted 4lato 7NR 2*E -- 1112*E Sta$erite+ or 4ara#etetic+ or ,he 4hiloso#her D 3ristotle His )ather was a co(rt doctor to the in$ o) Macedonia "4hilli#% 3ristotle mi$ht have had some initiation in medicine His )ather wo(ld have im#arted to 3ristotle a love o) all thin$s biolo$ical Moves to 3thens when he's 1N+ with the ex#ress #(r#ose o) st(d!in$ with 4lato in his 3cademn! =on't now whether he read 4lato+ or was 6(st see in$ the best ed(cation he co(ld $et S#ent 20!rs in 4lato's academn! Re)erred to as the Mind o) the School b! 4lato+ and as the Reader He wo(ld have $iven classes also at a certain #oint Said to have com#osed dialo$(es "4latonicall! com#osed% 3##arentl! were /(ite bea(ti)(l and cites 3ristotle as an exam#le o) elo/(ence 4lato s(ceeded b! S#e(ci)is at 97N2*E 3ristotle now leaves 3thens either beca(se o) hostilit! to the Macedonians+ or didn't li e the direction the school was $oin$ .eaves to modern da! t(r e! and wor s in the co(rt o) Hermae(s Herme(s is dis#osed soon a)ter+ and 3ristotle is de#osed to .esbos )rom here we $et his biolo$ical writin$s 3natom! o) animals+ re#rod(ction+ etc&&& 979 2*+ 4hili# o) Macedon calls (#on 3ristotle to become the t(tor o) soon to be 3lexander the Creat 3s #a!ment )or the t(torin$+ 4hili# o) Macedon released the citi>ens o) Sta$era and reb(ilt the cit! 3ristotle ret(rns to 3thens in 99A+ and o#ens a school+ .!ce(m Known to stroll as he ta($ht+ and hence the 'arapetetic "means the school as well% 3ristotle )lees 3thens to not allow the 3thenians to sin twice a$ainst #hiloso#h! =ies in a Macedonian stron$hold in 999 2*E

3ristotle's *lassi)ications o) Sciences ,hree)old division ,heoretical

 See nowled$e )or its own sa e 4ractical See nowled$e )or the sa e o) $ood actions S(bdivided into Ethics Economics "ho(sehold mana$ement% 4olitics Kind o) the master science in one sense 4rod(ctive See nowled$e in order to #rod(ce thin$s +echne % cra)ts ,heoretical Sciences ,hree o) them 4h!sics St(d! o) nat(re Gat(ral ob6ects can be characteri>ed as 'material' and 'chan$in$/s(b6ect to chan$e' 5b6ects o) #h!sics are sel) s(bsistant *a#able o) inde#endent existence Mathematics St(dies those thin$s which are material "in one sense% b(t it st(dies them inso)ar as it extracts its ob6ects )rom the material St(dies thin$s in matter+ b(t is mentall! abstracted )rom matter St(dies thin$s which are (nchan$in$ as well St(dies #ro#erties o) material thin$s 4ro#erties that can't exist o(tside o) material thin$s S#eci)icall! /(antities+ whcih are alwa!s of things, !et at the same time are abstracted St(dies thin$s which are (nchan$in$ Gat(re o) 2 sta!s the same Meta#h!sics St(dies that whcih is (nchan$in$ and immaterial and ca#able o) inde#endent existance "sel) s(bsistant% 0ord 'meta#h!sics' coined b! 3ristotle's editors+ "meta #h!sics D a)ter 4h!sics% 2(t this also a##lies since it is beyond #h!sics .o$ic s(bserves the sciences Establishes the correct methodolo$! to em#lo! in science 3ristotle's wor s on lo$ic are o)ten re)erred to as the organon which means tool

3ristotle's 4h!sics Science o) Gat(re Knowled$e o) Gat(re 0hat does 3ristotle mean b! Knowled$e1 Knowled$e o) #rinci#les

*a(ses Elements ,o now what somethin$ is+ to now wh! it is what it is+ and not somethin$ else+ is to now the #rinci#les/ca(ses that ma e it what it is+ and not otherwise ,o now its constit(ents ,o now what is x + !o( as what ind o) thin$ is it "what class o) thin$s does it belon$ to% 3lso as in$ what it is )or+ it's #(r#ose 2! whom+ and how+ is it made1 0hat is it made o)1 "Elements+ what are its constit(ents% 3ll o) these are /(estions abo(t its ca(ses and #rinci#les *omin$ to the answer involves anal!>in$ the thin$ and determinin$ its (ltimate constit(ents 4h!sics s#eci)icall! is the attem#t to achieve nowled$e o) nat(re 0hat are the #rinci#les/ca(ses that $overn the #henomena o) nat(re and what is nat(re (ltimatel! made o)1 How do !o( de)ine it1 0hat is nat(re in its essence1 0hat is nat(re's str(ct(re1 How do it's #arts relate to each other1 2oo 1 0hat is Gat(re1 Establish the )(ndamental #rinci#les o) nat(re Most basic+ most common 2oo 2 0hat distin$(ishes nat(ral thin$s )rom arti)icial thin$s1

2oo 1 3t least #art o) what de)ines nat(re/nat(ral ob6ects is the ca#acit! to chan$e Gat(ral thin$s are which are+ i) not #resentl! chan$in$+ are s(sce#tible to it Ever!thin$ in nat(re is either in motion+ or ca#able o) it 0hat we're doin$ here+ beca(se we're loo in$ to establish what nat(re is+ what we're $oin$ to be doin$ is to st(d! the #rinci#les/conditions )or the #ossibilit! o) chan$e ,heoretical conditions )or the #ossibilit! o) chan$e *han$e can be said in man! wa!s &inesis "chan$e% S(bstantial chan$e $eneration "somethin$ comin$ into bein$ and #assin$ awa!% X(antitative chan$e increasin$/decreasin$ in chan$e X(alitative somethin$ can be hot/cold .ocomotive chan$e ,he ?(ndamental 4(>>le ?(ndamental to the tho($hts o) Beno and 4armenides =enied the #ossibilit! o) motion and chan$e Beno's #aradox =enies the #ossibilit! o) chan$e o) #lace ,o travel an! distance "3 ------ 2% !o( have to travel hal) o) the distance+ b(t then hal) o) the hal)+ to the hal) to in)init! 8) !o( #roceed to in)init!+ !o( don't $et )rom 3 to 2+ hence motion is im#ossible 8diot .a#se o) time same thin$ a##lies

Er$o+ time can never #ass 3$ain+ he's an idiot 4armenides there is a wa! o) bein$ and a wa! o) becomin$+ which is not 0a! o) bein$ is the wa! o) reason 0a! o) becomin$ is o#inion1 *an bein$ as a whole come to be1 Go+ wh!1 8) it came to be+ what does it come )rom1 8) it comes )rom bein$+ it reall! didn't come to be+ it alread! was 8) it comes )rom not bein$+ it is nothin$+ beca(se it's not bein$ 8) bein$ were to come )rom nothin$ then nothin$ wo(ld be bein$ )rom which it came b(t nothin$ is nothin$ there)ore nothin$ comes )rom nothin$ Got onl! denies bein$ as a whole does not become+ it 6(st is, #ermanentl!+ he denies internal di))erentiation in the one that is bein$ ,o 4armenides+ to be somethin$ is to be determinate ,his+ rather than that 8) that's the case+ ever! determination is a ne$ation as well "x is x+ and not !% 2(t i) bein$ is divided in this wa!+ onl! nonbein$ can divide it+ b(t nonbein$ is nothin$+ there)ore nothin$ divided an!thin$ )rom an!thin$ else 3ll is one ,heoretical sol(tion to these #aradoxes =e)ine #rinci#les o) chan$e 3ristotle doesn't )avo(r reason over the data o) the senses Re)(tes the two claims 4rinci#le o) nat(re is not 5ne "4armenides% 3lso re)(tes the claim that the #rinci#les o) nat(re m(st be inn(merable

*ha#ter A+ 2oo 1 2e$ins b! s(mmari>in$ what he's done in 9 and 7+ in which he $oes over all o) what he's #redecessors have claimed+ and salva$es what he can 3ll o) his #redecessors+ a##ealed to contraries as )(ndamental #rinci#les 4len(m and the Eoid Rare and =ense Hot and *old 3ristotle a##la(ds them )or doin$ this 5ne is not red(cible to the other 8n nat(re+ nothin$ comes to exist randoml! ,here is an order to nat(re and ca(salit! in nat(re Rational order / rationall! accessible order 8) there weren't the scienti)ic endeavo(r wo(ld be )(tile Rational 5rder bein$ involved in the notion o) contraries are the #rinci#les we a##eal to 0henever an!thin$ comes to be+ it comes to be o(t o) its contrar!+ or some intermediate state 8n other words+ strictl! s#ea in$+ chan$es occ(r )rom one determinate state or condition+ to another determinate state or condition which can be described as #oints which can be #laced alon$ the same contin((m+ or the same s#ectr(m

*han$e onl! occ(rs )rom one #oint o) the s#ectr(m to another #oint on the s#ectr(m S#ectr(m within one t!#e o) thin$+ or one )amil! o) thin$s "one $en(s% Encom#assed b! one de)inition ?or exam#le+ hot comes )rom cold+ beca(se hot and cold can be #laced alon$ the same s#ectr(m o) tem#erat(re *an Hot come )rom 4ale1 Go+ beca(se the! don't belon$ on the same contin((m+ or the same $en(s+ or are encom#assed )rom the same de)inition Hot can onl! come )rom #ale accidentall! Somethin$ which is #ale is also cold+ and becomes hot 0hen !o( sa! the 4ale thin$ became hot+ it is shorthand )or the 4ale *old thin$ becomes a Hot 4ale thin$& .aw holdin$ )or all nat(ral thin$+ ever!thin$ that comes to be or #asses awa!+ comes )rom or #asses into its contrar! or intermediate state 1NN2 29 M(sical comes )rom the (nm(sical+ not 6(st an!thin$ (nm(sical thin$ 2! the end o) cha#ter )ive we've established that the #rinci#les which acco(nt )or chan$e have to incl(de contraries

*ha#ter @ Reca#s ar$(ment so )ar =o the! have to be two in n(mber1 Go *ontraries themselves don't a))ect or chan$e into each other Hot itsel) doesn't become cold itsel) Hot b! de)inition is not cold 3t minim(m+ we need a third term that the contraries can act (#on or a))ect Somethin$ has to (nderl!/(nder$o the chan$e )rom one contrar! to another 3 blac thin$ has to become white+ not blac itsel) to white *once#t o) S(bstance actin$ as S(b6ect ousia % s(bstance ,hird #rinci#le S(bstance actin$ as the hypo(eimenon "the thin$ that (nder$oes the chan$e and #ersists in and s(rvives the chan$e Hs(b6ect1I% in one t!#e o) chan$e 3 s(bstance+ or ousia is+ to 3ristotle+ that which is ca#able o) sel) standin$ existance *oncrete #artic(lar material thin$s in the material world ,hin$s we enco(nter in the world *hairs+ lect(res+ h(man bein$s Ever!thin$ else is #redicated o)+ or said o)+ a s(bstance X(alities or /(antities do not have inde#endent existence Red is a /(alit!+ or determination o) a s(bstance in an ob6ect 3ristotle has this )amo(s list o) ten cate$ories S(bstance+ in the strictest sense+ is the onl! thin$ that exists& Ever!thin$ else is #redicated (#on it ,he contraries have to be #redicated on a s(bstance actin$ as the s(b6ect in a chan$e ,he contraries can't s())ice+ the!'re not eno($h to acco(nt )or chan$e

Fo( need something that (nder$oes the chan$e 0hat (nder$oes the chan$e is the s(b6ect 3nd in one ind o) chan$e+ the s(b6ect is the s(bstance ,here wo(ldn't be a chan$e i) somethin$ didn't s(##ort/(nder$o the chan$e between one contrar! to another ?or chan$e to occ(r+ something m(st chan$e Somethin$ that is not chan$ed in the chan$e+ b(t (nder$oes the chan$e *hair that $oes )rom blac to white is still a chair+ b(t is chan$ed ,hree 4rinci#les ,wo contraries and a s(bstrat(m that (nderlies the chan$e in attrib(tes

*ha#ter R *on)irmation in the wa! we s#ea abo(t thin$s 5ne case o) chan$e still seems to con)lict with this acco(nt 0hen+ instead o) accidental chan$es+ !o( have s(bstantial chan$e 8n and accidental chan$e+ a s(bstance acts as the s(b6ect "that which (nder$oes the chan$e% )rom one contrar! to another 8t remains the t!#e o) thin$ it is+ the s(bstance that it is X(alities which can be said o) someone which are not #art o) the essence o) somethin$/somethin$ 3 red chair #ainted blac retains its nat(re /(a that it is a chair 8n an accidental chan$e+ the s(b6ect that which (nderlies the chan$e )rom one state to another+ is a s(bstance 2(t+ what abo(t when a s(bstance comes into bein$ and #erishes1 3 toaster bro en be!ond re#air which can no lon$er be said to be a toaster "cannot #er)orm its essential )(nction% 2(t even in the case where a #ile o) wood becomes a shi#+ "somethin$ with inde#endent existance somethin$ becomes into bein$% ,hin$s still don't s#ontaneo(sl! come o(t o) nothin$ "comes o(t o) wood+ in the above case% 3ll thin$s come to be o(t o) somethin$ else ,he anal!sis o) chan$e and accidental attrib(tes also a##lies to the case o) s(bstantial chan$e 8n an accidental chan$e+ !o( have three #rinci#les 4revation/ne$ation o) an attrib(te Havin$ o) a )orm/attrib(te ,hat which (nderlies the chan$e "s(bstance actin$ li e the s(b6ect% Stands (nder the chan$e in attrib(tes ,his /(ali)ication/determination is alwa!s of something 8n an accidental chan$e+ it is the s(bstance actin$ as s(b6ect 8n a s(bstantial chan$e+ !o('ve $ot three #rinci#les 3bsence o) s(bstantial )orm "absence o) the )orm shi#% 4resence o) a s(bstantial )orm "essential )orm o) the s(bstance% Matter as s(b6ect 8n a s(bstantial chan$e+ the s(b6ect (nder$oes and s(rvives the chan$e hyle 8n both t!#es o) chan$e+ !o( have three #inci#les 4revation/ne$ation

?orm/attrib(te and S(bstrat(m/s(b6ect 4rivation is somethin$ which a($ht to be #art o) a s(bstance b(t isn't there Ge$ation is an! /(alit! which isn't #art o) !o(r essence 3ristotle's acco(nt allows )or chan$e Removed the di))(c(lt! that earl! #hiloso#hers $ot into ,he )irst thin ers were misled beca(se the! tho($ht that nothin$ comes to be or #asses awa! beca(se the! tho($ht o) chan$e in absol(te terms 3ristotle's sol(tion is that nothin$ comes to be in an absol(te sense ,o come to be so and so )rom not bein$ means /(a not bein$ ,hin$s come to be onl! in a /(ali)ied sense "#recise/limited sense% ,he! come )rom somethin$ which lac s a #artic(lar /(alit!+ b(t is somethin$ Shi# comes to be )rom a #ile o) timber 3 m(sical man comes to be not absol(tel! s#ea in$+ b(t )rom an (nm(sical man "who lac s that #artic(lar attrib(te% 8) !o( )ail to ma e this distinction between absol(te $eneration+ and $eneration in a /(ali)ied sense+ !o( #rod(ce Beno's and 4armenides' nonsense "a a 2U..SH8,%

E/(ate the Got Havin$ o) an 3ttrib(te/?orm with 4otenc! *ynamis ,he havin$ o) the )orm/attrib(te with act(all! energeia 8n the case o) a s(bstantial chan$e+ !o('re $oin$ )rom a #ile o) wood which lac s the )orm o) shi#+ b(t havin$ the #otential )or shi# 0ood has #otenical )or recievin$ the )orm i) it is wor ed on in an a##ro#riate wa! b! a cra)tsman 3n (nm(sical man has the #otencial to recieve the determination o) m(sic "to act(ali>e #otenical% 4otencialit! isn't 6(st an! ind o) ne$ation/#revation 0hatever is not m(sical or not shi# has the #otential o) becomin$ m(sical or shi# 8t m(st have certain #ro#erties 0h! is this im#ortant1 8t $ives 3ristotle another wa! o) #hrasin$ his sol(tion/#aradox o) chan$e 4otencialit! is not nothin$+ it is a ind o) nonbein$ which act(all! becomes somethin$ *han$e ta es #lace o(t o) somethin$ 4otenicalit! isn't 6(st somethin$ we describe to thin$s in realit!+ it is there ,he not havin$ which is involved in all chan$e ")rom one state to another%+ exists in somethin$ which exists Got bein$ is the #otencial to be somethin$ 4otencialit! is somethin$ Gon bein$ "absol(tel! s#ea in$%+ doesn't exist+ !eah+ b(t when we're tal in$ abo(t somethin$ not bein$ something and then becomin$ it+ we're tal in$ abo(t #otentialit!+ we have somethin$ 4otencialit! and 3ct(alit! and Beno's 4aradox o) Motion So how can !o( $et to 3 and 21 3 line is not actually an in)init! o) #oints+ it has the potencial to be+ and there)ore !o( can traverse it

91/10/2011 3ristotle *ontin(ed ,!#es o) chan$e in $eneration and destr(ction =istinction between nat(ral ob6ects and arti)icial ob6ects Motion #art o) the de)inition o) a nat(ral ob6ect ,o come to now somethin$ is to see its ca(ses See in$ to now nat(re Ma es sense to tr! and determine the #rinci#les and ca(ses )or motion 8denti)!in$ the #rinci#les that allow )or motion 3 rational acco(nt/ex#laination o) motion involved three #rinci#les ,wo contraries S(bstrat(m hypo(eimenon /sia 0sp 1 % s(bstance that which exists in the strictest sense Red doesn't exist as )ree )loatin$+ it onl! exists in the colo(r o) a chair 4lace+ or all the other cate$ories ,hree #rinci#les can be anal!>ed )(ll! b! not havin$ a )orm/attrib(te+ havin$ the )orm/attrib(te+ and the hypo(eimenon that which (nder$oes the chan$e Somethin$ either comes into existence or #asses awa! 8) somethin$ is comin$ into bein$ !o( have 3bsence o) the s(bstantial )orm 4resence o) the s(bstantial )orm and the (nderl!in$ s(b6ect "matter or hyle% 8n an accidental chan$e "chan$e in nonessential attrib(tes o) a s(bstance% *hair $oin$ )rom blac to white So+ blac + white+ and chair as the three attrib(tes 0hat 3re Gat(re's 4rinci#les/*a(ses/Elements1 Gat(re is a realm o) (inesis or chan$e+ or at least thin$s ca#able o) chan$e ,he #roblem is that not all thin$s which are ca#able o) chan$in$ "chan$eable% exist b! nat(re Got all chan$eable thin$s can be said to be+ in the strictest sense+ to have a nat(re 3rti)icial ob6ects+ )or exam#le Gat(ral ob6ects exist within nat(re+ nat(re bein$ (nderstood as the realm o) all chan$eable thin$s Got nat(ral in the strict sense+ beca(se the! don't arise/exist b! nat(re =e)inition o) Gat(re in last class is too broad Got eno($h necessar! or s())icient conditions =etermine how we distin$(ish between nat(ral and arti)icial ob6ects Got 6(st a /(estion o) movement+ beca(se both nat(ral and arti)icia ob6ects are ca#able o) movement So it has to be a s#ecial t!#e o) movement s#eci)ic to nat(ral ob6ects 0hat exists b! nat(re1 4lants+ animals+ and the thin$s that ma e them (#

Sim#le elements ma e (# inanimate and animate ob6ects 0hat is common between all these thin$s1 ,o be a nat(ral thin$ is to have an internal #rinci#le o) motion/chan$e or o) rest/stasis+ nonchan$e Sel) contained )orce/#rinci#le in virt(e o) bein$ the ind o) thin$s the! are that ma es them do the ind o) thin$s that the! do ,he sim#lest elements s(ch as )ire and earth+ etc+ nat(rall! strive to be in a certain #lace in the (niverse 3ristotle's (niverse is hierarchical *entre o) the (niverse that roc s strive to be in+ and )ire "the rarest/least dense% strives to be on to#+ on the o(termost ed$e o) the circle Gat(ral thin$s have the abilit! to move in a certain direction or be in a certain state 3nimate ob6ects strive to #ersevere in bein$+ and i) !o( in6(re them in some wa!+ sa! c(ttin$ o)) a limb+ b! nat(re+ the animal tries to heal itsel) and reestablish the harmon! o) its #arts that is consistent with its nat(re/de)inition =oes it on its own initiative Got d(e to the wor (#on it b! an external a$ent 8nternal drive to reconstit(te itsel) accordin$ to nat(re Exam#le $rowth+ mat(ration o) a nat(ral creat(re "trees+ animals+ etc&% 3corn tr!in$ to reali>e its #otencial as an oa tree ,he $rowth and develo#ment o) an oa tree o(t o) an acorn is related to the )actors o) the environment+ b(t there is somethin$ in an acorn that ma es it strive to be the t!#e o) thin$ it is 3 nat(ral thin$ has an internal #rinci#le o) motion and rest Rest cessation o) motion/chan$e d(e to a nat(ral thin$ havin$ achieved its nat(ral state 5nce it has arrived in its nat(ral #lace+ it rests 0hen a nat(ral thin$ li e an acorn has $rown into an oa tree+ it rests+ so to s#ea *om#ared to an 3rti)act #encil 8) !o( dro# a #encil+ it )alls+ b(t it is not in virt(e o) bein$ a #encil+ it is in virt(e o) bein$ made (# o) nat(ral thin$s 8ts elements are nat(ral and they have internal motion 0ood and lead are heav! and the! strive to move in a certain direction Strictl! s#ea in$+ a #encil doesn't exist b! nat(re 3 #encil+ inso)ar as it is a #encil+ doesn't strive to do an!thin$ b! itsel) 3n external a$ent/)orce is needed to move the #encil so it can even )(l)il its own )(nction/virt(e 8n a wa!+ a #encil has a ind o) nat(re "essence/de)inition% 2(t+ it does not have a nat(re in the strict sense here+ beca(se it doesn't have an internal #rinci#le o) motion/rest =oesn't exist by nat(re+ b(t it ma! have nat(ral #arts How abo(t a car1 Str(ct(re+ order+ and it is onl! a car inso)ar as it has the order 2(t the movement is onl! d(e to the str(ct(re harnessin$ the nat(ral motions o) the nat(ral materials Ma in$ them do a certain thin$ "channellin$ them to a certain end de)inition o) a car%

*ha#ter 1+ 2oo 2 0hat is in each individ(al thin$ that is its nat(re1 ,he exam#les he (ses to ill(strate his #oint are all arti)icial Reason )or this: the nat(re o) somethin$ is $oin$ to be clearer loo in$ )or arti)icial ob6ects 0hat constit(tes the nat(re o) somethin$ b! nat(re1 ,hin s that there is a ind o) analo$! between arti)ical thin$s and nat(ral thin$s Gat(ral and arti)icial ob6ects mirror one another Fo( can loo to one to de)ine another 3ristotle considers two contenders: Matter ?orm Man! o) the #resocratics were materialists+ and claimed that the nat(re o) somethin$ is the s(m o) the constit(ents which ma e it (# 3nti#hon i) !o( b(r! a bed+ what comes o(t is a shoot+ not a bed+ there)or the nat(re m(st be wood+ not bed. 8diot Matter is the nat(re o) all thin$s+ beca(se its that which #ersists thro($h the destr(ction o) ob6ects ,he arran$ement o) wood which $oes )rom bed to shi# is an accidental chan$e 0ood itsel) is made (# o) other thin$s "water+ air+ )ire+ etc% So the (ltimate nat(re o) things m(st be the (ltimate elements o) all thin$s Earth+ or )ire+ or somethin$ li e that 3ristotle tho($ht this was b(llshit 3nother de)inition: ,he nat(re o) somethin$ is its )orm 0hen !o( want to state the di))erence between a #otential shi# "#ile o) wood% and real shi#+ !o( describe the )orm o) the shi# ,he material s(bstrat(m alone can't acco(nt )or what a shi# is 8t is more acc(rate to state its )orm 3lso+ it is more im#ortant to $ive the )orm when !o( are de)inin$ somethin$+ and !o( are closer to ca#t(rin$ the nat(re o) somethin$+ beca(se the same t!#e o) thin$+ havin$ the same nat(re+ can be com#osed o) di))erent materials Shi# can be made o) wood or steel So it mi$ht be more acc(rate to cite the )orm not the matter So it is more acc(rate+ in that case+ to cite the )orm beca(se it does not chan$e when the material does ,he )orm is more closer to the real thin$ beca(se it strives to be that thin$ ?orm o) ,ree is tree and acorn tries to be a tree1 Mathematics st(dies #ro#erties which are alwa!s #ro#erties o) #h!sical+ material+ chan$able thin$s+ b(t considers them in abstraction o) material chan$eable thin$s ,hin$s D line+ #oint+ trian$le Got ca#able o) existance o(tside o) matter ,he abstract conce#t - doesn't chan$e+ even tho($h in realit!+ these conce#ts exist onl! in material chan$able thin$s ,he nat(ral #hiloso#her st(dies thin$s which can'Ht be de)ined in abstraction )rom matter =e)inition contains a necessar! connection to matter 5b6ects o) #h!sics are not ca#able o) immaterial existance+

 *ant extract them )rom matter even in tho($ht 3nd st(dies chan$able thin$s *ha#ter 9 Reca#s what he's done so )ar Examined some candidates )or what nature means& Examined the h!#otheses o) matter+ and )orm 2oth are inte$ral to the st(d! o) #h!sics ,he #h!sicist has to now both+ (# to a #oint+ beca(se nat(ral ob6ects are li e 'sn(b nosed' as o##osed to 'c(rve' "mathematics% ,he matter o) thin$s are nown (# to a #oint ,o now what a ni)e is+ !o( need to now what ind o) materials !o( ma e a ni)e o(t o) 8t is at this #oint that 3ristotle $ives !o( his )(llest acco(nt o) the essential conditions )or chan$e ?o(r *a(ses o) Gat(ral ,hin$s 3cco(nts )or the bein$ o) nat(ral thin$s in the strictest sense 0hen we want to now what somethin$ is+ we're loo in$ )or wh! x is x and not x. 0h! a chair is a chair+ and not a don e! 0e're loo in$ )or that witho(t which that chair wo(ld not be ?o(r di))erent t!#es o) /(estions !o( as when !o( as the /(estion:wh! ,he necessar! and s())icient conditions )or the thin$ to be the thin$ it is .ectern have a bl(e#rint+ made o) a certain material+ someone made it+ and it serves a #(r#ose 3ll o) the )actors )orm wh! the lectern is what it is+ and not somethin$ else ,he ?o(r *a(ses: ?ormal *a(se ?orm o) the *hair 0hat is its de)inition/essence1 .iteral!+ what sha#e does it have to have to corres#ond to the de)inition and )(nction as a chair1 Material *a(se Matter *hair can't be a chair with some sort o) matter E))icient *a(se *ite the ma er+ a$ent Someone made it a chair E))icient ca(se o) a stat(e is the sc(l#tor 0h! does the sc(l#tor exist1 ?inal *a(se 0telos1 0hat is it )or1 ,he end that !o('re see in$ to reali>e when !o( b(ild a stat(e/chair ?inal ca(se o) a chair is to sit on it 2nly )o(r t!#es o) ca(ses+ to 3ristotle Each t!#e o ca(se is a necessar! condition )or the thin$s existance 0hen !o('ve cited all )o(r+ !o('ve #rovided the s())icient conditions )or it to exist

*itin$ one is not s())icient

Modalities o) *a(salit! ,he wa!s that the ca(ses can be nown ,he )irst is sim#l! that there are multiplicity o) ca(ses )or an! #artic(lar thin$/ob6ect/event ,he Ke! (s that inde#endentl!+ the!'re necessar! conditions+ b(t not inde#endentl! s())icient ,o$ether the! are s())icient )or acco(ntin$ )or an ex#lainin$ the existance o) somethin$ Precision is another modalit! o) ca(salit! .evels o) #recision that !o( can achieve in descrbin$ a ca(se 0h! does the sc(l#t(re exist1 3 h(man bein$ made it 2(t more #recisel!+ !o( can state the individ(al who made it "Michelan$elo% .ess #reciecel! wo(ld be: 0ho ma es a sc(l#t(re1 3 sc(l#tor& ,he more #recise !o( are+ the more #ower o) ex#laination !o(r ex#lainination ha Parrallelism between the level o) ex#lanation and the level o) $eneralit! in !o(r ex#laination Sc(l#tors b(ild what1 Sc(l#t(res& 3 #artic(lar sc(l#tor b(ilt this sc(l#tor *a(ses can also be reciprocal Ste#henson is havin$ hot )lashes Gow+ bac to lect(re <o$$in$ leads to health in the 6o$$er "e))icient ca(se%+ b(t it is not in the same sense that health ca(ses 6o$$in$ Health is a )inal ca(se o) 6o$$in$ 4(r#ose o) 6o$$in$ Hierarch! 0hich ca(se is most im#ortant1 Most )(ndamental in the sense that it dictates the sha#e o)/identical to+ the other ca(se o) somethin$ ?8G3.J ,he )inal ca(se is the most )(ndamental beca(se+ )or one thin$+ the )inal ca(se is what dictates/determines the character o) the matter that ma es (# the #artic(lar thin$ !o( are tr!in$ to ex#lain+ and that the )inal ca(se is a ca(se o) ,he #(r#ose o) a ni)e is to c(t ?inal ca(se: to c(t ,here)ore+ that dictates the ind o) materials that $o into constit(te the ni)e have to ma e it o(t o) metal 4(r#ose o) ho(se is to #rovide shelter+ there)ore+ don't b(ild it o(t o) straw or stic s+ ma e it o(t o) bric sJ ?inal ca(se also determines the )orm 8) the #(r#ose o) a ni)e is to c(t+ it sho(ldn't be sha#ed li e a tromboneM 5therwise it won't )(l)il its )(nctionin$ ,he #(r#ose o) the instr(ment+ the )inal ca(se+ determines the character o) the e))icient ca(se Fo( now who to hire to ma e it Fo( need a contractor to b(ild a ho(se+ b(t !o( onl! now this a)ter the )inal ca(se 8n nat(re+ in ob6ects that exist b! nat(re+ is even clearer

,he telos is more #rono(nced+ beca(se the other ca(ses tend to colla#se into it 8n either de)inition the! become indistin$(ishable in de)inition or in n(mber ,he )inal ca(se o) an acorn+ is what1 ,o reali>e its nat(re+ which is its )orm ?inal ca(se+ and the )ormal ca(se+ are almost identical in this wa! ,he #(r#ose o) a tree is to reali>e its )orm+ and en$ender other trees o) the same )orm 4art o) reali>in$ !o(r nat(re is en$enderin$ other thin$s o) the same nat(re ,he e))icient ca(se is the same in nat(ral ob6ects+ is the same in )orm/essence+ as the thin$ it $ives rise to+ b(t it is not one+ n(mericall! ,he tree $ives rise to tree+ b(t not itsel)+ another tree o) the same )orm/essence+ b(t not identical to it in n(mber 5nl! the matter doesn't coincide with the )inal ca(se+ b(t it too is at least s(bservient to the )inal ca(se Even in nat(ral ob6ects+ it is to reali>e its nat(re+ essential )orm 8t can onl! do so with a certain matter+ (sin$ a certain set o) com#onents/elements ,ree has to be made o) a #artic(lar t!#e o) material necessit! there ?inal ca(se as reali>ation o) the ?orm "tree%+ dictates the nat(re/character o) the material ca(se o) the tree

*hance and S#ontaneit! ,he /(estion that we are see in$ to answer is: are all o) the ca(ses in nat(re1 S(ch that once !o( cite them all+ !o( have to$ether #rovided all the necessar! and e))icient ca(ses )or whatever it is that !o( are acco(ntin$ )or1 Man! #eo#le ar$(ed that chance was a t!#e o) ca(se 8t mi$ht be #la(sible to sa! that chance is an ex#lanation :8t ha##ened b! chance; So+ what t!#es o) thin$s ha##en in nat(re b! chance1 ,hin$s that ha##en invariabl!+ all the time+ (n)ailin$l! Gecessaril! So+ does it ma e sense to cite chance to ex#lain thin$s that ha##en all the time1 Go+ beca(se that which is necessar!+ cannot be otherwise 0hereas thin$s b! chance can be otherwise+ the! are not necessar! So+ what abo(t thin$s that don't ha##en (n)ailin$l!+ b(t ha##en most o) the time So+ when it snows in the winter+ and its warm in the s(mmer+ can chance be cited1 Go+ beca(se somethin$ other than chance has to be cited to ex#lain )or the re$(larit! ,he onl! thin$ that mi$ht #ossibl! be acco(ntable thro($h chance are )rea occ(rrences 3ristotle sa!s that+ o) thin$s that come abo(t+ some lead to some $ood+ and others+ not Some are intentional+ and some are (nintentional *hance is a /(estion o) thin$s that ha##en (nintentionall!+ b(t )or the sa e o) somethin$ 2ene)it one o) the actors in the chance occ(rrence *hance+ )or 3ristotle+ is another word )or coincidence Ultimatel! $ro(nded in someone's choice ,he chance thin$ is the coincidence o) two ca(sal se/(ences interactin$ So+ accidentall! r(nnin$ into someone who owes !o( mone!+ and the! #a! !o( bac ,wo inde#endent actions+ one coincidence 8s chance doin$ an! sort o) ex#lanitor! wor 1 *an chance be cited to ex#lain the coincidin$1

Go+ beca(se !o( can sim#l! ex#lain that one $(! was $oin$ somewhere+ and the other was $oin$ another+ and then !o( ran into one another 8t s())ices to ex#lain wh! !o('d b(m# into them *hance is li e sa!in$ the #ale man b(ilt a stat(e 4ale+ there+ is incidental+ and irrelevant to the b(ildin$ o) the stat(e 0hat is relevant is that the #erson was a sc(l#tor *itin$ chance is sim#l! a con)ession o) !o(r i$norance+ b! (sin$ what is to be ex#lained+ as an ex#laination 0h! did it ha##en1 2! chance D well+ beca(se it 6(st ha##ened& 3ristotle distin$(ishes between chance and s#ontaneit! Go choice ,ri##in$+ not b! choice+ and missin$ somethin$ that was abo(t to hit and ill !o( 3$ain+ coincidin$ o) two inde#endent ca(sal se/(ences+ both o) which can be ex#lained witho(t reco(rse to the notion o) chance

01/11/2011 Gichomichean Ethics Se#arate science )rom the science o) #h!sics 3ims+ method+ and its a(dience+ accordin$ to 3ristotle 2oo 1+ *ha#ter 9 =escri#tion o) the aims+ method and a(dience o) Ethics as a science 3t the bei$nnin$ o) 3ristotle+ Ethics is a science+ and )alls (nder #ractical sciences+ meanin$ that+ o##osed to theoretical sciences "which see nowled$e )or the sa e o) nowled$e%+ see s nowled$e )or the sa e o) $ood action S(##osed to be cond(cive to $ood action in its st(dents Ethics is abo(t what can be done *oncerned with thin$s which are chan$able 3ctions involve chan$e *ontin$ent thin$s that+ i) the! are+ co(ld have been otherwise Ethical action i) it is not dealin$ with thin$s that can be other than the! t(rn o(t to be+ then deliberation will not be a##licable Fo( don't deliberate over what is necessaril! so and cannot be otherwise 2(t !o( can deliberate on whether or not somethin$ sho(ld be allowed to be in a certain wa! 3bo(t thin$s which are chan$in$/chan$able+ and thin$s which are contin$ent 8ts #rinci#les are )ixed+ (nchan$in$ ,his is wh! it can be a science Since ethics is a #ractical science+ it is concerned with actions+ which are alwa!s #artic(lar+ and $ood actions are $ood onl! in s#eci)ic circ(mstances/condititions+ and the s#eci)ic manner in which the! are (nderta en =eals with what is #artic(lar+ and what is variable there are still (niversal and (nchan$in$ #rinci#les which (nderl! and acco(nt )or $oodness o) actions

there is not sheer m(lti#licit! in the world o) ethics Still thin$s which need to be ascertained Ethics wo(ldn't be a science otherwise 8) it is a science it can't be concerned with sin$(lar thin$s+ b! de)initions 3 science concerned with sin$(lar thin$s+ all it is doin$ is re#ortin$ sin$(lar occ(rances Ex#lain them in terms o) (nchan$in$ (niversal #rinci#le Similarl!+ what we're loo in$ )or in Ethics are the (nchan$in$ and common #rinci#les which acco(nt )or the $oodness o) certain actions re$ardless o) the circ(mstances 0hat ma es them all instances o) $ood actions1 Universal and (nchan$in$ #rinci#les Got all sciences admit the same level o) #recicion/clarit! Mar o) an intelli$ent #erson to loo )or the #recision o) all thin$s =i))erent sciences involve di))erent levels o) clarit! and #recision ,he science o) ethics "even tho($h it involves (nchan$in$ #rinci#les%+ it doesn't allow )or the same de$ree o) clarit! as somethin$ li e mathematics or #h!sics ,here is+ accordin$ to 3ristotle+ one ri$ht wa! to behave in ever! context =eterminin$ that one ri$ht wa! is not an exact science ,here is a ri$ht answer in ever! moral context+ b(t $ive or ta e a little bit .eewa! 3cce#table ran$e o) behavio(r in its #artic(lar condition ,he Gichomichean Ethics+ or 3ristotle's science o) ethics+ is not a r(le-based ethics R(le-based ethics starts with (niversal #rinci#le "r(le or law%+ and ded(ces $ood cond(ct based on+ or )rom that )irst #rinci#le ,o 3ristotle+ that won't wor + since !o( cannot derive the $ood )rom some sort o) al$orithm which will ch(rn o(t an answer in an! sit(ation Cood in a #artic(lar context is not determined )rom a sin$le thin$ R(le-based ethics don't wor since !o( need a r(le )or the a##lication+ and a r(le )or that+ and a r(le )or thaaat&&&&& Event(all! we will see what ind o) r(les/laws can be identi)ied+ and will identi)! the ind o) con$inition is involved in moral action

2oo 1 2oo 1 is introd(ctor!+ the most )(ndamental #rinci#les Ethical cond(ct involve variet! and )l(ct(ation 0hat is $ood in one sit(ation is not $ood in another Gever have an exact answer when as in$ ethical /(estions+ or at least not as exact as math that doesnOt mean that moral laws are #(rel! convention ,heir a##lication is not as #recise as other sciences Ri$ht 3(dience )or Ethics Got !o(n$+ or at least not !o(n$ in character+ b(t the two thin$s $o hand in hand 0hat does !o(n$ in character mean1 Someone who is $overned s#eci)icall! b! the #assions Someone who )ollows #assion indiscriminatel! 0h! is that not $ood )or an a(dience )or ethics1 0hat is ethics1

8) !o( are $overned b! !o(r #assions+ !o( won't be able to im#liment the moral cond(ct that !o( learned 3n a(deince can't be !o(n$+ #eriod+ beca(se the !o(n$ are inex#erienced+ and !o( need ex#erience to thin abo(t ethics #ro#erl! 0h!1 0e don't start with a )irst #rinci#le and wor )rom that+ it is the other wa! aro(nd+ bottom (# Start with concrete instances o) virt(o(s $ood behavio(r+ and st(d! these exam#les o) $ood behavio(r+ and tr! to ded(ce/in)er+ on the basis o) o(r anal!sis o) these exam#les+ what it is in these which ma es them $ood1 Ethics investi$ates tr(e o#inions/traditional belie)s involvin$ $ood moral cond(ct He's $oin$ to hold them (# to the scr(tin! o) reason+ beca(se the! t(rn o(t not to be rationall! 6(sti)iable+ b(t the rest are $oin$ to have their rational thin$s shown ex#licitl! ,he st(d! o) ethics is $ood beca(se it is ma in$ ex#licit that ma es virt(o(s cond(ct+ virt(o(s ,he l(cidit! will hel# them in morall! ambi$(o(s sit(ations Solidi)! the tr(e o#inions the! hold and hel# them resolve moral dilemmas with the im#licit nowled$e now made ex#licit thro($h scienti)ic anal!sis o) $ood cond(ct

0hat is 2est in .i)e1 0hat 8s the Cood1 2oo 1+ is a )irst attem#t at identi)!in$ and anal!>in$ the hi$hest h(man $ood ,hree sta$es to 3ristotle ar$(ment: 1-9 establishment that there is a hi$hest $ood 7-R the hi$hest $ood is ha##iness 0hat is ha##iness1 3n activit! that is done in accordance with the excellence/virt(e that is s#eci)icall! h(man+ and im#l!/involve a rational #rinci#le/exercise o) reason ,wo )(ndamental modes o) virt(e ,here is a Hi$hest Cood *ha#ters 1 and 2 H(man bein$s can st(d! thin$s 0e can act/ma e decisions 0e can ma e thin$s 3ll o) the above activities can be called #ro6ects Ever! #ro6ect is )or the sa e o) a $oal/aim Ever!thin$ we do in li)e has a #(r#ose ,he aim o) an! o) o(r #ro6ects is the $ood that we ho#e to achieve thereb! ,hro($h that #artic(lar #ro6ect ,he aim o) medicine D health ,o 3ristotle+ we need to anal!>e what inds o) ends there are Some ends are ends in themselves Coods in the strictest sense+ so($ht not )or an!thin$ else 3ctivities which don't $ive rise to an! )(rther end/$ood Ends which are both ends in themselves to a de$ree+ and means to )(rther ends 4(rs(ed )or themselves+ and )or the sa e o) some other end that the! $ive rise to <o$$in$ )or health+ b(t some #eo#le )ind #leas(re in it+ so it is an end in itsel)

Got as $ood a thin$ as somethin$ that is #(rs(ed )or its own sa e Got as com#lete an end+ not as )inal/(ltimate an end which is so($ht onl! )or its own sa e+ and not )or some )(rther thin$ that it $ives rise to Got ends in themselves+ b(t are #(rs(ed bca(se the! are means )or the sa e o) some )(rther end 4lowin$ and toilin$ in the )ields are not #(rs(ed )or the sa e o) it+ it is done to harvest )r(its and ve$$ies+ and is onl! $ood "and end%+ inso)ar as it serves as a means )or the obtainment o) the )(rther end "to eat% Means is $ood onl! on the condition that it !ield the )(rther end that !o( want it to !eild+ ?(rther end is s(#erior to instr(mentall! val(ed means =istinction o) thin$s which are $ood in and o) themselves+ and thin$s which are $ood onl! inso)ar as as the! $ive rise to somethin$ else S(bordinate $oods+ instr(mental $oods+ and $oods in and o) themselves

*ha#ter 2 8s there one end that is #(rs(ed strictl! in and o) itsel)+ and so is absol(tel! $ood+ and s(ch that all other $oods will onl! be $ood inso)ar as the! $ive rise to+ or enable !o( to reali>e the thin$ that is the absol(te $ood 8) there is no hi$hest $ood+ li)e is (tterl! )(tile and #(r#oseless 3ll o) !o(r desires wo(ld be instr(mental 8 li e 3 beca(se it $ives me 2 which $ets me *+ which allows me to $et =&&&& 3ll $oods wo(ld be relative+ not one better than the other+ and so there wo(ld be no real direction in li)e .i)e wo(ld be )(tile Hobbs the hi$hest $ood is desirin$ one thin$ a)ter another+ and the hi$hest $ood is )(l)illin$ whatever desires come to !o( 0ant to establish that there is a hi$hest $ood+ and what end /(ali)ies it Have to establish the hi$hest $ood b! loo in$ at the hierarch! o) the sciences S(bordinate sciences and master sciences which control and $overn the lower ones ,his re)lects a hierarch! o) ends ,he master end encom#ass the hi$hest end Hi$her sciences incl(de an end which encom#ass all other ends+ and the other ends are $ood onl! inso)ar as the! hel# establish the ends o) the hi$her science Saddle Ma in$+ Horseshoe ma in$ and horse )ood ma in$ ,he end o) bridle ma in$ is the ma in$ o) $ood bridles+ the end o) horshoes is to ma e a $ood horse shoe and the )ood is )or )ood --Q all e/(al ,he end is )or horsemanshi# and the art o) ridin$ Coverns the s(bordinate sciences with their ends and their #rinci#les Ridin$ is li e this+ and horses are li e this+ and there)ore+ this is what the! need ,he lesser scientists need to )i$(re o(t how to #rod(ce them Ridin$ is the #rinci#le $iven to the lower scientists which match the #rinci#les ,he end o) the art o) ridin$+ is what1 Cood horse ridin$ ,he saddle+ bridle and ha! are onl! $ood inso)ar as the!'re $ood )or $ood horse ridin$+ and )or a $ood horse

2(t+ what dictates what a $ood rider is1 Strate$!J ,he art o) achievin$ victor! in battle "end% 5nce a$ain+ strate$! tells the rider what a $ood rider is+ inso)ar as a rider is a rider in battle ,he stra$e! tells the rider+ and the rider )i$(res o(t how to do that ,he $ood o) horse ridin$ is s(bordinate to the end o) victor! in battle 0ant to be $ood at horse ridin$ so to be victorio(s in battle ,he hi$hest science is #olitical science ,he #olitician determines what sciences sho(ld be st(died in the cit! "le$islation%+ and to what extend the! sho(ld be st(died+ and #erha#s b! whom 2! loo in$ to the end o) the science o) #olitics+ the #olitician determines what thin$s a($ht to be striven )or in the cit!+ and what sciences are needed to #rod(ce those $oods ,he #olitical scientists determine the val(e o) all the sciences He/she will now whether the! $ive rise to+ and are there)ore $ood+ the end that the #olitician/statesman has in r(ler+ /(a r(ler ,he r(ler+ in the strict sense+ determines whether/ to what extent+ all the other sciences are $ood+ and all the ends which are so($ht b! the other sciences are $ood+ inso)ar as the! enable the achievement o) the r(ler /(a r(ler+ loo s towards and see s to reali>e+ whatever it is 8t t(rns o(t that it is the $ood o) all the citi>ens+ and there)ore the ha##iness o) all the citi>ens

0hat is the Hi$hest H(man Cood1 Ha##inessJ D% 8n a ver! t!#ical wa!+ 3ristotle starts o)) b! examinin$ the views o) the man! and the )ew ,he o#inions o) the masses+ and the o#inions o) the wise ,ries to salva$e what he can )rom these 4oints o(t that event the man! and the )ew all a$ree on one $eneral thin$: ha##iness is the hi$hest $ood Ha##iness D eudaimonia "eu D $ood+ daimon D s#irit% ?or 3ristotle+ ha##iness is not a s(b6ective state/)eelin$ ,o man! o) (s+ we moderns thin o) it as a )eelin$+ which is not what it is )or 3ristotle 8t has to do with )lo(rishin$+ or act(ali>in$ !o(r #otencial *an't be mista en abo(t a )eelin$+ b(t to 3ristotle+ !o( can be mista en abo(t bein$ ha##! or not+ beca(se !o( can be mista en abo(t what is ma in$ !o( )lo(rish or not ,he man! and wise don't a$ree on the nat(re o) ha##iness *ha#ter A 3ristotle examines traditional contenders )or the hi$hest h(man $ood .i)e o) Sens(al 4leas(re 3ristotle doesn't have m(ch o) an ar$(ment at this s#eci)ic #oint a$ainst it He 6(st sa!s that it is slavish and well born #eo#le thin o) it as beastl!+ even tho($h it is #o#(lari>ed ,here will be an ar$(ment later wh! it can't be the hi$hest $ood+ beca(se it involves what s#eci)icall! de)ines (s as h(man bein$s 2eca(se a##etitie isn't what de)ines (s as h(man bein$s "we share this with the animals%+ it cannot be the hi$hest+ s#eci)icall! h(man+ $ood

.i)e o) Hono(r .i)e o) #olitics (nderstood as a li)e o) see in$ hono(r 8t can't be+ beca(se it is too s(#er)icial and de#endent on externalities Ma es the ha##iness o) the hono(red individ(al de#endent on somethin$ external )rom him/her Ma es him de#end on how other #eo#le ha##en to see him at that #artic(lar time+ whcih he can't control 0hereas the hi$hest $ood+ sho(ld be somethin$ that is !o(r #osession+ and can't easil! be lost 8) it can be lost+ then it can't be the hi$hest $ood+ and de#ends on the whims o) the #eo#le !o( interact with ,o see hono(r )or its own sa e is another #erversion o) nat(ral order 4ointin$ to the )act that tr(e r(lers don't desire hono(r 6(st )or the sa e o) hono(r =esire to be hono(red b! those who are ca#able to 6(d$e b! those who are vit(ed and excellent ,o those who are tr(e r(lers+ the! don't desire hono(r i) it is not hono(r )or its excellence ,he! don't 6(st desire hono(r+ the! desire virt(e and want to be hono(red on the basis o) their virt(e Got a com#lete+ sel) s())icient $ood 0ant to be hono(red for somethin$+ mainl! virt(e .i)e o) *ontem#lation .i)e o) Mone!ma in$ =oesn't $et o)) the $ro(nd+ beca(se mone! is a means+ an instr(ment that allows #eo#le to obtain other $oods 4eo#le who s())er )rom aboris+ are #erverts+ beca(se the invert the nat(ral order o) ends and means ,reat as ends what is nat(rall! a mean 8) it is nat(rall! somethin$ onl! $ood inso)ar as it $ets !o( somethin$ else+ it cannot be the hi$hest $ood

Eirt(e =oesn't de#end on externalities+ doesn't de#end on what other #eo#le thin o) !o(+ and other #eo#le can't ma(e !o( virt(o(s Gotion is still va$(e *ha#ter @ =i$ression on the theor! o) the )orms+ and on the )orm o) the $ood *ha#ter R L 3ristotle con)irms the wisdom o) the )ew and the man! that the hi$hest $ood is ha##iness ,wo criteria )or somethin$ to meet )or it to be the hi$hest $ood Geeds to be com#lete+ in the sense o) most )inal "teleion% and needs to be sel) s())icient "self3sufficient% Got all $oods are as as e/(all! )inal Some are desired both )or their own sa e and )or the sa e o) an end which is be!ond them

and that the! $ive rise to 2oth )or themselves+ and be!ond them Some are desired )or their own sa e+ and not )or somethin$ be!ond them Somethin$ desired )or its own sa e is more )inal than somethin$ that is desired )or somethin$ be!ond it 5nl! ha##iness )its the )irst criteria Fo( mi$ht #(rs(e sens(al #leas(re+ and mi$ht also #(rs(e hono(r as an end in itsel)+ b(t !o( also #(rs(e these thin$s )or the sa e o) bein$ ha##! Fo( want hono(r and bodil! desires to be ha##!& Fo( don't desire ha##iness )or the sa e o) hono(r+ or ha##iness )or bodil! desires&&&& Ha##iness is the onl! thin$ that is )or its own sa e and not )or the sa e o) somethin$ else Sel)-s())icienc! Got all ends are e/(all! sel)-s())icient Ma es li)e desirable and lac in$ in nothin$ Ha##iness is the whole nat(re o) the $ood 3ddin$ somethin$ to it will not ma e it better ,he )irst criterion is that there is nothin$ be!ond the hi$hest $ood+ and the second is that there is no $ood besides the hi$hest $ood 5nl! ha##iness )its this as well Ha##iness isn't made better with the addition o) more $ood 3ll other $oods are $ood onl! inso)ar as the! $ive rise to ha##iness Ha##iness m(st be the hi$hest $oods to which all other $oods are s(bordinate 3ll other $oods are onl! #arts o) ha##iness *on)irmed the o#inions o) the man! and the )ew

?inal Sta$e 0hat is Ha##iness1 4oo# U--Eri a 0hat is it )or a h(man bein$ to )l(o(rish as a h(man bein$1 ,o )(l)il his/her nat(re as a human being Have to loo to the )(nction o) a h(man bein$ ,he $ood o) an!thin$ is )or that thin$ to )(l)ill its nat(re ,he $ood will be )(l)illin$ their essential )(nction+ and h(man bein$s have a #artic(lar )(nction "ergon% 0hat de)ines a toaster1 ,oastin$ the bread Eirt(e or arete is alwa!s said o)+ #redicated o)+ or lies in+ a )(nction ,he )(nction o) a toaster is to toast+ and a $ood virt(o(s toaster toasts bread well 5(r virt(e is be #er)ormin$ the )(nction that ma es (s $ood h(mans+ well ,he )(nction o) h(mans 8t can't have to do with n(trition+ or $rowth+ or re#rod(ction+ beca(se that is somethin$ we share with all livin$ thin$s *an't be the li)e o) sensation+ beca(se we share this with all animals 0hat is the remainin$ thin$1 .i)e o) Reason 3ctivit! that shares in a rational #rinci#le 3ctive li)e o) the element that has a rational #rinci#le

Ha##iness will be the exercise o) reason that is either im#licit in or ex#ressed in action+ or the exercise o) reason+ #eriod&

Hi$hest H(man Cood *ha#ter N Coes over the views o) the man! a$ain 8ncidental thin$s to be said abo(t ha##iness ?irst ha##iness is an activit! Got a dis#osition/state "hexis% ,o be excellent+ to be virt(o(s in the )(llest sense+ !o( have to act(all! act virt(o(sl! ?irst vs& second act(alit! Eirt(e/excellence+ is+ in the )(llest sense+ a h(man bein$ act(all! #er)ormin$ their )(nction o) a h(man bein$+ in accordance with virt(e Got 6(st havin$ a #otential thro($h habit(ation Got 6(st havin$ the )irst act(alit! )or actin$ virt(o(sl!+ b(t act(all! actin$ virt(o(sl! ,hat+ over the whole co(rse o) ones li)e ,o answer i) someone is ha##!+ !o( can't 6(st isolate one se$ment o) their li)e+ !o( have to ta e a lar$e ex#anse o) time+ the whole o) someones li)e even ,he li)e o) excellence/virt(e+ a($ht to be #leas(rable )or the virt(o(s #erson ,he virt(o(s #erson has to love virt(e 8) !o( $ive mone!+ b(t do it $r(d$in$l!+ !o( are not act(all! $ood+ and are doin$ it )or the sa e o) somethin$ else that it !eilds Habit(ation s(##osed to ma e individ(als b! #ro#er ed(cation+ desire the ri$ht thin$s+ and ta e #leas(re in them 0hat is virt(o(s is nat(rall! #leas(rable ,r(e #leas(re+ and what is noble/best+ all coincide 5nl! a con)lict i) !o( act a$ainst nat(re .ast inccidence a ha##! li)e re/(ires external $oods Gecessar!+ b(t not a s())icient condition ,o 3ristotle+ !o( need health+ $ood loo s+ $ood o))s#rin$+ $ood birth+ etc& Es#eciall! mone!+ beca(se some o) the moral virt(es involve $ivin$ it awa! Elements o) $ood )o(rt(ne is involved in excellence in ha##iness Element o) moral l(c to 3ristotle's moral theor! Ha##iness+ is a ind o) )lo(rishin$+ and tho($ht o) on the analo$! o) the )lo(rishin$ o) a #lant 4lants need a #ro#er hos#itable environment to )lo(rish Similarl!+ $ood birth+ and l(c in $ettin$ mone!+ etc+ are li e the )ertile soil that a h(man is born in+ and the isolation )rom which+ it is di))ic(lt to live a morall! virt(o(s li)e ,he virt(o(s #erson will ma e do with ver! little+ and harmed less b! adversit! 3dversit! an o##ort(nit! )or nobilit! to shine thro($h Eirt(o(s #erson ma es the best o) all circ(mstances and is not easil! swa!ed )rom it 09/11/2011 Ha##iness is the Hi$hest Cood Meets the two criteria that the hi$hest $ood has to meet *om#lete/absol(te

Sel)-s())icient Go $oods be!ond the hi$hest $ood 3nd no $ood besides the hi$hest $ood Gext /(estion: i) the hi$hest $ood is ha##iness+ what is ha##iness1 3nswer: have to loo to the $ood o) a h(man bein$ 3ristotle's most detailed acco(nt "and there)ore the $ood o) a h(man%+ comes in cha#ter 19 ,o 3ristotle+ some thin$ is $ood i) it )(l)ils its nat(re 0hat is o(r nat(re1 0hat is o(r s#eci)ic $ood1 Some thin$s+ are de)ined b! a s#eci)ic or essential )(nction Got all+ li e 'trian$les'+ "nat(re+ not )(nction% H(man bein$s do have a )(nction Excellence/$oodness "arete%+ is #redicated o) somethin$'s )(nction 4lants have so(ls+ animals have so(ls+ and we are an animal and there)ore we have so(ls as well 0e have to loo to the so(l "#s!cholo$!%+ to )ind the essential )(nction

H(man So(l So(l D internal #rinci#le o) motion and rest in all h(man bein$s 0hat are the #arts o) the h(man so(l1 0e share+ with all livin$ thin$s+ a vegetative, reproductive, nutritive so(l *onvertin$ )ood into ener$!+ re#rod(ction "3ristotle thin$s that !o( t(rn )ood into semen%+ Got where h(man excellence lies tho($h&&& Gext #art: Appetitive so(l Sensitive so(l ,he )ac(lt! that allows (s to sense and have a##etities Strictl! s#ea in$+ inso)ar as it is 6(st a desirin$ element+ then we share it with animals+ and it is not where o(r specific excellence or virt(e lies 0hat is excl(sivel! h(man in all the animals1 Rational so(l 3##etitive vs Rational Strictl! s#ea in$+ the appetitive soul is irrational ,he a##etitive so(l is irrational beca(se it does not+ o) its own+ #rod(ce a rational #rinci#le *annot come (# with+ on its own+ a means o) reasonin$ its own behavio(r 8t is+ an a($ht to be considered+ rational in a sense 8t can act(all! be made to heed/listen to reason *an ta e advice )rom reason+ in the ver! same wa! that a child can ta e advice )rom an ad(lt *hild is not 'reasonable' since it cannot #rod(ce ar$(ments in )avo(r to one thin$ or another+ b(t can be made to see the rationalit! in other ar$(ments *an reco$ni>e rationalit! when it sees it Rational in the sense that it can be trained/ed(cated/habit(ated/com#elled to act in accordance to reason 8n line with the dictates o) reason *an be made to obe! reason beca(se it sees the rational behind a dictation+ or beca(se it has been trained to do so

,he Rational So(l ,he #art o) the so(l that can #rod(ce a rational #rinci#le ,his division between the #arts o) the so(l+ "one that is rational in a loose sense+ and one that is rational in a strict sense% dictates the #arts o) virt(e in a sense Moral virt(es Excellences havin$ to do with character *an act in a wa! that involves a rational #rinci#le+ even tho($h it doesn't #rod(ce it Reason that 3ristotle thin s that it is s#eci)ic to h(man is that animals can be trained+ b(t their a##etitive so(l can never reco$ni>e the rationalit! o) an ar$(ment Excellence o) o(r ca#acit! to act or )eel in a rational )ashion "or+ involvin$ reason% 8ntellect(al virt(es Eirt(es o) the mind in the strictest sense "rational so(l% Eirt(e o) o(r ca#acit! to thin rationall! Excellence o) the ca#acit! o) reason =e)ines !o(+ in a strict sense ,here)ore+ there is a ind o) ha##iness associated with this ind o) virt(e However+ there is another ind o) virt(e that is h(man&&&moral virt(e

2oo 2 Ceneral acco(nt o) moral virt(e "what it involves% .oo s#eci)icall! at inds o) moral virt(e LRead *ha#ter R )or ill(strations o) his doctrine+ i) !o( wantL 5(tline the conditions )or moral res#onsibilit! ?or somethin$ bein$ a vol(ntar! act Moral action m(st be deliberate and vol(ntar! 8ntrod(ces moral virt(e b! ex#lainin$ how it is ac/(ired+ and contrasts it with intellect(al virt(es+ which are ac/(ired b! teachin$ ,he! are learned Moral virt(es+ in a ver! im#ortant sense+ are not ta($ht 3c/(ired thro($h trainin$/habit(ation *hild+ in bein$ reared #ro#erl! has to be told not to lie+ etc& 3nd i) the! don't lie+ then initiall!+ it is not beca(se the! (nderstand the ar$(ment behind it+ it is beca(se the! have been trained to do so ,his is how moral virt(e is ac/(ired 3##etities bein$ controlled in s(ch a wa! that the! are in line with reason 2eca(se moral virt(es come )rom habit(ation/trainin$+ the! can't+ arise b! nat(re Gothin$ that exists b! nat(re can )orm a habit that is contrar! to nat(re Roc s )all to the #lace the! want to be in+ and !o( cannot habit(ate a roc to do otherwise 8) moral virt(e were li e that+ then it co(ld be li e the stone Fo( can habit(ate someone to be a ver! vicio(s #erson+ or a ver! virt(o(s #erson 2(t+ !o( cannot train a roc to $o (# Moral virt(es are not contrar! to nat(re either 2! nat(re+ we are made able to receive them Have the #otential to receive them 8n a sense+ it has to be b! nat(re

2(t what we have in the strictest sense "o(t o) the womb%+ is 6(st a bare #otential to ac/(ire it 3ct(ali>ed thro($h #ro#er habit(ation ,he idea here+ is that as o##osed to the )allin$ o) roc s+ nat(re+ in the case o) h(man bein$s+ needs hel# to be #er)ected ,hro($h ed(cation+ or h(man in$en(it! 3lso+ cr(ciall!+ what exists b! nat(re )irst has #otentialit!+ or the #otentialit! to do somethin$+ and then later exhibits the activit! 8n thin$s which arise b! habit+ on the other hand+ and which are there)ore not b! nat(re "o(t o) the womb%+ it is the other wa! aro(nd Fo( )irst have to exercise the moral virt(es be)ore !o( become morall! virt(o(s Fo( don't have the abilit! to be morall! virt(o(s+ (ntil !o( #ractice doin$ morall! virt(o(s thin$s 8ts 6(st li e learnin$ to #la! an instr(ment+ how1 2! #la!in$ itJ Fo( don't have the stron$ sense o) #otentialit! to #la! it in the ')irst act(alit!' sense& Fo( don't reall! have the abilit! to act in a morall! virt(o(s wa! (ntil !o( do morall! virt(o(s thin$s and ac/(ire the habit that is moral virt(e 4oint o) habit(ation is to create a $ood settled state o) character 8) it is to #rod(ce moral virt(e+ the aim o) ed(cation is to #rod(ce a )ixed dis#osition to res#ond in a##ro#riate wa!s to $iven sit(ations+ or to !o(r own emotions "hexis% ,his settled state o) character arises o(t o) li e activities ?or exam#le+ it is b! bein$ )orced b! a commandin$ o))icer to withstand the stresses o) battle that a soldier ac/(ired the moral virt(e o) co(ra$e 8t is onl! b! doin$ co(ra$eo(s thin$s can someone be co(ra$eo(s ,his settled state o) character arise thro($h the re#etition o) activities which are the same sort o) activities which will )low )rom the moral virt(e once it comes Stren$th is ca(sed b! (nder$oin$ m(ch exertion 5nce !o( become stron$ the activities that )low )rom stren$th are the same "li)itin$ lots o) st())% ,em#erance is ca(sed )rom asbstainin$ )rom base #leas(res+ and once !o( have this moral virt(e+ !o( abstain an!wa! 8) !o( become virt(o(s+ !o( can become vicio(s as well thro($h habit(ation

4leas(res and 4ains How the! )it into the notion o) moral virt(e ,he! indicate o(r settled state o) character Fo( are not reall! tem#erate i) !o( abstain )rom sens(al #leas(res b(t $r(d$in$l! ,he o(tward act o) tem#erance is not s())icient to be considered so ,he o(tward show o) moral virt(e is similar+ !o( have to ta e #leas(re in it Similarl!+ !o( are not act(all! co(ra$eo(s i) !o('re in battle onl! beca(se !o( have to be Fo( have to ta e #leas(re in it+ it has to be #art o) !o(r nat(re+ and not somethin$ !o( are )i$htin$ at all costs 8m#ortant to )oc(s on #leas(res and #ains+ beca(se it is beca(se o) them that we do bad thin$s 3s lon$ as we ta e more #leas(re in )li$ht than in )i$ht we are not co(ra$eo(s+ and we will be moved b! o(r #assions to act in a wa! that is not co(ra$eo(s Civen their im#ortance+ the! are what have to be trained )rom an earl! a$e Have to be ed(cated to ta e #leas(re in the correct thin$s at the ri$ht time to the ri$ht de$ree+

etc&&& 3ristotle notes that !es+ moral virt(e is concerned with #leas(re and #ain+ b(t it is not the case that 6(st beca(se somethin$ is #leas(rable is it morall! virt(o(s Fo( can ta e #leas(re in the wron$ thin$s as well Have to ta e #leas(re in the right thin$s

*ha#ters A-R *ha#ter A $ives (s the $en(s o) moral character+ and cha#ter @ $ives (s a more s#eci)ic/detailed acco(nt R exam#les o) moral virt(e 0hat is Moral Eirt(e .oo s to the so(: Emotions/#assions 3lwa!s accom#anied b! #leas(re/#ain ?ac(lties/#owers ,hin$s that enable !o( to )eel States ,hin$s in virt(e o) which we stand well or badl! in res#ect to o(r emotions Settled #atterns o) emotional res#onse #oo#ie Coin$ to excl(de it bein$ a #assion or a )ac(lt!+ leavin$ state 0h! isn't it a #assion1 0e're not #raised/blamed )or )eelin$s which arise )rom sensation Eirt(e and vice are not the )eelin$s themselves+ b(t involve )eelin$ the )eelin$s in a certain wa! "too m(ch/little% ?eelin$ them toward the ri$ht/wron$ ob6ect at the ri$ht/wron$ time 8nvolves emotion+ b(t isn't it itsel) ?eelin$s are not determined b! emotion/#assion itsel) 0e are $ood/bad to the extent that we control o(r #assions Reinin$ them in or $ivin$ them )ree rei$n at the ri$ht time 0e )eel witho(t choice 0hereas moral virt(e necessaril! involves choice 0h! can't it be a )ac(lt!1 ,he abilit! to have #assions Got #raised/blamed )or the abilit! to )eel a certain #assions 5r )or havin$ sensation as #art o) !o(r so(l 3nd+ we have a )ac(lt!/abilit! to )eel certain emotions b! nat(re 3s soon as we're o(t o) the womb 2(t we can't be morall! vicio(s or virt(o(s b! nat(re ,here)ore+ it cannot be a #ower to have sensations 3ss(min$ this list is exha(stive+ moral virt(e has to be a settled state o) character S#eci)icall!+ a $ood settled state o) character Ceneral descri#tion o) moral virt(e Y

*ha#ter @ =etailed acco(nt Lcr(cialL Cood settled state o) character is what1 0hat does it mean to have a $ood settled state o) character1 =octrine o) the Mean ,he $ood settled state o) character 4attern dis#osin$ !o( to res#ond emotionall!/behavio(rall! 3 dis#osition to choose the mean between excess and de)ect in circ(mstances ,wo t!#es o) means: 5b6ective/mathematics @ is the mean between 10 and 2 "P7 is 10+ -7 is 2% S(b6ective mean Relative to (s 3 mean between excess and de)ect as )ar as we are concerned 8) 10lbs o) )ood is too m(ch+ and 2lbs is too little+ the mean+ in relation to !o(+ mi$ht be 9lbs "neither de)ective nor excessive%+ whereas the ob6ective mathematical mean mi$ht be @lbs+ which ma! not be correct in relation to !o( Moral virt(e is stri in$ the mean in an! #artic(lar moral context ,he morall! virt(o(s #erson aims )or the mean Relative to (s Fo( can )eel a $iven emotion ,oo little/too m(ch 0hat is intermediate+ and there)ore best+ is to )eel this emotion at the ri$ht time+ in re)erence to the ri$ht ob6ect with the ri$ht aim 8n the ri$ht wa! ,his $oes )or actions too Excess and de)ect lies here as well Excess and de)ect are blamed+ stri in$ the mean is #raised+ and there)ore virt(o(s Ceneral de)inition o) virt(e: *ha#ter 7 to call someone $ood+ !o( have to loo be!ond the actions themselves+ be!ond their o(tward a##earance Have to loo at the intentions/state o) the #ersons doin$ those thin$s 3ctions in themselves are not eno($h How a #erson saw the actions he/she have committed ,o be morall! virt(o(s+ the moral a$ent m(st have nowled$e M(st be able to acco(nt )or the virt(e o) his/her deeds ,he moral a$ent+ in order to be morall! virt(o(s+ m(st have chosen the actions he/she have carried o(t+ and m(st be chosen )or their own sa es Got o(t o) com#(lsion+ or not )or the sa e o) some )(rther end "which+ i) it were removed+ the #erson wo(ld not do it% *annot be means to an end 3ctions cannot be $ood or bad i) the! are chosen+ i) the! are com#lelled to do it 8) a moral a$ent is to be called morall! virt((o(s+ on acco(nt o) one or a n(mber o) deeds+ this

deed has to #roceed )rom a relativlel! stable character 8t is not a##ro#riate to call someone morall! virt(o(s i) the! do it once in a bl(e moon 5n the basis o) the above+ one can ma e sense o) the $eneral de)inition: "*ha#ter @% :Moral excellence is a settled state o) character concerned with choice+ l!in$ in a mean "i&e& ,he mean relative to (s%+ this bein$ determined b! reason+ and in the wa! in which the man o) #ractical reason wo(ld determine Moral virt(e+ in other words+ is a settled #attern o) a##ro#riate emotional and behavio(ral res#onses which dis#oses !o( to stri e the mean between excess and de)ect in an! #artic(lar circ(mstance *hoose accordin$ to reason+ or accordin$ to a r(le+ which is accordin$ to which a virt(o(s #erson wo(ld choose

Stress on choice Got onl! m(st it be chosen+ it m(st arise o(t o) a settled state o) character Ed(cation dis#oses !o( to choose in one wa! or another 8) moral actions m(st be chosen+ the moral state itsel) is also chosen "2oo 9% 4ractical 0isdom phronesis % the exellence o) the t!#e o) co$nition involved in moral action Got onl! the word )or the excellence+ it is the word )or the )ac(lt! that enables !o( to carr! it o(t ,he #racticall! wise #erson is able to ma e the ri$ht choices re$ardin$ each #artic(lar circ(mstance in order to stri e the mean )or each circ(mstance Gote+ it is a va$(e de)inition 0hat is the mean1 8t is that which the man o) #ractical wisdom will choose 0hat is the ri$ht choice1 0hat the #erson o) #ractical wisdom wo(ld choose "#erson bein$ de)ined as the one who ma es the ri$ht choice% Got #(ttin$ )orward de)inition as a test that can be r(n as a $eneral #rinci#le wherein !o( can ded(ce what to do in an! sit(ation 8t is a descri#tion o) what moral virt(e is Standard )or what is a##ro#riate to do <(d$ement that a #racticall! wise #erson will come to Got ever! emotion has a mean Fo( can't be 6ealo(s or envio(s in 6(st the ri$ht wa! as the ri$ht time+ beca(se the! are absol(tel! bad Go excess or de)ect o) tem#erance/co(ra$e+ since the mean is the absol(te 8t is absol(tel! $ood *o(ra$e is a mean o) bein$ brash and bein$ cowardl!+ so !o( can't have an extreme since it is b! nat(re a mean 8t is also an absol(te $ood "no better or worse wa! to be co(ra$eo(s+ beca(se either wa! !o( are bein$ co(ra$eo(s% ,hree Exam#les ?eelin$s o) )ear and con)idence

*o(ra$e is the mean Excess o) )earlessness is brashness+ and a de)icienc! is cowardice 2oth are bad ,he moral virt(e "the mean%+ is co(ra$e ?eelin$s o) sens(al #leas(re ,em#erance the mean Excess Sel) ind(l$ence =e)ect 8nsensitivit! 3ctions Civin$ and ta in$ mone!+ the mean is liberalit! Excess is #rodi$alit! "$ivin$ in excess%+ and the de)ect is stin$iness

*ha#ter 9+ 2oo 2 Em#hasi>es the di))ic(lt! o) attainin$ the mean+ and ex#lores how the mean is $ras#ed+ b! which intellect(al )ac(lt! Moral virt(e is a $ood settled state o) character that dis#oses !o( to stri e the mean between two extremes Got eas! to )ind the mean 3n!one can $et an$r! and the #assions is not the virt(e itsel) 0hat is di))ic(lt is $ettin$ an$r! toward the ri$ht #erson at the ri$ht time with the ri$ht #(r#ose in mind Since the mean is di))ic(lt+ !o( sho(ld tr! to steer clear )rom that which !o( are most dis#osed So i) !o( now !o(r dis#osition is sel)-ind(l$ent+ !o( sho(ld aim )or bein$ insensitive and end (# somewhere in the middle How do !o( end (# in #artic(lar sit(ations nowin$ what the ri$ht thin$ to do is1 Ethics isn't an exact science+ so it is a /(estion o) de$ree .ittle less or more+ not that bi$ a deal .ar$e deviations )rom the mean are blameworth! How do !o( draw the line1 4erce#tion Got identical to #ractical wisdom 2ein$ com#ared to sensation here beca(se it deals with #artic(lar )acts and thin$s while theoretical wisdom deals with $eneral thin$s 8n a sense+ it is nowled$e o) #artic(lars 4ractical wisdom nowled$e o) what to do in #artic(lar circ(mstances 3lon$ the lines o) #erce#tion Fo( are not a##l!in$ some (niversal r(le and derivin$ what to do )rom the (niversal 8t is a ind o) si$ht =oesn't mean that there aren't an! (niversal #rinci#les 3ll morall! virt(o(s actions are a mean (niversal #rinci#le *annot $ive an acco(nt )or wh! the! are what the! are 4erson o) #artic(lar wisdom will now how the! wor o(t in #artic(lar sit(ations+ b(t it is not that the! now what to do )rom derivin$ nowled$e )rom an (ltimate #rinci#le

17/11/2011 Ha##iness 3n activit! o) the so(l em#lo!in$/involvin$ reason+ in accordance with excellence Em#lo!in$/involvin$ reason D ambi$(o(s 8n *ha#ter 19+ 2oo 1+ he sets (# a distinction in the h(man so(l: Rational vs irrational ,he irrational #art ve$itative+ re#rod(ctive+ n(triative Go share in reason 3##etite+ however+ has a share in reason 8ntellect(al virt(e excellence o) o(r abilit! to thin Moral Eirt(e excellence o) o(r ca#acit!/abilit! to act/behave/)eel/ in a wa! that corres#onds to reason ,he irrational #art o) the so(l shares in reason in that it can reco$ni>e a $ood ar$(ment Eirt(es o) *haracter Moral virt(e settled #attern o) emotional/behavio(ral acco(nt which dis#oses (s to chose the mean in an! $iven sit(ation between excess and de)icienc! in res#ect to emotions/actions Goted two thin$s: Stress on choice Somethin$ has to be done intentionall! *ondition )or the #ossibilit! o) moral eval(ation ,he #erson o) #ractical wisdom is re$arded b! 3ristotle in the )ormal de)inition o) moral virt(e - :doin$ what the #erson o) #ractical wisdom will do; 2oo 9 *ha#ters 1-A ,he reason this is im#ortant is beca(se thin$s are onl! s(sce#tible to blame/#raise i) the! are deliberate 0hat is 8nvol(ntar! ,a es two )orms: 8nvol(ntar! beca(se !o( are com#elled #h!sicall! to do it 3 certain t!#e o) i$norance on the #art o) the moral a$ent "!o(% *om#(lsion an! case in which the movin$ #rinci#le )or !o(r action lies com#letel! o(tside o) !o( "is external to !o(% Fo( the a$ent contrib(te nothin$ to what !o( are doin$ 8) !o( are #h!sicall! com#elled to do somethin$+ then its not !o(r )a(lt =(ress doesn't mean that !o( are bein$ com#elled+ and there)ore+ not invol(ntar! 0hatever is done to avoid a $reater evil+ is still vol(ntar! 8) !o( are sailin$ in a shi# and !o( have to 6ettison #recio(s car$o+ and !o( owed that car$o to someone+ !o( are still morall! com#elled So(rce o) action is still !o(+ the #erson+ throwin$ these #recio(s thin$s overboard 8$norance 5nl! i$norance o) #artic(lars in an! $iven circ(mstance can co(nt as invol(ntar! and there)ore

$et !o( o)) the hoo + so to s#ea 0hereas+ in the case o) (niversals or $eneral #rinci#les at #la!+ those+ it is blameworth! not to now Sa! !o( accidentall! ill someone at a bowlin$ alle! b! rollin$ a bowlin$ ball )(ll o) ex#losives+ its not !o(r )a(lt since !o( didn't now 2(t+ !o( co(ld be blamed i) !o(r exc(se was that !o( didn't now that illin$ was bad 0hat is *hoice1 Moral virt(e im#lies that it was chosen 3ristotle sa!s that choice is what is decided (#on with #revio(s deliberation 0hat is deliberation1 ?irst need to thin abo(t what we can deliberate abo(t1 0e cannot deliberate over necessities ,hin$s that ha##en most o) the time "(nchan$in$% 5r thin$s which ha##en o(t o) chance 0hat others do "inso)ar as the! are the ca(ses o) somethin$% 8m#ossible thin$s 4ast events ,hin$s that cannot #ossibl! be otherwise =eliberate abo(t what can be otherwise *ontin$ent Got necessaril! the wa! the! are 0hat it is in !o(r #ower to do1 More o)ten than not+ we deliberate abo(t means and not ends ,he s#eci)ic ends that we deliberate abo(t the means to reali>e are s(##lied b! another so(rce Got deliberation ?or exam#le+ o(r end is ha##iness 0e don't deliberate abo(t that 8n virt(e o) bein$ h(man bein$s+ o(r end is ha##iness 0e deliberate over the means )or ha##iness Fo( mi$ht+ tho($h deliberation+ decide that ha##iness determined to health+ and that 6o$$in$ is a $ood means o) attainin$ health ,he )(nction o) a doctor is what de)ines a doctor /(a doctor =oes not deliberate on whether or not to heal =eliberates abo(t the means to his/her end /(a doctor *ha#ter A+ 2oo 9 2oth $ood and evil deeds are chosen =en!in$ that means that +oral cate$ories don't a##l! to (s 5b6ection actions )ollow )rom settled states o) character+ b(t+ what i) !o(r settled state o) character is s(ch that !o( can't resist tem#tation1 Moreover+ this ob6ection is stron$er beca(se o(r moral character+ o(r #atterns that we )orm thro($h habit(ation+ in )act+ colo(r/sha#e the wa! we see thin$s Ma e (s see the world in a certain wa!+ ma e (s thin$ certain thin$s are $ood and others bad So+ how can a #erson be blamed )or )ollowin$ their settled state1

0ell+ !o( m(st have chosen to do those activities re#eatedl!+ and once the! cr!stalli>e into a dis#osition+ i) even irrevocabl! so+ !o( have still chosen to do the thin$s that )orm the character Fo(r character determines !o(r world view and what !o( deem to be $ood 8) !o( have a vicio(s character+ what !o( deem to be $ood+ is not act(all! so Fo( are still morall! res#onsible )or !o(r character+ and th(s the actions which )low )rom it

2oo @ 3dmits that his de)inition o) moral intelli$ence is a circ(lar one So what is the mean1 ,hat which is in accordance with orthos logos "ri$ht reason% 8n other words+ that which the #erson o) #ractical wisdom who sees what is the ri$ht reason wo(ld choose 3ristotle himsel) reco$ni>es that this is abo(t as hel#)(l as tellin$ doctors that the! sho(ld 6(st do what the medical art re/(ires ,h(s+ it sho(ld be determined what is the ri$ht r(le/reason and what is the reason that )ixes it Have to loo )or the )actors res#onsible )or stri in$ the mean ,he co$nitive )ac(lt! that enables (s to stri e the mean in an! #artic(lar sit(ation+ or the com#onents o) an! s(ch a##ro#riate 6(d$ement Reminds (s o) the distinction between moral and intellect(al virt(es+ and the corres#ondin$ distinction between the rational and the irrational #arts o) the so(l Gew distinction within the rational #art o) the so(l in the strict sense ,wo #arts o) the rational #art o) the so(l in the strictest sense: 5ne b! which we contem#late the indo) thin$s whose #rinci#les cannot be otherwise "necessar!% Scienti)ic #art 5ne b! which we contem#late variable thin$s "contin$ent thin$s% *alc(latin$/deliberatin$ #art =on't deliberate that 2P2 D 7+ or deliberated i) !o( sho(ld have eaten bananas or not yesterday 5b6ects 3ssociated with Each o) the =ivisions o) the Rational So(l ,he )(nction o) ever! intellect(al )ac(lt! is to distin$(ish between the tr(e and the )alse ,he excellence o) an intellect(al )ac(lt! is to 6(d$e between tr(e and )alsit! well 8n the case o) the )ac(lt! o) the rational so(l which thin s abo(t eternal necessar! (nchan$in$ thin$s+ its )(nction is to ascertain what is necessarily tr(e or )alse 0hereas+ in the case o) the #art o) the rational so(l which is set over contin$ent thin$s+ it is a little more com#lex ,he $ood state o) #ractical reason+ is tr(th "or the ca#acit! to discern tr(th%+ in a$reement with ri$ht desire =eliberate =esire ,he e))icient ca(ses o) actions is choice ,he moral acts to be moral acts have to be chosen ,he ori$in or e))icient ca(se o) choice is two)old: Ri$ht desire 5r+ desire+ #eriod& =etermines the end which is to be #(rs(ed

3lwa!s in con6(nction with the )irst: deliberation Reasonin$ abo(t means in view o) the ends s(##lied b! desire Reason which 6(d$es re$ardin$ the ends set b! desire ,his is wh! choice+ $ood/bad action+ cannot exist witho(t both tho($ht and a settled state o) character ,he SS* sha#es !o(r dis#osition+ inclination+ to desire in one wa! or another+ which set the end which !o( deliberate abo(t the means to reali>e Moral virt(e settled state o) character which involves choice "which is deliberate desire% 8nvolves both the ri$ht desire and the ri$ht deliberation o) the means which lead to that ri$ht desire 8ntellect alone does not s())ice !o( to move to an!thin$

*om#lete .ist o) 8ntellect(al Eirt(e 5#inion/belie) can't be intellect(al virt(e since it has to do with the $ras#in$ o) tr(th/)alsit! well 0hereas o#inion+ b! de)inition+ is not reall! a $ras# o) tr(th or )alsit! =emonstrative *annot be otherwise Universal/eternal tr(ths ,he method o) episteme is demonstration 3 little li e what 4lato called hypothetical reasoning =ed(ces a concl(sion accordin$ to valid in)erence )rom #remises 4remises o) a demonstration can the! themselves be intermediate concl(sions 0hat abo(t the #remises which are not concl(sions o) #revio(s ar$(ments1 ?irst #remises are not themselves $oin$ to be )(rther s(bstantiated b! other #remises ,he! are )irst #rinci#les Episteme is the intellect(al virt(e re$ardin$ demonstrations which cannot be otherwise =raws #remises o(t o) those which are #re-$iven Knowled$e+ in this sense o) demonstrative reasonin$+ is concerned with validit! =e)inition o) a valid ar$(ment is that if the #remises are tr(e then the concl(sion m(st be tr(e 8n itsel)+ validit! has to do with the str(ct(re o) the ar$(ment =eals with tr(th and internal consistenc! Relies on another #ower within reason to $ive it tr(e #remises )rom which it can derive thin$s +echne ,hin$s that are variable and can be otherwise Has to do with the ma in$ o) thin$s *oncerned with thin$s that come to be and re/(ire and external a$ent to ma e them 5ther #art o) reason+ havin$ to do with variable thin$s+ is #ractical wisdom =oin$ thin$s+ rather than ma in$ them Ma in$ and doin$ aren't the same thin$ ,he #rod(ction o) ob6ects+ this #rocess has an end o(tside o) itsel) "the thin$ which is #rod(ces+ which itsel) has a )(rther #(r#ose% 3ction+ moral action+ is an end in itsel)+ and there)ore the two can't be the same thin$

*oncerned with the tr(ths re$ardin$ the #rocesses o) #rod(ction *ar#enter nows what a table is and nows the materials that the )orm o) table dictates+ and the car#enter /(a car#enter nows the techni/(es o) ma in$ a $ood table

'hronesis 4ractical wisdom Knowled$e o) how to sec(re what is best in li)e How to reali>e o(r ends as h(man bein$s *oncerned with action+ and what is to be done+ and what is contin$ent and variable ,he man o) #ractical wisdom deliberates well on how best to lead a )(l)illed li)e 4ractical wisdom involves deliberation More on =eliberation Fo( don't deliberate abo(t ends+ or (ltimate ends =eliberate abo(t the means to )(l)il that end "desire% ,r(e and reasoned state o) ca#acit! to act in a wa! that is $ood or bad )or men 8n 2oo A+ #ractical wisdom is called o#inion 0ell+ it mi$ht not be o#inion in the strictest sense 5#inion can't be an intellect(al virt(e beca(se intellect(al virt(e has to do with ascertainin$ what is $ood and tr(e 5verstatement on the #art o) 3ristotle Rationale: can't be an o#inion in the strictest sense o) o#inion+ beca(se to be morall! virt(o(s in the )(llest sense+ !o( need to now what !o( are doin$ is morall! virt(o(s+ and !o( need to be doin$ it beca(se it is morall! virt(o(s+ and )or no other reason ,he nowled$e involved in moral virt(e is a ind o) nowled$e and not mere o#inion <(st loo s li e o#inion when !o( com#are it to episteme 5r the theoretical sciences in $eneral Moral nowled$e not as exact as that )o(nd in theoretical disci#lines Got /(ite nowled$e in the )(llest sense o) theoretical reason+ and closer to #erce#tion beca(se to has to do with #artic(lars $ous *om#rehension 2ein$ able to demonstrate what )ollows )rom )irst #rinci#les is di))erent )rom bein$ able to $ras# those )irst #rinci#les themselves ,wo intellect(al )ac(lties have to be at #la! 5ne that sees what )ollows )rom #remises Geeds somewhere else )or the #remises to come )rom 8) there wasn't a )irst #rinci#le+ li)e wo(ld be an in)inite re$ress 5ne that $ras#s the #remises themselves 8) nowled$e is $oin$ to be #ossible+ 6(sti)ication )or o(r #ro#ositions thro($h demonstration+ thro($h ded(cin$ those #ro#ositions )rom somewhere+ it has to come to an end at some #oint !o( will need a non demonstrative/immediate $ras# o) #remises $ous % immediate+ direct $ras# o) )irst #rinci#les/#remises o) an ar$(ment

4hiloso#hical 0isdom someone who is #hiloso#hicall! wise has to now what the )irst #remises are+ and what )ollows )rom them *ombination o) demonstrative nowled$e and nous $ous what enables the $ras# o) )irst #rinci#les o) reason Cives !o( a direct $ras# o) reason ,he (ltimate/most )(ndamental r(les o) reasonin$ Somethin$ can't be and not be at the same time Fo( can't #rove that b! invo in$ other #remises and demonstratin$ )rom it ,hat demonstrate wo(ld rel! on the #rinci#le o) non-contradiction $ous also $ives !o( a direct $ras# o) (niversals =e)initions o) thin$s ,o 3ristotle+ we can #ercieve/observe a whole b(nch o) thin$s at the same time "$ro(# o) chairs%+ and on the basis o) 6(st observin$ those+ nous $ras#s what is common to them+ what the! are "o) the same sort% Fo( don't ded(ce it lo$icall! or ar$(e )or it rationall! 8t is on the basis o) !o(r direct $ras# o) the nat(re o) - that !o( can demonstrate )rom it Fo( can't $ras# !o(r conce#t )rom somethin$ else+ and i) !o( can+ !o( have to int(it directl! )rom that conce#t 1@/11/2011 0hat is the $ood )or an!thin$1 ,o reali>e its nat(re ,hose thin$s de)ined b! an essential )(nction+ virt(e is $oin$ to be #redicated on that )(nction ,he essential h(man )(nction is thin in$+ reason& 5(r $oodness+ what )(l)ils (s is thin in$+ and em#lo!in$ reason 3ristotle $oes on to re)ine this acco(nt b! investi$atin$ the so(l *h 1A+ 2oo 1+ there are two #rimar! #arts to the so(l Rational 8rrational ,o each #art corres#onds a virt(e Even the irrational #art+ one #art o) it+ has a share in reason as 3ristotle #(ts it 4arta es o) it+ or at least+ can obe! it thro($h habit(ation 3##etite 3##etite can heed advice )rom reason *an reco$ni>e $ood reason when it sees it ,he rational #art+ #ro#er+ is the #art that act(all! thin s+ and $enerates ar$(ments )or or a$ainst a certain t!#e o) behavio(r ,wo t!#es o) h(man excellence Moral Eirt(e 4retain/belon$ to+ the #art o) o(r so(l that is irrational+ b(t can be made to heed reason Settled state o) character that dis#oses !o( to stri e the mean in an! $iven sit(ation between excess and de)icienc! with res#ect to actions "virt(o(s behavio(r% 8ntellect(al Eirt(e 3bilit! to $ras#/discern the tr(th/)alsit! in the vario(s s#heres that we can com#rehend

,hese two )orms o) excellence are two di))erent t!#es o) ha##iness )or h(man bein$s 0hat ind o) hierarch! is there between these two )orms o) ha##iness1 "2oo 10%

2oo @ Remember that+ within o(r rational so(l+ there are vario(s #owers o) reason ,o these corres#ond vario(s excellences/intellect(al virt(es ?ive states in which the activit! o) thin in$ is #er)ormed well =eliberate/calc(lative Eariable "bi)(rcates into&&&% +echne "art/ma in$% 'hronesis "#ractical wisdom% ,heoretical invariable "leads to&&&% 4ophia "#hiloso#hical wisdom% "which bi)(rcates into&&&% Episteme "demonstrative wisdom% $ous "int(ition% =emonstrative Reason "Episteme% Eirt(e is to be able to reason validl! )rom $iven #remises+ tho($h it does not $enerate them+ to the concl(sion that )alls o(t o)+ or can be derived validl! )rom/b! the #remises+ that it ta es over )rom another )ac(lt! "$ous% ?rom the h!#othetical reasonin$ in 4lato 8) an ar$(ment str(ct(re is valid+ the s(##osed tr(th entails the tr(th o) the concl(sion =emonstrative reasonin$+ however+ can't $o on in)initel! ,hen !o('d need a demonstration )or a #remise which wo(ld need a demonstration and !et another #remise which wo(ld need&&&&& 0hat (ltimatel! #rovides the )irst #rinci#les o) demonstrations/ar$(ments : $ous5 Go(s ,he immediate $ras# o) the )irst #rinci#les o) ar$(mentation 2edroc #remise )or ar$(ments/demonstrative reasonin$s "demonstrations% Cras#s (niversals on a basis o) the #erce#tion o) the man! di))erent instantiations o) a #rinci#le Cras# o) the )orm chair wo(ld be abstracted )rom nous b! the em#irical observation "sense data o) man! chairs% 8t is thro($h this that !o( can then $o on to demonstrate thin$s 8t is nous which $ras#s that all men are rational+ and then demonstrative reasonin$ ta es over 3ll men are rational ")irst #rinci#le%& Socrates is a man "$ras#ed b! #erce#tion%& ,here)ore+ Socrates is rational "$enerated b! demonstrative reasonin$& ,o thin thro($h a s!llo$ism1 8t re/(ires both t!#es o) reason+ and is there)ore an exercise o) sophia& 8t is onl! wor in$ in con6(nction that !o( can $et tr(e nowled$e "sophia%+ #hiloso#hical reasonin$ 8) !o( are $oin$ to have tr(e nowled$e+ !o( need to now more than sim#l! that one thin$ is a table "nous%+ and then !o( have to tal abo(t it "episteme%

3n$(s is s(ch a Ei in$ U--!es& 3 #remise $ras#ed b! #erce#tion& :4

4ophia Hi$hest reali>ation o) nowled$e beca(se it is concerned with the hi$hest "best% ob6ects b! nat(re ,hose which exist b! necessit!+ and (nchan$in$l! $ous $ras#s what is, rather than what becomes& 2! contrast+ the ob6ects o) phronesis "#ractical wisdom%+ are Got necessar! "can be other than what the! are% 3re not (niversal "sophia % (niversal #rinci#les% More concerned with #artic(lars 0hat is ri$ht to do in a #artic(lar sit(ation 3bo(t h(man+ not divine thin$s 5n the basis o) this com#are and contrast+ there is an evident hierarch! between sophia and phronesis 4ophia Q 'hronesis 3ll o) these are intellect(al virt(es+ b(t phronesis and sophia are the res#ective intellect(al virt(es o) deliberate and theoretical reasonin$ 'hronesis is an end in itsel)+ while techne is a means to $ettin$ )(rther ends 4ophia is an end in itsel) also+ and is s(#erior to phronesis *ha#ter 12+ 2oo @ 5b6ection 'hronesis is concerned with all )orms o) behavio(r and emotions which are $ood 3ctin$/)eelin$ in a##ro#riate wa!s 2(t+ those who are $ood+ have a $ood settled state o) character+ don't seem to need phronesis since their settled state dis#oses them to do the ri$ht thin$s 0hat is the (se o) phronesis1 3nalo$! !o( have to become a doctor to become health! Fo( can't 6(st )ollow their dictates to become health! 3ristotle's res#onse the )(l)ilment o) o(r essential )(nction in moral virt(e also involves an intellect(al virt(e b! necessit! Excellence o) character isn't s())icient+ even in tr(e morall! virt(o(s actions Moral virt(e+ $ood settled state o) character+ is what ma es !o(r aim correct+ !o(r desire correct& =eliberation "phronesis% is re/(ired to stri e (#on the ri$ht means in reali>in$ the end Habit(ation to desirin$ certain thin$s and not in others Hence+ moral virt(e involves phronesis =istinction 2etween =oin$ Morall! Eirt(o(s ,hin$s and 3ct(all! 2ein$ Morall! Eirt(o(s ,o reall! be morall! virt(o(s+ )or it to be tr(e+ the external deed bein$ externall! in con)ormit! to moral virt(e is not s())icient 3s 3ristotle #(ts it+ in order to be $ood one m(st be in a certain state+ and )or the sa e o) the acts themselves ,o eval(ate an! $iven action+ !o( have to now how that a$ent #ercieved that action

'hronesis is cr(cial to this distinction ,he a$ent has to now wh! it is that what he is doin$ is morall! virt(o(s Knowled$e is an essential com#onent to moral virt(e ,he a$ent+ doin$ the morall! virt(o(s thin$+ has to now that it is morall! virt(o(s+ and is doin$ it for that reason & 'hronesis $ives !o( nowled$e o) what is re/(ired in an! $iven #artic(lar sit(ation+ what the mean is that !o( are tr!in$ to stri e+ "ri$ht reason% 'hronesis can be e/(ated to #erce#tion+ as it is a $ras# o) the #artic(lar ri$ht wa! o) )eelin$ in a #artic(lar sit(ation 'hronesis is ver! close to #erce#tion what $ot (s the 'Socrates is a man' #oint in the s!llo$ism 5bservin$ man! di))erent morall! virt(o(s actions o) a #artic(lar sort+ to #ic o(t and $ras# what it is which ma es all o) those instances o) moral virt(e+ morall! virt(o(s& 8n that sense+ phronesis is closer to nous+ or at least involves somethin$ li e nous& *an't 6(st be nowled$e o) #artic(lars Knowled$e o) the $eneral #rinci#les

*ha#ter 19 =istinction between moral virt(e "wea nat(ral virt(e% and moral virt(e in the strict sense Gat(ral virt(e is a blind (nconscio(s #er)ormance o) actions which externall! con)orm to ri$ht reason ,h(s+ the! loo li e somethin$ a morall! virt(o(s #erson wo(ld do Gon-virt(o(s reason+ or done o(t o) sheer habit(ation 2! contrast+ there is somethin$ that is real moral virt(e Moral virt(e in the strictest sense is $(ided b! nowled$e and is chosen on the basis o) the moral a$ents nowled$e o) wh! it is that the #artic(lar deed he is contem#latin$ is $ood+ and the $eneral #rinci#les that he is (sin$ to eval(ate his actions/ends in a sit(ation ?or that reason+ moral virt(e necessaril! involves phronesis and isn't )(ll! com#lete witho(t it Moral excellences havin$ to do with character are not )orms o) reason in an o) themselves 2(t+ the! necessaril! involve the #resence o) reaso ,he moral a$ent m(st be reasonin$+ and nowin$ that what he is doin$ is reasonable and )or the ri$ht reasons Moral Eirt(e 8m#lies 'hronesis and 'hronesis 6e/(ires Moral Eirt(e+ S(ch ,hat ,he! are *o=e#endent 8) phronesis is the ca#acit! to debate abo(t means+ then it re/(ired moral virt(e to #rovide it with a $ood end to which to wor toward 'hronesis )irst and )oremost is to debate abo(t the means which lead to good ends+ there)ore+ it needs moral virt(e to $ive it somethin$ to wor 'hronesis is the ca#acit! to deliberate how to be $enero(s in a #artic(lar sit(ation 8) witho(t this $ood end is not #resented to phronesis then it wo(ld 6(st be cleverness "reasonin$+ #eriod%& -----4oo#ire on #hronesis---- "b! Eri a% 'hronesis re/(ired moral virt(e+ since !o( onl! develo# that nowled$e based on re#eated observations o) morall! virt(o(s actions !o( become $ood at stri in$ the ri$ht mean b! observin$ others

'hronesis will be able to extract the $eneral #rinci#le o(t o) the observations 8n that sense+ to be a man o) phronesis+ in a sense+ !o( alread! need to be morall! virt(o(s aristotle can $o die in a hole ,here is a sense that+ des#ite the )act that the two are co-de#endent+ that !o( are a(tomaticall! morall! virt(o(s b! 6(st bein$ a #erson o) phronesis !o( have all the moral virt(es once !o( have phronesis on the condition that !o( alread! have a $ood settled state o) character&&&which !o( will have since the develo#ment o) phronesis re/(ires a $ood settled state ,wo thin$s abo(t phronesis: Sometimes he seems to s#ea as tho($h it as intellect(al virt(e that allows !o( to #ic the correct means to the $ood end 2(t+ nowin$ what the $ood end is+ is also a co$nitive activit! ,he morall! virt(o(s #erson in the )(llest sense needs to now wh! what he is doin$ is morall! virt(o(s ,he morall! virt(o(s #erson needs to have phronesis to now what the means are to reali>e his end+ moral virt(e+ "the means bein$ stri in$ the literal means% 2(t+ !o( can't now that somethin$ is $ood witho(t nowin$ the end as well1 Fo( can't now that 6o$$in$ and eatin$ well leads to $ood health+ i) !o( don't now that there is $ood health+ or what $ood health is Moral virt(e to 3ristotle is not sim#l! a co$nitive state+ even tho($h it involves a co$nitive state "phronesis% 4er)ect moral virt(e is #art habit(ation+ and #art nowled$e Knowled$e dis#oses !o( to see correct ends and ta e #leas(re in the actions that are morall! virt(o(s ,he tr(l! virt(o(s #erson's habits will be a sel)-conscio(s ex#ression o) his #ractical wisdom

,wo 4rimar! Kinds o) Eirt(e Excellences associated with irrational #art o) so(l Excellences associated with rational #art o) so(l 3ssociated with+ that the excellences themselves+ are two di))erent )orms o) ha##iness 0hat we want to establish in 2oo 10+ "ch@-9% is to establish which Eirt(e is s(#erior to the other Ha##iness "act(ali>in$ !o(r nat(re% is not a dis#osition Got a #otentialit! 8) it were+ then !o( co(ld be ha##! when !o( are aslee#+ when !o( are in a coma ,his is not a )(l)illed li)e Ha##iness isn't some soma #ill& "4oma D 2rave Gew 0orld re)erence& 8) !o( don't $et it+ $o read the boo &% Ha##iness+ in the strictest sense+ is #la!in$ the $(itar+ not when !o( have the #otencial to #la! i 8) ha##iness were a dis#osition+ then !o( co(ld be ha##! in the most extreme mis)ort(ne ,he ex#ression o) moral virt(e in extreme mis)ort(ne is ver! limited 5ne has to be born+ to a certain de$ree+ with the e/(i#ment to act(ali>e moral virt(e Ha##iness has to be an activit! done well *arried o(t in accordance with virt(e Some activities are #(rs(ed )or their own sa es+ others )or the sa e o) somethin$ else Since the hi$hest $ood is an activit!+ it is an end in itsel)+ since it is the hi$hest $ood

0hat is the activit!+ that+ when done well+ is ha##iness& Got that it $ives rise to it ?irst contender: 3m(sement 8t seems li e it mi$ht be+ since+ am(sement+ )rivolo(s idle #leas(res are )(l)illin$ Fo( s#end a lot o) time #la!in$ video $ames+ $oin$ so )ar as to ne$lect )ood and s(ch 3m(sement is also what #eo#le with a lot o) #ower do 3m(sement is what the! see 3ristotle's re#l!: onl! those #eo#le who have sam#led all the di))erent t!#es o) #leas(res are )it to choose ,!rants choose onl! #h!sical #leas(res+ not so m(ch the am(sement o) #hiloso#hical wisdom 3m(sement can't be it+ beca(se+ it is #erverse and childish to constr(e am(sement as a hi$hest $ood or end in itsel) 4erversion o) the nat(ral order o) means and ends ,he #(r#ose o) am(sement is to restore !o(rsel) so !o( can better accom#lish that which is tr(l! an end in itsel)

21/11/2011 2oo 10 8n cha#ter @+ 2oo 10+ it is established that ha##iness is not a dis#osition Got a ca#acit! Fo( cannot be said to be virt(o(s or excellent+ or $ood in the )(llest/strictest sense (nless !o( are act(all! carr!in$ o(t those thin$s which are virt(o(s+ (nless !o( are de#lo!in$ !o(r settled state o) character in #(rs(in$ morall! virt(o(s activities+ and contin(o(sl! doin$ so 5r at least doin$ so as m(ch is #ossible 0hen !o( are aslee#+ !o(r moral virt(e is 6(st a dis#osition+ not in e))ect .i e a #erson who can #la! the $(itar+ b(t doesn't act(all! have a $(itar in their hands+ the! have the #otential to #la! Ha##iness is an activit! 8) ha##iness is the hi$hest $ood+ then it is one when done in accordance with virt(e is ha##iness in itsel) ,he )irst contender )or that activit! when #(rs(ed with virt(e is 3m(sement/idle )rivolo(s #leas(re "sens(al% 4eo#le seem to #(rs(e it as an end itsel) beca(se the! $ive (# a lot o) thin$s to $ain it ,he t!rants o) this world see am(sement+ even tho($h the! have all the #ower in the world 3m(sement is 6(st childish and #erverse 8t is #erverse to thin that idle thin$s are the hi$hest $ood+ beca(se !o( don't brea !o(r bac and toil all da! 6(st so !o( can #la! video $ames 3m(sement is s!non!mo(s with diversion 3m(sement is sim#l! a diversion which ta es !o(r mind o)) somethin$ and relaxes !o( 2(t i) it is the hi$hest $ood+ !o( wo(ld #(rs(e it )or its own sa e

3 li)e o) 6(st am(sement wo(ld be a li)e o) diversions+ and th(s an em#t! li)e =iversions b! nat(re are divertin$ )rom something+ and i) that is all that !o( are doin$+ clearl! !o(r li)e m(st be em#t! 3m(sement is )or the sa e o) somethin$ else+ )rom wor "which is inherentl! )(l)illin$% So+ what activit!+ when done well+ is ha##iness1 +heoria % ,heoretical reasonin$ ,he ob6ect o) which are necessar! and eternal tr(ths 8t's virt(e is sophia

+heoria ,he hi$hest )orm o) virt(e in (s+ which re#resents the most com#lete ha##iness is theoria when done well He #roves this b! brin$in$ (# a criterion or characteristics o) com#lete ha##iness+ and showin$ how theoria and onl! theoria )(l)ils that critera Happiness should be an activitiy which is in accordance with our highest/supreme excellence *ontem#lation+ when done well+ is the best+ and there)ore meets this criteria ,heoretical reasonin$ is what is hi$hest/best in (s ,here)ore the hi$hest )orm o) excellence+ and th(s+ hi$hest )orm o) ha##iness 8t enables (s to $ras# the hi$hest ob6ects+ b! nat(re+ those thin$s which are best in nat(re and there)ore are to the )(llest extent "#(re act(alit! Heternal (nmoved moverI% 2est in (s beca(se it is what most strictl! s#ea in$+ de)ines (s+ se#arates (s and distin$(ishes (s )rom all other animals and livin$ thin$s 3ristotle's reasonin$ is that which de)ines !o(+ that which ma es !o( that t!#e o) thin$+ is what is best in !o( and th(s ma es !o( that t!#e o) thin$ 2eca(se reason is what distin$(ishes (s )rom other thin$s+ it there)ore m(st be the best o) (s Happiness should be continuous and not intermittent +heoria is that which can be done contin(o(sl! 2! contrast+ the morall! virt(o(s #erson will ta e #leas(re in a $enero(s act+ b(t that act is /(ic l! endin$+ and with it+ the #leas(re ends too+ and the act itsel) is over+ and the act itsel) is virt(e ,his is de)initel! the case with sens(al #leas(re Happines should be mingled with pleasure ,here sho(ld be #leas(re in achievin$ the hi$hest $ood and reali>in$ !o(r nat(re ,o 3ristotle+ sophia which is the hi$hest virt(e "the excellence o) o(r ca#acit! to contem#late%+ is the #leasentest o) activities ,he #leas(res o) #hiloso#h! are marvello(s )or their #(rit! and their end(rin$ness ,he #leas(re o) #hiloso#hical conversation is #(re in that it is (nallo!ed with an! s())erin$ b! necessit! 0hereas+ to 3ristotle+ moral virt(e is alwa!s im#(re in this sense+ the #leas(re associated with this is alwa!s im#(re 8) !o( are co(ra$eo(s+ then !o( m(st ta e #leas(re in !o(r acts o) braver!+ which (s(all! involve illin$ #eo#le 8nso)ar as !o( are brave+ !o( are $oin$ to ta e #leas(re in it 2(t i) !o( are morall! virt(o(s in a ro(nded wa!+ !o( are also com#assionate

3nd inso)ar as !o( are com#assionate !o( are $oin$ to be #ained b! illin$ someone else So+ the #leas(re that !o( derive )rom !o(r braver!+ !o( will be sorrowed as well 4hiloso#hical #leas(res are end(rin$+ beca(se+ barrin$ !o( d!in$ or $oin$ cra>!+ !o( can contem#late eternal tr(ths lon$er than an!thin$ else 0hereas+ the same can't be said o) sens(al #leas(res 3nd as !o( a$e+ the s#here o) !o(r avaliable )orms o) moral virt(e $et smaller and smaller 3s !o( a$e+ !o( sto# bein$ able to be brave on the battle)ield Fo( can still have the dis#osition+ b(t !o( can't )(ll! de#lo! it Happiness is self-sufficient ,here are no $oods beside it *ontem#lation is the most sel)-s())icient activit! He $rants that #hiloso#hers have basic needs which need to be satis)ied+ b(t the! need less o) these thin$s than other h(man bein$s+ and there)ore their activit! is more sel)-s())icient ,o be morall! virt(o(s+ !o( need more e/(i#ment than !o( need to 6(st thin well ?or exam#le+ to be $enero(s+ !o( need a little more mone! than what !o( need b! necessit! to s(rvive ,o be brave+ !o( needed to be wealth! eno($h to b(! !o(r e/(i#ment "armo(r% ,o be morall! virt(o(s+ !o( need more external $oods+ and there)ore less sel) s())icient ,his $oes )or other moral virt(es as well+ all o) which are inter#ersonal 0ith contem#lation+ all !o( need is !o(rsel)+ b(t )or somethin$ li e indness+ where !o( need another #erson Moral virt(es are carried o(t in a social context Fo( cannot be $enero(s witho(t havin$ other #eo#le to be $enero(s to 8t hel#s !o( to become a better reasoner when !o( disc(ss with other #eo#le+ and there is ed(cation involved+ b(t+ !o( can easil! 6(st do it b! !o(rsel) a)ter the disc(ssions "$o into the mo(ntains or some s(ch% Happiness is most final 8n the sense that it is #(rs(ed as an end in itsel) and not )or the sa e o) an!thin$ )(rther+ be!ond it 8t is the end o) all ends 5nl! contem#lation is #(rs(ed )or its own sa e Gothin$ arises )rom the contem#lation o) eternal necessar! tr(ths than eternal necessar! tr(ths 8t is not #(rs(ed )or some )(rther end 2! contrast+ !o( do $ain )rom moral virt(e Fo( become hono(red and rich )rom the #er)ormance o) brave deeds Fo( $ain )avo(rs )rom the #er)ormance o) ind deeds Happiness depends on leisure Ha##iness is a leis(rel! activit! .eis(re here is not an idle activit!+ b(t somethin$ which is most end-li e 8t is the thin$ !o( a($ht to #(rs(e i) !o( had the o#tion o) ever! activit! in the world Moral virt(e is not leis(rel! in this sense .et (s ta e the moral virt(es in war *o(ra$e+ )or exam#le+ is a moral virt(e+ b(t !o( wo(ld not wa$e war i) !o( didn't have

to+ and even the co(ra$eo(s morall! virt(o(s #erson wo(ld not wa$e war+ 6(st beca(se ,here)ore+ it is not an end in itsel) Fo( wa$e war )or the sa e o) #eace ,he same $oes )or moral virt(e in the s#here o) #olitics Fo( can de#lo! moral virt(e in #olitics 8n )act+ the two hi$hest s#heres wherein moral virt(e is dis#la!ed best are war and #olitics ,he $ood #olitician r(les )or the bene)it o) his/her s(b6ects ,he #oint o) r(lin$ 2(t it is toilsome+ and !o( sacri)ice a $reat deal in r(lin$+ and le$islatin$ #ractical wisdom 3nd in a #er)ect world+ wherein ever!one was a(tomaticall! virt(o(s+ then the morall! virt(o(s #erson wo(ld not want to r(le 8t is not+ in the )(llest sense+ an end in itsel) ,he morall! virt(o(s #erson carries o(t morall! virt(o(s actions )or their own sa es Fo( are onl! morall! virt(o(s beca(se !o( ta e #elas(re in them+ not beca(se !o( are #aid to do so+ or )or an! end be!ond it which ma! be accidental to bein$ a morall! virt(o(s #erson 2eca(se r(lin$ their s(b6ects is a $ood thin$+ the! do it+ however+ it is not an end in itsel) in the )(llest sense+ beca(se i) the world were #er)ect+ and habit(ation thro($h laws were not re/(ired to ma e $ood #eo#le+ the r(ler wo(ld not want to r(le Moral virt(e is not leis(rel!+ beca(se i) !o( didn't have to do it+ !o( wo(ldn't Fo(r moral virt(e wo(ld remain a dis#osition Hi$hest moral virt(es 4olitical moral virt(e Moral virt(e in the battle)ield 2(t the! are not hi$hest virt(es in the sense that when done )or themselves are ha##iness 11RR220 +heoria is the activit! that+ when done well+ is ha##iness 8t is the hi$hest and the least intermittent )orm o) ha##iness 8t is an endless and in)inite #leas(re 0hat is best in (s+ is what we most tr(l! are Even phronesis some animals have Some can deliberate well abo(t $ood means+ $ood )or them 0hat !o( are in the strictest sense is !o(r ca#acit! to reason theoreticall!+ and !o( are onl! secondaril! a bod! there)ore it wo(ld be stran$e i) someone were to choose the li)e o) themselves+ b(t the li)e o) somethin$ else "the bod! D moral virt(e% ,hat which is best and most #leasant in each thin$ 8t is+ however+ a li)e too hi$h )or man 0e en6o! it inso)ar as there is a s#ar o) the divine in (s 2(t+ we are )inite creat(res o) )lesh and blood+ and we have needs that we need to attend to 0e need to eat+ need to slee#+ etc& 0e strive )or the ha##iness that is involved in reasonin$ well+ in #hiloso#hical wisdom 2(t+ we can never )(ll! attain it+ beca(se the li)e o) the bod! dra$s (s down

8nso)ar as the #hiloso#her is h(man+ he never trancends the polis 4hiloso#h! is #ossible in a well-ordered state+ and #rovides the leis(re that is necessar! )or his/her activit! 8n a sense+ the #hiloso#her is a #arasite ,he! need the sec(rit! o) a well-ordered state ,here)ore+ the! need to either become a r(ler himsel) to maintain the well-ordered state+ or he remains de#endant on #oliticians who are able to r(le well 3t the ver! least+ the #hiloso#her will have to ed(cate his )ellow citi>ens+ the elites He will have to show them that the li)e o) contem#lation doesn't #ose a threat to the cit!+ and doesn't $o a$ainst the cit!'s belie)s 3nother vindication o) #hiloso#h! in the )ace o) their detractors 8t is a de)ence o) #hiloso#h! be)ore a #olitical a(dience 3ristotle's lect(res wo(ld have been said be)ore #oliticians ,he li)e o) the #hiloso#her is divine 8t is not com#letel! attainable )or h(man bein$s inso)ar as the! are h(man bein$s Unendin$ en6o!ment o) this li)e is not #ossible )or h(man bein$s 2(t we can a##roach it 4aradox *om#lete ha##iness ends (# bein$ the #er)ormance o) the hi$hest h(man activit! in accordance with virt(e ,here)ore+ theoria done with sophia 2(t inso)ar as we #er)orm this activit!+ we transcend o(r )init(te and become eternal and necessar! o(rselves "the eternal (nmoved mover Hwhich is eternall! en$a$ed in contem#lationI% 0e see to em(late the li)e o) the eternal (nmoved mover 8n terms o) 4lato's cave meta#hor+ we exist at the mo(th o) the cave+ and we are eternall! in the str($$le o) that #art o) (s which is divine and the #art that is h(man H(mans are a #oint o) tension 0e see to contem#late+ b(t we also have bodies+ which needs shelter+ and th(s re/(ires #olitics and comm(nit!+ and so we are #(lled down into the cave H(mans a s!nthesis o) intellect and bod! Strainin$ to transcend o(r )init(de+ and to contem#late eternall!+ b(t are tied down b! o(r )inite material bodies H(man bein$s are a s!nthesis o) intellect and bod!+ and i) that is the de)inition o) a h(man+ the moral virt(e is more #ro#erl! h(man+ beca(se it+ in the strict sense+ re/(ires habit(ation "with the bod!%+ b(t involves intellect+ beca(se to be tr(l! morall! virt(o(s !o( need to now wh! !o( are bein$ morall! virt(o(s+ and wh! !o( are doin$ what !o( are doin$ "#ractical wisdom%

4olitics Gecessar! beca(se #ro#er habit(ation cannot ta e #lace o(tside the context o) a well r(n state ,he )orce that a )ather weilds is ins())icient Fo( need the coercive )orce o) a well r(n state to mold a #erson's character s(ch that the! develo# a $ood settled state o) character ,he #(r#ose o) a r(ler is to #ass $ood laws+ and the! are $ood #recicel! beca(se the! lead to #ro#er habit(ation o) citi>ens State intervention o) the develo#ment o) moral virt(e is necesar!

,his is com#letel! o##osite to modern liberal conce#ts o) the state ,he 6(sti)ication o) a state is one that develo#s $ood moral virt(e in its s(b6ects 3nd a $ood state is one that achieves this+ b! #rod(cin$ morall! virt(o(s s(b6ects

5UR 434ERS Ex#lain the ar$(ment in whatever #assa$es are relevant in whatever #assa$es are relevant in what in the /(estion in /(estion 2e s#eci)ic to the /(estion ?oc(s in on what is #ertinent to the /(estion Explain the ar$(ment =istinction between ex#lainin$ and s(mmari>in$ 0hen !o( are #ara#hra>in$/narratin$+ !o( are 6(st assertin$ thin$s+ that one thin$ is said+ )ollowed b! another+ )ollowed b! the next .oo at the ar$(ment and the lo$ical connections between each o) the #oints which are raised in the dialo$(es Un#ac them+ and s#ell o(t+ ma e ex#licit+ the connections between one thin$ that is said and another thin$ that is said 0hat has to be #res(##osed )or the concl(sion1 0hat are the ste#s that have to be #res(##osed )or that concl(sion to be )ollowed1 Set (# the content o) !o(r #a#er and !o(r s#eci)ic to#ic in !o(r introd(ction 8t sho(ldn't 6(st s(mmari>e the whole ar$(ment Ma e ever! lin in !o(r ar$(ment ex#licit and cr!stal clear Some 'aper-wor See what 8 did there1 x= 4ronominal 4ossessives Her P s D Hers 8nde)inite 4rono(n+ 4ossessive ?orm 5ne P s D 5ne's Somebod! else's Series o) three terms: ,he 3merican )la$ is red+ white, "the comma here is the 'ox)ord comma'% and bl(e& 4arenthetical remar s Sho(ld be se#arated o)) )rom the rest o) the sentence b! a comma on both sides "=((((((h% *omma 2e)ore *on6(nction 8ntrod(cin$ a Se#arate *la(se ,he stor! o) its )irst !ears can no lon$er be constr(cted+ and blah blah blah blah& 8) !o( don't (se a con6(nction "so+ b(t+ and+ th(s+ etc% and !o( 6(st #(t a comma between two inde#endent sentences+ that's a run on& Underestimate the intelli$ence o) !o(r reader& Shorten sentences when !o( can+ i) it doesn't a))ect the meanin$ ,he Semi-*olon ,o divide two inde#endent cla(ses witho(t a con6(nction M! car is o(t o) $asW we cannot reach town be)ore dar &

*olon Used be)ore a /(otation and acts as evidence )or what !o('ve said 3lso (sed when !o( are n(meratin$ thin$s "acts as e/(al si$n% ,he s(b6ect o) the verb determine the n(mber o) the verb Sin$(lar verb a)ter the )ollowin$: each+ either+ ever!one+ ever!bod!+ neither+ nobod!+ someone& :Ever!bod! thin s he has a (ni/(e sense o) h(mo(r; G5,: :Each #erson li es the smell o) their own )arts&; :Each #erson li es the smell o) his own )arts&; =on't (se 'their' as the ne(tral #rono(n+ it is #l(ral& USE 'HE'JJ Harmoni>e !o(r #rono(ns 8) !o( start with 'one'+ ee# (sin$ it thro($ho(t the sentenceJ :Each #erson m(st do what he thin s is ri$ht&; Each #erson is sin$(lar+ so+ !o( m(st (se 'he'& G5,: :Each #erson m(st do what they thin is ri$ht&&&; S(#er)l(o(s 0ords :Her stor! is a stran$e one&; <(st write: :Her stor! is stran$e&; :Used )or )(el #(r#oses&; Ummm&&&& :Used )or )(el&; G()) said&

Eno($h abo(t Crammar+ Gow+ )or the #a#ers themselves ,he 4(r#ose o) the 3ssi$nments ,o ta e a section o) a wor as a whole and ex#lain the ar$(ment that the section+ whatever it ma! be& E"')A7$5 ?o(r virt(es to $ood writin$ in HUMS 2000 3cc(rac! Examine the text and ma e ex#licit to !o(r reader Un#ac and anal!>e the ar$(ment that the text contains ,here is an ar$(ment+ and there)ore+ a ri$ht answer Fo( can inacc(ratel!+ or acc(ratel! ca#t(re the ri$ht answer Co thro($h the ar$(ment and ta e metic(lo(s notes 8n them+ !o( sho(ld be ex#lainin$ to !o(rsel) what the ar$(ment is ,he relationshi# between #remise 1 and 2+ and how to$ether the! entail the concl(sion 8) there are #reliminar! ar$(ments that are involved+ ma e notes on those too and ex#lain how the! )it 4recision Sa!in$ on #a#er what !o( mean to sa! 3ct(all! translatin$ !o(r (nderstandin$ onto the #a$e so that someone else can (nderstand the ar$(ment and see that !o( do too *larit! Ele$ance *itations ,he #oint1 ,o avoid bein$ acc(sed o) #la$iarism 2(t this a##lies more i) !o( are (sin$ secondar! so(rces 8) !o( are /(otin$ )rom that a(thor+ or even ar$(in$ in a wa! similar to it+ !o( need to cite

Fo( cite wherever !o( need to answer: :where does he $et that in 4lato/3ristotle1; *itation+ in other words+ is a wa! o) #rovidin$ text(al evidence )or what it is that !o( are sa!in$ ,hwartin$ #ossible challen$es to !o(r ar$(ment Fo('re also aidin$ !o(r reader b! $ivin$ them the citation+ sho(ld the! wish to loo it (# 8) !o( are drawin$ )rom a whole "lar$e% section o) a text+ then that isn't hel#)(l ,a e !o(r reader b! the hand ,he! sho(ld never have to $(ess at what !o('re doin$

90/11/2011 8ntrod(ction to 4lotin(s Moved to 3lexandria to st(d! law+ b(t /(ic l! )ell in love with #hiloso#h!+ and st(died (nderneath 3mmoni(s Sac ass&&&&"what an (n)ort(nate name% He then went on an ex#idition with an em#eror to 8ndia+ b(t be)ore he $ot to 4ersia+ the em#eror was assasinated b! his troo#s 2(mmed o(t+ he moved to Rome and then o#ened (# an extremel! s(ccess)(l school 2ecame the school o) 3thens+ and he had a lot o) im#ortant #atrons Some meta#h!sics ?o(ndation on the basis o) which !o( can (nderstand #olitical )(nctions 2! the time we $et to 4lotin(s+ meta#h!sics has been moored )rom its #olitical basis ,he excl(sive concern is now solel! ethical+ not 6(st #olitical Soteriolo$ical salvation Stoicism+ e#ic(rianism+ c!nicism+ etc& ,o all these schools o) tho($ht+ #hiloso#h! becomes thera#! )or the individ(al so(l+ becomes the means o) salvation )rom the world o) #olitics 4olitics no lon$er the #lat)orm )or morall! virt(o(s behavio(r See it in the wa! that Socrates' interloc(tors see it in 2oo 1 o) the 6epublic R(n b! thieves+ and r(lin$ is 6(st bein$ a thie) on a lar$er scale Salvation is o(tside o) the realm o) #oltics a#olitical Most tr(e )or neo-#latonism 8ndivid(al salvation thro($h #hiloso#hical contem#lation o) the hi$hest thin$s Ultimatel! thro($h a m!stical (nion with the )irst #rinci#le o) the (niverse 8ncreased em#hasis on the belie) that the bod! is a #rison "#resent in 4lato+ b(t exa$$erated here% 5(r bodied state is (nnat(ral 3bandonin$ concerns with #olitics 3im o) neo-#latonism is to esca#e o(r embodied state Recollectin$ o(r s#irit(al nat(re thro($h contem#lation Re indlin$ the s#ar o) the divine that lies within (s 0e alread! are b(t we've )or$otten b! caterin$ excl(sivel! to o(r bodies *ontem#lation no lon$er an end in itsel) end to salvation ,he sole motivator o) salvation is also a res#onse to the man! /(estions le)t (nanswered in 4lato/3ristotle Some schools 6(st tr! to de)late these /(estions Geo-#latonism tries to answer the /(estions that are le)t (nanswered in 4lato+ b(t doin$ so b!

remainin$ )aith)(l to the s#irit o) 4lato's tho($ht So+ what are some o) these /(estions1 0hat is the Cood+ reall!1 0hat is its relation to the other )orms1 0here are the )orms1 0hat are the )orms1 "Got reall! $iven a thoro($h answer in 4lato% How and wh! do #artic(lar material thin$s #artici#ate in the )orms1 0hat does '#artici#ation' here+ mean1 0hat is recollection+ exactl!1 How do we come to now the )orms1 0hat #roced(re1 How is it #ossible )or (s to now the )orms1 8) we are most essentiall! de)ined b! o(r so(ls+ wh! are we in bodies to be$in with1 3ristotle: How+ reall!+ does the eternal (nmoved mover move all thin$s thro($h love1 How can we derive (niversal nowled$e )rom o(r sense ex#erience o) #artic(lars1 5(r nowled$e o) the )orm o) chair isn't a $enerali>ation+ b(t abstracted )rom the data bein$ s(##lied to (s 0h! do we have a divine element within (s1 =oes it s(rvive o(r death1 8) so+ where does it $o1 0h! are there onl! 7 ca(ses1 Some schools o) tho($ht 6(st swee# them awa! as ill-)o(nded and d(e to the bad )o(ndations o) the #hiloso#hies themselves .oo to answer the /(estions that arise on the basis o) thin$s that 4lato does sa!+ and elaborate (#on "or revise% the thin$s that 4lato's sa!s ex#licitl!+ abo(t $eneral #rinci#les o) his tho($ht 4lato was not a s!stematic thin er Geo-#latonists love s!stems S!stems o) tho($ht sa! what 4lato sort o) "or sho(ld have% said 0o(ld have been consistent with his $eneral #rinci#les+ and answer the /(estions that arise within them *ross-#ollination between the schools Geo-#latonists are 'latonists b(t+ ado#t )rom stoicism and 3ristotelian #hiloso#hies as well S!stematic s!nthesis o) these di))erent strands o) #hiloso#h! 0eave it into a (ni)ied whole Geo-4latonism

0ants to accom#lish two thin$s: S!stematic and exha(stive acco(nt o) the whole of reality Str(ct(re So(rce 4rinci#les 3ll thin$sJ =on't 6(st want to now the so(rce o) movement and chan$e+ and $o )(rther than 3ristotle+ want to now the (ltimate so(rce/ca(se o) thin$s& 4eriod& 0h! are thin$s the wa! the! are+ and not otherwise

,o develo# an acco(nt o) wh!/how it is we can come to now these thin$s 0hat ind o) thin$s are we+ s(ch that we can as /answer these /(estions1 0hat is o(r nat(re1 0hat is s#ecial abo(t (s1 ,he two above motives are inextricabl! related ,o acco(nt )or the order o) the (niverse+ is to ex#lain o(r station/nat(re+ o(r role in the cosmos ,he Geo-4latonic Universe

0hat is the to# o) the neo-#latonic (niverse1 ,he ?irst 4rinci#le ,he 5ne "+o 8en% ?irst in two wa!s: 3ll thin$s )low o(t o) the )irst ca(se Emanate )rom the )irst ca(se 3ll thin$s desire to ret(rn to their so(rce+ and be li e the )irst #rinci#le in the extent that it can 8n and thro($h their desire+ that the! act(ali>e their vario(s nat(res 3ll thin$s ret(rn to the )irst #rinci#le in the wa!s and the extent that the! can+ as determined and de)ined b! their res#ective nat(res ?irst ca(se is the )inal ca(se o) the (niverse+ and that's how it acts as the )irst #rinci#le 2e$innin$ is the end+ end is the be$innin$ 3l#ha and 5me$a+ ori$in and the end ")inal end% o) all thin$s ,he )irst 4rinci#le is called the 5ne+ and as the )inal ca(se+ it is called the Cood 0hat does the 5ne has to be li e to be the )irst "e))icient% ca(se o) all thin$s1 Cives rise to all thin$s *a(se o) all bein$ 8) that is the case+ it cannot itsel) be a bein$+ 8t cannot be+ #eriod ,he 5ne m(st be be!ond bein$ 0h!1 '2ein$' is what we are tr!in$ to ex#lain+ and $ive a reason/acco(nt )or ,o sa! that the 5ne is bein$+ it wo(ld amo(nt to sa!in$ that there is no ca(se to bein$ *a(se o) bein$ has to be be!ond bein$ Has to be be)ore/#rior to bein$+ b(t not temporally#chronologically5 3n!thin$ that is #ossible+ is act(al in the neo-#latonic (niverse Seamless hierarch! o) bein$ with no $a#s Ever! t!#e o) bein$ exists ,he idea is that i) the 5ne were not be!ond bein$+ then it co(ldn't be the ca(se o) in)initel! man! thin$s 2ein$ is determined& ,o be is to be determined+ to have determinate /(alities//(anitites& ,o be is to be limited/de)inate ,o be this rather than that. ,here is bein$ as a whole+ beca(se there are bein$s who are #ositivel! identi)ied+ who exist discreetel!

,hin$s are something rather than nothing& 2ein$ as a whole+ cannot exist+ (nless there are bein$s which are somethin$ rather than nothin$ 8) the 5ne were not be!ond bein$+ i) it were bein$ itsel)+ it wo(ld have a determinate nat(re+ and be a certain t!#e o) thin$+ b(t this wo(ld im#l! that it co(ldn't $ive rise to in)initel! man! thin$s ,hin$s onl! $ive rise to those thin$s which )ollow )rom their determinate nat(re ?ire+ is somethin$+ and $iven that determinate nat(re+ onl! one e))ect )ollows )rom it: heat& 8) the 5ne were a bein$+ it wo(ld be determinate and its re#rod(ctive #ower limited+ but it has $iven rise to all thin$s+ so+ there)ore+ it is be!ond bein$ 2e!ond s(bstance 2e!ond havin$ a determinate nat(re 8t's existance is sheer indeterminism 2! excess o) #ower and bein$ and (nit!+ not b! de)ect 8t is not bein$+ b(t it is not non-bein$ 2ein$ a non-bein$+ it is not nowable+ and not name-able ,o s#ea is to name somethin$ and to name somethin$ is to ma e it somethin$&&&& How can we come to now it i) that is the case1 Strictl! s#ea in$+ we can't& 0e can come to now it b! analo$! ,hro($h its e))ects+ thro($h what it #rod(ces Have to ne$ate an!thin$ #ositive that it mi$ht sa! abo(t it ?or exam#le+ we can sa! that it is absol(tel! #ower)(l+ and in)initel! #rod(ctive 8t is (ni)ied+ and it is sim#le& 8n the case o) it bein$ #ower+ it is onl! beca(se it has the abilit! to $ive rise to in)inite thin$s o) determinate #ower 8t is called the one beca(se it $ives rise to thin$s that are+ and there)ore+ one& ,hin$s are to the extent that the! are one+ and the s#eci)ic t!#e o) (nit! that de)ines it 8t is one in the wa! that an arm! a($ht to be one 2(t it is not one+ as in 1+ or a determinate nat(re that is o##osed to two+ or three+ or )o(r+ beca(se it is be!ond all determinations/bein$s Use the term 'one' as a meta#hor 8t is one beca(se it is not two+ or three ,he 5ne is 6(st the sim#lest name #ossible =etermination im#lies m(lti#licit! 8) !o( determine it+ !o( are x and not not x. "M(lti#licit!% 2(t the 5ne is x and not x& 8) it were com#osite+ intelli$ible material com#onents+ a #rior ca(se wo(ld have had to occ(r to ca(se them 2(t+ that is abs(rd+ beca(se there is nothin$ #rior to it+ which $ives rise to it ?or a ver! similar reason+ it can have no #otentialit!+ it is #(re act(alit! 8t can't have #otencialit!+ beca(se i) it did+ some #rior ca(se wo(ld have to be #osited to ma e it act(al 2(t b! de)inition it is the )irst ca(se 8t is not ca#able o) chan$e& 8) !o( have no #otentialit!+ !o( cannot be otherwise than !o( are

Civin$ rise to the rest o) the (niverse =oesn't ta e #lace in time 3ll thin$s )low and emanate )rom it+ b(t o(tside o) time 8t is $ivin$ rise to all thin$s doesnOt a))ect it in an! wa! 8n )act+ it is not even correct to sa! that it is related to what it #rod(ces+ b(t what it #rod(ces is related to it 4lotin(s describes the one as a river )lowin$ o(t o) a so(rce+ b(t the so(rce never bein$ de#letin$ it in an! wa!

,he Cood ,o (nderstand wh! the 5ne m(st also be called the Cood ,he 5ne con)ers bein$ on all thin$s+ and does that b! ma in$ each thin$ 1 ,hin$s are+ #eriod+ to the extent that it is one Fo( destro! somethin$ b! ma in$ it loose its essential de)inin$ (nit! Unit! in 4lotin(s' s!stem is #rior to bein$ ,he 5ne ma es thin$s come into existence b! con)errin$ a de$ree o) (nit! (#on them 2(t when thin$s are bro($ht into existence+ the! t(rn bac (#on the one in their res#ective wa!s+ and onl! in so doin$ do the! act(all! become the thin$s that the! are& ,hin$s come to be o(t o) the one+ b(t+ it is reall! onl! in see in$ to ret(rn to the one that the! tr(l! act(ali>e what the! are+ and act(ali>e the s#eci)ic ind o) (nit! that de)ines them Each thin$ attem#ts+ in its own wa!+ to its so(rce+ accordin$ to its nat(re+ and this s#eci)ic attem#t is its nat(re+ and is what each thin$ is 8n desirin$ to comm(ne with it+ all thin$s reali>e their res#ective nat(res+ and th(s reali>e the Cood& ,he Cood is to act(ali>e !o(r nat(re and be the thin$ that !o( are b! nat(re+ b! essence So&&&what does this mean1 ,he )irst thin$ that is #rod(ced b! the one/$ood ,he ?irst "not chronologically% is a divine mine Go(sJ "ca#ital 'G' to distin$(ish it )rom 3ristotle's (se% $ous is the onl! thin$ that the 5ne $ives rise to directl! $ous is what the one #rod(ces directl!/immediatel! ,he 5ne $ives rise to bein$ as well ,(rns o(t+ that in $ivin$ rise to a divine mind "$ous% that it $ives rise to bein$ 0hat is 2ein$1 Got mere existence 2ein$ involves determination and hence ne$ation/o##ort(nit! 2ein$ as a whole is a s!stem o) determination s(ch that each thin$ is what it is in virt(e that it is somethin$ that all other thin$s are not ,HE ?5RMSJ 2ein$ is the com#lete hierarchicall! ordered s!stem o) )orms "intelli$ible determinations% 2(t there are #rimar!+ secondar!+ and tertiar! determinations o) bein$ ,h(s+ some )orms are more 4rimal/?(ndamental than others& 4lato calls them the $reatest inds 2ein$+ Same+ 5ther+ Rest+ Motion+ X(alit!+ X(antit!+ 4assion+ etc&& Most (niversal )orms

Ever!thin$ that is in the sense o) bein$ a bein$ is determinate and #artici#ates in the )orm o) 2ein$+ and 5ther "beca(se it is the same as itsel) and other than what it is not%+ Same+ Rest+ etc&&& Most (niversal ,here are some thin$s that are less (niversal+ beca(se not not ever!thin$ is a s/(irrel+ etc& ,o the neo-#latonists )orms are existin$ bein$s and the ca(ses o) all thin$s that )all (nder them E&$& ,he $en(s animal is the ca(se o) all thin$s animal+ and the ca(se o) the individ(al do$s and s/(irrels+ etc& ,he ?orms are the meta#h!sical ca(ses o) bein$ s(ch a thin$ as do$ Fes the! have sex and re#rod(ce+ b(t it is the meta#h!sical ca(se o) the )orm o) do$ that allows them to be do$s ,he more $eneral/encom#assin$ )orm isn't 6(st the encom#assin$ ca(se+ it is also their e))icient ca(se ,he $en(s animal is that )rom which the vario(s s#ecies o) animal+ which are also )orms+ derive ,he! )low o(t o) the hi$her order )orm 4ict(re dar ness+ and a beam o) li$ht+ white li$ht which contain the other colo(rs within them 0hat is contained in sim#licit! in the white li$ht is re)racted thro($h the #risms o) the vario(s levels o) )orms and t(rned into the man! colo(rs ,he )orm o) animal contains within it+ and encom#asses/envelo#s all the di))erent s#ecies that are re)racted )rom it .ess and less #ower to #rod(ce+ the more s#eci)ic the )orm+ the less #ower that it encom#asses ,he )orm do$ $ives rise to #ower and less #rod(ctive thin$s than the do$&&& Cive a ca(sal acco(nt o) the existence o) all thin$s H#oo#I Ex#ress/ma e m(lti#le what it ex#ressed in (tter (nit! Each )orm has onl! a limited de$ree o) #rod(ctivit!+ based on how s#eci)ic/$eneral is 2(t even the most $eneral )orm isn't as encom#assin$ as the thin$ which $ives rise to it+ and that which $ives rise to the other )orms 2ein$s lower in the hierarch! is less Cood ,he less (ni)ied !o( are+ the more m(lti#le !o( become and the less $ood !o( are 4rime matter D (tter absence o) (nit!

0A/12/2011 4lotin(s *ontin(ed Geo-#latonism has a two-)old aim ,o acco(nt )or all thin$s 3 rational acco(nt o) the entire order o) the (niverse 3n acco(nt o) the so(rce o) all thin$s ,he ori$in o) realit!/its )irst #rinci#le ,o #rod(ce an acco(nt o) wh! we can now these thin$s 5nl! b! $ivin$ an overall acco(nt o) the whole o) realit! that !o( can ex#lain wh! it is that we h(man bein$s can come to now the whole o) realit! 0ill be $ivin$ an acco(nt o) o(r nat(re and o(r station in the cosmos Coes )(rther than 3ristotle+ beca(se 3ristotle onl! $ives the acco(nt o) the ori$in o) the chan$e

that is s!non!mo(s with nat(re Start at the ,o# ,wo-)old ca(sal relation with all thin$s 3ll thin$s )low )rom it+ all thin$s )ollow )rom it Cives rise to all thin$s ,h(s+ the e))icient ca(se o) all thin$s 8ts name is 'the 5ne'& 8t is also the end o) all thin$s 3ll thin$s strive to end to it Have a love )or it 8n this wa!+ it is the $ood+ as it is the $ood o) all thin$s+ the end that all thin$s see The essay uestion is! "#hat are the three hyposteses/levels of reality $the one, divine intellect, and soul% according to Plotinus, and how do their relations explain the structure of reality 2eca(se all bein$ comes )rom the 5ne+ the 5ne has to be be!ond bein$ *a(se o) all bein$+ there)ore+ be!ond bein$ ,r!in$ to ex#lain the ca(se o): bein$& 8) we were to sa! that the )irst #rinci#le itsel) was Zbein$Z+ then it wo(ld not be a satis)actor! answer ,he )irst #rinci#le/ca(se o) bein$/whole o) bein$+ with the )irst #rinci#le/ca(se o) all thin$s+ has to be be!ond bein$+ has to transcend it ,o be is to be determinate Somethin$+ rather than nothin$ ,o be 'somethin$' is to be 'this thin$' rather than 'that thin$' 2ein$ as a whole is the totalit! o) all thin$s havin$ a determinate nat(re ,he bein$ o) all thin$s which have a determinate nat(re+ itsel) has a determinate nat(re 8t& itsel)+ is somethin$ 8n other words+ there is no bein$ as a whole+ witho(t bein$s. 0h!+ then+ does the )irst ca(se have to be be!ond bein$1 2ein$s are beca(se the! are somethin$ rather than nothin$+ and the! $ive rise onl! those thin$s that )ollow )rom their determinate nat(re ?ire+ onl! $ives rise to heat+ it doesn't cool thin$s *oolin$ thin$s doesn't )ollow lo$icall!/ca(sall!+ )rom the determinate nat(re o) )ire ,he determinate nat(re o) heav! thin$s doesn't $ive rise to tho($ht+ beca(se that is not lo$ical 8) the )irst ca(se were a bein$+ it wo(ld have a determinate nat(re+ and its ca(sal #ower wo(ld be limited+ and co(ld not $ive rise to in)initel! man! thin$s/all thin$s which are #ossible 3ll thin$s are #rod(ced b! the 5ne Er$o+ it has to be be!ond determinate bein$ *an't be said to 'be'+ #eriod+ i) b! 'bein$' !o( mean determinate+ s(bstantial bein$ ,hat doesn't mean that it doesn't exist+ however ,he one isn't nothin$ness or sheer non-bein$ 8t is not bein$+ b(t not non bein$ 8t is an excess o) act(alit!+ an excess o) #ower

So+ what else can we sa! abo(t the 5ne1 Since it is sheer existence+ it is also s!non!mo(s with #(re act(alit! *an have+ there)ore+ no #otentialit! 8) it did+ we wo(ld have to h!#othesi>e some #rior ca(se that $ave rise to it+ b(t that's abs(rd+ since the 5ne is the first principle Gothin$ ca(sed it+ nothin$ is #rior to it ?or a similar reason+ it has to be absol(tel! sim#le 8) it were com#osite+ some #rior ca(se wo(ld have to be s(##osed )or those com#osite elements bein$ (nited in it+ s(ch that it becomes the com#osite thin$ that it is 3$ain+ this wo(ld be abs(rd+ since b! de)inition+ the )irst #rinci#le is the firstJ 8t is 5ne Utterl! (ni)ied 0e can sa! this beca(se the 5ne/)irst #rinci#le+ $ives rise to the whole o) bein$ 0e've seen that thin$s are+ to the exent that the! are 5ne ,he man! di))erent wa!s that thin$s can be 5ne+ is the man! di))erent wa!s thin$s can be+ #eriod& 3 chair has a de)inin$ essential ind o) (nit! that is s#eci)ic to it+ and onl! itsel) ,he 5ne $ives rise to all thin$s+ and in $ivin$ rise to all thin$s it $ives rise to (nit! 3ll thin$s are to the extent that the! #artici#ate in the (nit! o) the 5ne Got 1+ as o##osed to 2+ 9+ or 7& Got a determinate nat(re o) the n(mber one the 5ne+ etc+ are sim#l! meta#hors ,he one is (nnameable+ ine))able *annot be described *annot be s#o en/named ,o s#ea is to sa! somethin$ de)inite 2(t the one is no thing *annot be nown Knowled$e is a bein$+ nowled$e is what is Fo( have to have an ob6ect to now soemthing+ whereas the one is not something ,he 5ne is (nchan$in$ Cives rise to all thin$s+ b(t $ives rise to all thin$s o(tside o) time Civin$ rise to all thin$s don't chan$e it/a))ect it .o$icall! and ontolo$icall! )irst+ b(t not tem#orall!+ or chronolo$icall! )irst 2eca(se it is nothin$ b! not bein$ a thin$+ it is ever!thin$ 8t cannot be a))ected b! $ivin$ rise to somethin$+ beca(se it is no thin$& 8t encom#asses all thin$s+ b(t is encom#assed b! no thing+ it is not a))ected b! it 3ll thin$s )low )rom it+ witho(t it bein$ de#leted in an! wa! .i e a river )lowin$ )rom a so(rce "the 5ne%+ b(t it doesn't loose an!thin$ b! thin$s iss(in$ )orth )rom it ,he 5ne is #er)ect 4lentit(de o) bein$+ b(t not bein$ 8m#er)ection is a ind o) ne$ation/corr(#tion+ or nonbein$ 3n im#er)ect chair is somethin$ that doesn't corres#ond to its nat(re 3 chair that is an im#er)ect chair is a chair that is less chair than other chairs which more

closel! corres#ond to what it is to be a chair 3n im#er)ect chair is less+ #eriod+ beca(se its bein$ is 6(d$ed accordin$ to its essence as a chair ,he one is #(re act(alit! 4(re existence 4(re bein$+ "b(t+ it is not determinate bein$% 8t is not+ b(t onl! b! excess o) bein$ Sheer and absol(te #lenit(de o) existence 3bsol(tel! in)inite inexha(stible #rod(ctive #ower 2asic #ost(lates o) neo-#latonism 3ll thin$s which are #er)ect+ #rod(ce 0hen one thin$ reaches its de)inin$ act(alit!+ it's state o) #er)ection "internal act(alit!/activit!%+ once it is reali>ed+ once it is #er)ect as the thin$ it is+ it $ives rise to external realit!/external act(alit! 0hat is #rod(ces is an external ima$e/ex#ression o) itsel) 4lotin(s (ses the term 'emanation' to describe this /(alit! ,he 5ne $ives rise to bein$+ beca(se o) its #er)ection 8t is s(#er ab(ndant #er)ect/#ower/existence ,he 5ne can't contain itsel) 8t has so m(ch #ower/act(alit!+ it over)lows 8t wo(ldn't ma e sense )or it to hold onto its #ower+ since it is in)inite 2! $ivin$ it awa!+ it doesn't lose it 0holl! transcendent Each thin$ is determinate+ and the 5ne is indeterminate Utterl! imminent 2(t+ it can't be other than all thin$s+ beca(se it is indeterminate ,o be 'other' is to be somethin$ else+ which it is not 0hat it $ives rise to is bother other than it+ b(t similar to it+ and im#ortantl! encom#assed b! it 0hat it $ives to is encom#assed b! it 0hat it $ives rise to is also di))erent )rom it 8) two thin$s are exactl! ali e in ever! res#ect+ the! are the same 8) the one were to $ive rise to thin$s that were exactl! li e it+ it wo(ld not be 5ne+ it wo(ld be ,wo+ b(t it is not 0hat the 5ne $ives rise to is less #er)ect than it 4er)ection is s!non!mo(s with act(alit!+ (nit!+ and #ower 5nl! di))erent )rom o(r #ers#ective 0hat it $ives rise to is onl! a )ra$mented/divided ex#ression o) the 5ne 0hat is en)olded in the one .ess #er)ect &ne --' (ntellect

,he 4rod(cts o) the 5ne 8mmediatel! a divine mind "second h!#ostes!%

$ous emanates )rom the 5ne+ it $ives rise to it 3s soon as it iss(es o(t o) the 5ne+ it t(rns bac toward the one in an attem#t to (nite with it/$ras# it 8t's )irst e))icient ca(se is also its end/)inal ca(se 0h! does it t(rn bac and tr! to (nite with the 5ne1 8n other words+ wh! is it the Cood ")inal ca(se%1 3ll thin$s desire #er)ection 8) the 5ne is absol(te #er)ection+ all thin$s also desire the 5ne 3ll thin$s desire to be+ b(t thin$s onl! are to the extent that the! #artici#ate in (nit! ,he 5ne is absol(te (nit! ,here)ore+ all thin$s have lon$in$ )or the 5ne $ous+ in iss(in$ )rom the 5ne+ lon$s to (nite with it ,he onl! wa! it nows how "har har%+ to thin( it+ since that is its nat(re 2(t+ the 2ne cannot be tho($ht+ it is be!ond bein$ ,o thin is to thin somethin$+ and not nothin$ ,he $ous can't be+ beca(se the 5ne is not bein$ 2(t+ in this necessaril! )ailed attem#t to $ras# the 5ne+ it act(ali>es itsel) as a se#arate level o) act(alit!+ and there)ore $ives rise to bein$ in tr!in$ to thin the one 5 a!&&&so+ how 0ell+ thin abo(t bein$ ,o be is to be determinate 2ein$+ as a whole+ is the total hierarchicall! ordered s!stem o) determinations =eterminations D )orms ,he ?orms are that+ in virt(e o) which+ an!thin$ is what it is 2ein$ is not becomin$ ,he ?orms are what most tr(l! is. ,he ?orms are (nchan$in$+ (niversal+ absol(te+ sel)-#redicatin$+ and thats wh! the! are what is most tr(l! ,hin$s which #artici#ate in them are less than them Material instantiations are s(b6ect to chan$e+ are alwa!s other than what the! are+ not sel)identical 2ein$ and the ?orms are s!non!mo(s 2ein$+ to 4lotin(s+ "what the divine mind $ives rise to%+ is the total hierarchical s!stem o) )orms+ in which the most $eneral order o) ?orms $ive rise to more lower order ?orms+ and have more ca(sal #ower than the lower-order ?orms& 5ntolo$i>e lo$ic E&$& 2eca(se Same and 5ther are $eneral )orms& ,he hi$her order )orms which encom#ass the more s#eci)ic )orms+ also $ive r(se to them ca(sall!+ b(t all within nous& ,he 5ne's in)inite #rod(ctive #ower is di))(sed thro($h this wa! ,he ?orms are also #rod(ced in nous' necessar! attem#t to (nite with the 5ne ,he 5ne re#els tho($ht+ since somethin$ has to be a somethin$ to be nown Fo( now some things $ous, there)ore+ in tr!in$ to $ras# the 5ne+ $ras#s not the 5ne+ b(t itsel)

$ous

$ous tries to thin the one+ b(t beca(se the 5ne is not able to be an ob6ect o) tho($ht+ the onl! thin$ that $ous thin s is it's abilit! to thin + and its inabilit! to $ras# the 5ne 3ll the $ous are the determinate ex#ressions o) the 5ne's in)inite #rod(ctive #ower/act(alit! 8t doesn't thin these thin$s one a)ter another& 8t thin s all o) these #rod(ctive #owers all in one moment #oo# in mind Helo/(ence+ b! Eri a 2elloniI 0hat it ends (# thin in$ is it's own activit! o) tho($ht+ 3nd it's own activit! o) tho($ht+ in a sense+ are the ?orms

$ous *onstit(tes itsel) in a se#arate level o) realit!+ as a ind o) bare #otentialit!/#ower to exist ,here is almost a second level o) its existence+ in tr!in$ to ret(rn to the 5ne 8n tr!in$ to ret(rn to it+ it constit(tes itsel) as a second level o) existence 8t $enerates the ?orms in thin in$ the (tter sim#licit! o) the 5ne ,here is a corres#ondance between the two ,he tho($hts in $ous do corres#ond to what is contained in the 5ne Re)raction o) what is contained as (tter sim#licit! in the 5ne ,he )irst (n)oldin$ o) what is en)olded in the 5ne 3nalo$!: .o$os o) the mind+ and the .o$os o) the word ,he lo$os o) s#eech is a more m(lti#le+ divided ima$e o) the (nited .o$os in the mind ,he Hi$hest ?orms .o$icall!+ the )irst to be #rod(ced b! $ous ,he Hi$hest+ most (niversal/#ower)(l "most (ni)ied% Cive rise to most thin$s Hi$hest ?orms ,hin in$ 2ein$ Same 5ther Rest Motion X(antit! X(alit! How do these thin$s arise )rom $ous' )ailed attem#ts to $ras# the 5ne $ous is a thin in$ activit! How does its ver! act o) thin in$ $enerate the #rimar! determination o) bein$1 3nd th(s all the other determinations ,ho($ht and bein$ are co-constit(tin$ $ous ma es bein$ in thin in$ it 8ntellect $ives rise to bein$ in thin in$ it+ and bein$ $ives intellect existence in bein$+ b! $ivin$ tho($ht $ous thin s ,hin in$ )irst $enerates determinate bein$ 8n thin in$+ is somethin$ determinate

8n bein$ somethin$ in thin in$ $ous' de)inin$/interal activit! is to thin ,hin in$ is alwa!s abo(t somethin$ Knowled$e is alwa!s abo(t what is ,he di9ine mind $ives rise to bein$ 8t doesn't reall! $ive rise to somethin$ se#arate )rom bein$ 3ll tho($ht re/(ires d(alit! "s(b6ect/ob6ect% =(alit! o) thin in$/bein$ 8n the divine mind+ that d(alit! is alwa!s immediatel! abolished ,hin in$ and bein$ are identical Re/(ires an ob6ect )or tho($ht+ i) it is thin in$ it is thin in$ somethin$+ and !o( can there)ore ded(ce the )orm o) bein$ ,he thin$s it thin s 6(st are the moments o) its thin in$ activit! 8n $ous + to be is to be tho($ht ,he ?orms are tho($hts o) the divine mind+ not 6(st the ob6ects Moments o) its thin in$ activit!

Same and 5ther ,hin in$ involves a d(alit! between s(b6ect and ob6ect Ri$ht awa! there is a distinction between same and other ,o be an ob6ect o) tho($ht+ it m(st be de)inite+ to be this rather than that Something rather than some other thin$& Ri$ht awa! there is same and other ,hin in$ en$enders a distinction between the )orm o) same and the )orm o) other ,his+ is the same as itsel)+ and not that "otherness% ,his di))erence is immediatel! abolished in nous& ,here is alwa!s an (nderl!in$ identit! in this otherness in nous+ it is the most s(#remel! (ni)ied orders o) realit! which come )rom the 5ne "save the 5ne%& 3ll the determinations o) nous are+ in one hand+ all absol(te+ since 2ea(t! is bea(t!+ not relative to an!thin$ 8n the divine mind+ the! are all absol(te+ b(t the! are also all relational+ onl! are what the! are+ in relation to other thin$s 3ll the ?orms in nous onl! have an identit! in relation to the totalit! o) the s!stem o) )orms o) all other thin$s ,he 5therness is immediatel! abolished beca(se there is an inherentl! identit! between the ?orms Motion and Rest Got s#atial motion and rest+ or tem#oral .o$ical+ ca(sal+ motion and rest Motion o) lo$ical entaiment or reci#rocit! Motion is (inesis+ chan$e+ and rest is stasis, stabilit!+ or sel)-sameness ,he stabilit! is each )orm bein$ what it is and not somethin$ else Sel) idenitit! Movement within nous is abo(t how some )orms are derived )rom other )orms More s#eci)ic )orms are lo$icall! derived )rom the hi$her order )orms

'*at' is lo$icall! derived )rom the )orm '3nimal'& .o$ical/ca(sal movement+ not s#acial or tem#oral ,hese lo$ical and ca(sal relations between )orms are movements o) the thin in$ o) nous itself. ,hese are moments o) nous itsel) Go(s doesn't thin these one a)ter another+ it thin s them in a sin$le eternal act+ which is sim(ltaneo(s+ and sin$le 8t is thin in$ them in )ailin$ to thin the 5ne+ b(t it is internall! di))erentiated ,here is a movement o) tho($ht+ lo$icall! and ca(sall!+ between nous' tho($ht&

X(antit! and X(alit! 8) to be is to be determinate+ then what ma es a thin$ determinate1 8t's /(alit! 8t's #ossession o) a trait or determination which ma es it what it is+ and not some other thin$ 8nherent in it's notion o) /(alit! is bein$ this rather than that, which is /(antit! ,wo thin$s 0R/12/2011 4lotin(s *td& 0h!+ exactl!+ does nous t(rn bac and tr! to re6oin the 5ne1 $ous 4rod(ces its contents b! thin in$ divided #ers#ectives o) the (tterl! sim#le 5ne =oesn't thin these #artial mani)estations s(ccessivel!+ b(t sim(ltaneo(sl! 8n a sin$le act+ o(tside o) time ,hin s/$ives rise to the total hierarchicall! ordered relational s!stem o) the determinations o) bein$ "a a& 4latonic )orms% 8n a wa!+ these )orms are not wholl! other than it the! are the moment's o) nous's thin in$ Fo( can thin o) the divine mind as 3ristotle's divine mind "tho($ht thin in$ itsel)% 4latonic )orms sit(ated in a divine mind 3n!thin$ that )(l)ils its nat(re+ or reali>es its de)inin$ activit!+ creates ,he 5ne has a ind o) internal activit!+ b(t one that cannot be de)ined =(e to its s(#er-ab(ndant #ower/act(alit!+ it $ives rise to a second act(alit! ,his secondar! realit! is nous *ontin(it! between nous and the 5ne Ex#ression o) itsel) 3ct(ali>es itsel) b! attem#tin$ to ret(rn to the 5ne ,he neo-#latonic (niverse is a s#iral 4recisel! in ret(rnin$ to the one+ it )ails to $ras# the one+ and nous reali>es itsel) as other than the one 3s soon as it reali>es what it is+ it+ in t(rn+ $ives rise to a secondar! realit!+ which is&&&so(l 3nd so(l+ will do the same thin$

<(st li e the 5ne+ $ous will $ive rise to a secondar! realit! ,hro($h attem#tin$ to thin the one+ and )ailin$+ and thereb! $eneratin$ a s!stem o) the ?orms+ it also $enerates another secondar! realit! ,his #rocess o) emenation+ or $ivin$ rise to a secondar! realit!/act(alit!+ o) nous' $ivin$ rise to so(l+ is anala$o(s to the 5ne's $ivin$ rise to nous. <(st li e the 5ne is not de#leted in $ivin$ rise to nous+ $ous doesn't become de#leted b! $ivin$ rise to So(l 0h! do these thin$s #rod(ce1 ,he! have a s(#er-ab(ndance o) #ower/#er)ection/act(alit! ,oo m(ch #ower within them 8t wo(ldn't ma e sense to 6ealo(sl! ee# all that #ower+ beca(se their #ower is in)inte ,he! lose nothin$ in dis#ensin$ Go(s absol(te+ total s!stem o) the determinations o) bein$ 0hat nous $ives rise to is more m(lti#le o) it =ivided re)racted ima$e So(l 3 reca#tit(lation o) the one's #rod(ction o) $ous, b(t at a lower level 8t is still+ in a wa!+ comin$ o(t o) the one So(l is still (ltimatel! an ex#ression o) the 5ne's ca(sal #ower+ b(t mediated thro($h $ous Re)raction o) the re)raction So(l is the external act(alit! o) $ous So(l+ )or the most #art+ is what we are 0e are not (tterl! identical with the h!#ostesis "level o) realit!% o) so(l 0e are individ(al so(ls 0hich both are+ and are not identical with the h!#ostesis 3t the centre o) o(r ver! bein$ as so(l+ is nous+ and at the centre o) that+ the 5ne Similar to the meta#hor o) logos in the mind+ vers(s the logos o) the so(l ,he word in the mind is more (ni)ied in lan$(a$e or s#eech ,he word in the mind is alwa!s sim#ler So(l is li e the external s#eech o) nous& 8t is more m(lti#le beca(se it is an ex#ression in s#eech

So(l's *onstit(tion $ous $ives rise to so(l an active #ower to exist+ as So(l ,his #ower to be is act(ali>ed in So(l's attem#t to ret(rn to nous in the wa! that it can& ,o thin ,(rns o(t that it's thin in$ is a #artic(lar sort+ di))erent )rom the sort that characteri>es nous So(l desires its #roximate ca(se+ and indirectl! it desires the one 2(t+ as So(l+ it hasn't even heard o) the 5ne 8t thin s nous is #(re act(alit! 8t see s to ret(rn to nous )or the same reasons that nous desires to ret(rn to the one 0h!1 3ll thin$s desire act(alit!/existance 3s )ar as so(l is concerned+ nous is #(re act(alit!+ and it desires to become one with it+ to (nite with it

3ll thin$s desire to be+ and all thin$s are to the extent that the! are 5ne ?rom the #ers#ective o) So(l+ nous is (tterl! (ni)ied+ (tterl! 5ne ,r(e to a certain extent nous is the more 5ne-li e o) the determinate bein$s 8n nous+ the determination between s(b6ect and ob6ect is abolished 8t's otherness is alwa!s abolished beca(se it onl! is what it is in re)erence to all the other )orms 3s )ar as So(l is concerned+ is absol(tel! 5ne So(l see s to ret(rn to nous in accordance to its nat(re 2! thin in$ it+ since it is an intellect(al bein$ ,hin s it disco(rsivel!+ not noeticll! Go(s D noesis So(l D dianoia 0hat dianoia means+ to 4oltin(s+ is r(nnin$ thro($h+ or thin in$ thro($h So(l thin s the contents o) the divine mind+ b(t+ one )orm at a time ,hin s them se/(entiall!+ seriall! ,a es what is+ )rom So(l's #ers#ective+ is (tterl! (ni)ied+ and divides/re)racts it+ one )orm at a time =ividin$ one ?orm )rom the other ,a in$ one in isolation o) the other 2o(nd to #rod(ce a )ra$mented (nderstandin$ o) each o) those )orms 4recisel! beca(se the 4latonic )orms are a total s!stem o) tho($ht+ and it cannot be tho($ht in isolation o) somethin$ else 8t onl! thin s #artial as#ects o) each )orm+ one a)ter another =ivides the )orms themselves b! $ras#in$ one as#ect+ and another+ and another 8solates the )orm o) <(stice and tries to #rod(ce de)initions thro($h #ro#ositions 2(t none o) those #ro#ositions are #ro#er de)initions 5h+ 6(stice is this&&&and this&&&&and that&&&and this tooJ 2eca(se So(l thin s disc(rsivel!+ it $enerates ,ime ,ime D meas(re o) the chan$e in So(l's thin in$+ the meas(re o) its thin in$ 8n nous + there is a ind o) chan$e/motion+ beca(se there are distinct lo$ical movements and l$ocial motion between those movements+ 3ll o) the determinations are done in a sin$le moment+ since nous is o(tside o) time& 2(t now+ at So(l's level+ this becomes a tem#oral movement+ beca(se it thin s one )orm+ and then+ what that )orm entails+ lo$icall!+ and what that )orm entails+ lo$icall! 8t doesn't )or$et its tho($ht *a#able o) #rod(cin$ s!llo$isms beca(se it remembers the thin$s it discovered be)ore

,ime Gew wa! in which thin$s can be m(lti#le 0e are Most Essentiall! So(l&&&3t least+ )rom an 3n$le ,here)ore+ o(r most essential )(nction is thin in$ Gow+ how is it that we can thin the )orms1 Knowled$e is #ossible beca(se we came )rom nous, we're ca(sed b! nous& ,hat entails that+ at the ver! core o) o(rselves+ trancends more than 6(st So(l ,here is a #art o) (s+ as So(l+ which remains in nous+ which #artici#ates in nous

*ontin(it! between ca(se and e))ect+ and the e))ect+ in one sense+ remains+ and is imminent to+ its ca(se 8) there weren't some ind o) contin(it! between ca(se and e))ect+ and i) So(l didn't remain somewhat a #art o) nous+ it wo(ldn't be able to ,hin 0e wo(ld have no intelli$ible ob6ect+ we wo(ld have no access to nous& 0e can 6(d$e bea(ti)(l thin$s in terms o) each other+ it m(st entail that we have some co$nitive $ras# o) the )orm+ bea(t!+ as it resides in nous& 0e do it on the basis o) o(r access to the )orm in nous& ,here is a #art o) (s+ as So(l+ that remains in nous& 8) the ob6ects o) So(l's tho($ht "the )orms%+ were alien to it+ then the en/(ir! wo(ld be )(tile+ it wo(ld be im#ossible to now an!thin$ 5(r disc(rsive reasonin$ is $(ided b! the #resence+ to (s+ o) the ?orms 8) the! were (tterl! alien to (s "doctrine o) recollection%+ i) we didn't+ at some level+ have some sort o) $ras# o) the )orms+ wh! wo(ld we desire to now them1 Fo( onl! desire to loo / now somethin$ when !o( now what the! are 3nd how will we now when we've )o(nd them1 8t is onl! beca(se the! are not alien to (s ,hat within (s+ that transcends (s ,here is a #art in the so(l that is hi$her than So(l

,hree 4hases o) Emanation 8n So(l's comin$ )rom nous+ there are three moments "o(tside o) time% 1% Remainin$ "Essence% 8n one sense+ the essence o) so(l itsel)+ has to be nous ,he hi$hest #oint as its ver! bein$ as so(l+ has to be nous 4art o) so(l is (n-descended *ontin(in$ to #artici#ate in nous, it has access to it+ and it is wh! it can thin thin$s li e 6(stice+ or bea(t! 2% 4rocession "4ower% 0hen the external act(alit! emanates )rom its ca(se ,o be the thin$ that it is 9% Ret(rn "3ct(alit!% ,he #ower to be what it is+ bein$ act(ali>ed+ in the attem#t+ and s(bse/(ent )ail(re to ret(rn Reversion o) so(l to no(s Got entirel! c(t-o)) )rom what we are thin in$ #oo# indeed a$reed weeeeeeeeeeeee[[[[[[[[[[J

0here are we ri$ht now1 8n $ous 5r in the 5ne1

2od! So(l $ives rise to somethin$ external to it 3 more m(lti#le ex#ression/ima$e o) itsel)+ )or the ver! same reason that $ous $ives rise to So(l 8t act(ali>es its nat(re+ and reali>es the $ood in act(ali>in$ its nat(re+ becomin$ #er)ect+ #rod(ces somethin$ o(tside itsel) 2od! D the whole o) nat(re Material thin$s s(cce#tible to chan$e Some o) those havin$ internal #rinci#les o) motion and rest So(l+ as a whole+ $ives rise to nat(re as a whole+ the material world So(l's #rod(ction is more m(lti#le than+ and in)erior to+ it 0h!1 8t is s#atial+ in s#ace ,ime is $enerated in So(l's thin in$ disc(rsivel!+ and So(l $ives rise to s#ace in thin in$ 2od! So(l sort o) overcomes its dividedness/m(lti#licit! in memor!+ ee#in$ the )orms that it has tho($ht+ b(t 2od! can't do that 8t can't overla# *an't be in the same s#ace as another bod! 5ne s#atial )orm can't be in the same s#ace as another s#atial )orm =ivisions within So(l Hi$her So(l #ermatel! )ixated on nous *ontin(o(sl! carr!in$ o(t disc(rsive thin in$ .ower So(l mana$erial 5rder+ mana$e+ and $ive rise to Gat(re ,he whole o) material realit! 8t is thro($h the lower so(l that nat(re is contin(all! created and s(stained 8t does so b! sendin$ o(t what 4lotin(s calls seminal reasons lo$oi s#ermati oi Seminal reasons iss(e )orth )rom the lower #art o) the So(l+ and the! are 6(st 3ristotleZsinternal #rinci#les o) motion and rest ,he )orms+ as we )ind them in this world ,he ?orms o) matter ,he H!#ostesis o) So(l is interall! com#lex Man! so(ls within the H!#ostesis o) So(l+ and each o) (s is one o) those so(ls Each individ(al so(l both is+ and is not+ a #art o) the H!#ostesis+ in the same wa! that the )orms in nous both are+ and are not+ the whole o) nous ,here is a hierarch! amon$ the individ(al so(ls in the h!#ostesis o) so(l Some are more divine than others 8m#ortant+ beca(se each o) thse individ(al so(ls is s(##osed to mana$e/s(stain di))erent #arts o) the material world+ while remainin$ )ixated on nous 8n virt(e o) their contem#lation o) nous that the! are able to order the contem#lation o) no(s So(ls are s(##osed to $ive rise to and s(stain thin$s in the material world 8ndivid(al so(ls are able to do that wihto(t becomin$ tan$led in the thin$s the! $ive rise to in the material world+ and order ,he hi$her )orms o) so(ls in the hierarch! o) so(l as a whole+ are able to do this

2(t the cra##ier so(ls+ "(s%+ aren't able to do that ,he! )or$et+ that the! have this hi$her so(l+ which is )ixated on nous and is even+ in a sense+ #art o) nous& 8nstead+ the! come to identi)! with that which we a($ht to 6(st mana$e in a detached wa! 2ein$ in a bod! is a bad thin$+ and is (nnat(ral 0e are not s(##osed to identi)! o(rselves with this bodil! thin$ and see this )ate as identical So(ls that become attached to the bod! are lesser so(ls and more #rone to corr(#tion 8t consists in tolma "a(dacit!/rebellion% 3 will to be (tterl! sel) determinate 3s a bod! or a so(l+ in isolation )rom all other thin$s in the (niverse 3$ainst the laws/reason which $overns all thin$s 0ishin$ to be one's own law+ #recisel! as an (tterl! limited+ insi$ni)icant #art o) the cosmos 8ronicall!+ this #erverted desire to become absol(tel! sel) movin$+ ma es these so(ls less #ower)(l Ma in$ them hetero enetic+ instead o) a(to inetic 2ein$ moved b! other so(rces instead o) sel) movin$

Hetero inesis ,hese so(ls are swa!ed b! their #assions and are r(led b! the bod! ,his )inite #art o) this material world is v(nerable ,he! are #re! to their #assions and the! are slaves to #leas(res and #ains+ which are 6(st the wa! in whcih the bodies are a))ected b! external thin$s 4assions are de)ined in the wa! that their bodies are a))ected b! external thin$s Remain in the level o) mere o#inion+ and thin that the world is real based on what the senses re#ort ,a in$ the senses+ and what the! deliver+ as nowled$e+ as tr(e realit! ,his is #assive+ since !o( can't sto# sensin$+ b(t+ !o(r senses deceive !o( Knowled$e+ to 4lotin(s+ is a ind o) sel) movement+ is a(to inesis 3($ht to be derived )rom the internal #rinci#les o) the so(l Fo( can't come to now thin$s strictl! s#ea in$ thro($h the senses Fo( can't see (niversal laws thro($h !o(r senses So+ how do !o( become a(to inetic Move inwards+ and (#wards 3 #rocess o) recollection+ rememberin$ who we are Strate$ies Made to have contem#t )or the bod! and the nat(ral world 2(t+ we m(stn't come to see it as inherentl! evil 8nso)ar as it is+ it is $ood and bea(ti)(l+ beca(se bein$ is s!non!mo(s with $oodness and bea(t! ,he nat(ral world+ the bodil! world+ is beneath (s Geed to come to see that we+ in )act+ contin(all! $ive rise to it+ inso)ar as that we are so(ls *ontin(o(sl! s(stain it Geed to sto# identi)!in$ with the bod!+ and sto# ta in$ its #leas(res and #ains as what is o) most im#ortance ,his is hel#ed b! ascetic #ractices *(rb !o(r a##etites to the extent that a h(man bein$ can&&&witho(t d!in$

Have to come to reco$ni>e that what we are most essentiall! is So(l+ and that o(r )(nction is thin in$ Remember that which the! alread! are+ b! movin$ inwards and (#wards 0e are more so(l than bod!+ and as s(ch+ beca(se so(l has a #art o) itsel) remainin$ in nous+ !o( are+ at !o(r core+ nous itsel) 4hiloso#hi>in$ is an attem#t to $et bac to nous& 3s lon$ as it remains at the level o) disc(rsive reasonin$ "which sho(ld onl! be a #re#arator! #hase%+ we will sta! in the level o) So(l 8nt(itivel!+ a##rehend the )orm in itsel)+ and become identical to nous & 8nso)ar as !o( identi)! with an! o) the )orms+ !o( become one with nous,and the whole s!stem o) )orms 8n becomin$ so(l+ !o( become more a(to inetic+ beca(se the whole material world is $overned b! so(l 8nso)ar as !o( become one with so(l+ the whole material world becomes an ex#ression o) !o(r ded(ctive #ower 8) !o( ascend )(rther+ #(ttin$ o)) disc(rsive reasonin$+ Fo( m(st reali>e+ or reco$ni>e+ that !o( alwa!s are so(l+ and as s(ch+ are alwa!s+ alread! are nous. 2ecome concio(s o) the thin in$ activit! that alwa!s ta es #lace within !o( 0hen !o( ascend to $ous !o( become more a(to inetic ,he Cood+ in itsel)+ lies be!ond nous+ is the 5ne 2(t !o( can't reach it while !o('re still thin in$+ beca(se as lon$ as !o( ee# thin in$+ !o( are other than it ,he last sta$e is a transintellect(al m!stical envelo#ment in the 5ne Got a conscio(s ex#erience+ or an intellect(al one 3n absor#tion into the 5ne Have to $ive (# bein$ as a determinate bein$

0R/12/2011 ,HE ES3M Same sort o) exercise as the #a#ers Still ex#ects it to be ri$ero(sl! or$ani>ed& 4re#are an o(tline which sho(ld be committed to memor! 5nl! 9 h!#ostesis+ even tho($h there are 7lvls o) realit! 5ne Go(s So(l 2od! doesn't co(nt+ beca(se it doesn't #rod(ce an!thin$ 3nswer sho(ld incor#orate bod! beca(se the material realit! is the external act(alit! o) So(l 3n acco(nt o) so(l will involve an acco(nt o) nat(re

4art 3% 10 $ree words+ 11 en$lish Go(s D 4lotin(s

no(s D 3ristotle

4ractice ,erms 8upo(eimenon 3ristotle's 4h!sics+ tr!in$ to $ive a s())icient acco(nt )or chan$e *han$e occ(rs between two contraries 8n a s(bstantial chan$e+ the hupo(eimenon "the (nderl!in$ s(bstrat(m%+ one o) the three #rinci#les 0hat (nderlies the chan$e between contraries "contraries bein$ the other #rinci#les% 8n a s(bstancial chan$e+ the hypo(eimenon is matter+ $oin$ )rom not shi#+ to shi#+ i) it is made o) wood 3ccidental chan$e+ the hypo(eimenon is the s(bstance+ (nder$oin$ a chan$e in non-essential attrib(tes $ous 4lotin(s's 3enead's 5ne o) the three orders o) realit!+ the second level o) realit! #rod(ced b! the one and in t(rn $ives rise to So(l 8t thin s the 4latonic )orms in one sim(ltaneo(s act+ and in so doin$+ $ives rise to a secondar! realit!: So(l&