Reaction on Ancient Greek Philosophers

y

Reaction on Ancient Greek Philosophers (Socrates, Plato and Aristotle)

There have been many very important philosophers in the past that have made great contributions to the way we live life today. Majority of those mentioned and recognized were men, women at one point in history were not recognized the way men were. Also, when we think of ancient Greece, we think right away of Athens. Several of the philosophers we have already discussed discussed considered it the pinnacle of their careers to come and teach in this great city. The philosophy of the idea has a propensity to allow thought to withdraw into its own inner form, to develop an account of experience solely in terms of dialectical distinctions and categories. When this approach is extended to ethics the result is a comprehensive system of the existing forms of moral, social, and political life, but no vision of the good or the best is forthcoming from philosophy itself. Thus, Philosophy plays no role in the making of the day. Moving forward, the Ancient Greek philosophers have played a pivotal role in the shaping of the western philosophical tradition. This article surveys the seminal works and ideas of key figures in the   Ancient Greek philosophical tradition from the Presocratics to the Neoplatonists. It highlights their  main philosophical concerns and the evolution in their thought from centuries ago. The Ancient Greek philosophical tradition broke away from a mythological approach to explaining the world, and it initiated an approach based on reason and evidence. Initially concerned with explaining the entire cosmos, the Presocratic philosophers strived to identify its single underlying principle. Their theories were diverse and none achieved a consensus, yet their legacy was the initiation of the quest to identify underlying principles. This sparked a series of investigations into the limit and role of reason and of our sensory faculties, how knowledge is acquired and what knowledge consists of. Here we find the Greek creation of  philosophy as ³the love of wisdom,´ and the birth of metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were the most influential of the ancient Greek philosophers, and they focused their attention more on the role of the human being than on the explanation of the material world. The work of these key philosophers was succeeded by the Stoics and Epicureans who were also concerned with practical aspects of philosophy and the attainment of happiness. Lastly, their science is not that good, but their math was the best. Greek mathematicians went about math unlike all other people in recorded history. They found the underlying rules, and this created a math system that could be both concrete and abstract. The methodicalness of it allowed for complex deductions but also intuitive leaps that could later be proven. Greek math influenced Greek philosophy by creating a logical system of argument. The Greeks had more time and inclination for philosophical debate than other cultures for many reasons. Therefore they covered more ground, and had their arguments refuted, supported, praised, and attacked by others. No culture had ever before supported such a large group of people whose purpose was to logically deduce the great questions of life, through argument and reason, and gave them a good deal of freedom in their conclusions. So we revere their philosophies as we revere their math, because while we may reach much better  conclusions conclusions with w ith both, we're still using their methods. methods.

y

Reaction on Kohlberg, Freud and St. Aquinas

Morality is one of the few topics in academe endowed with its own protective spell. A biologist is not blinded by her biological nature to the workings of biology. An economist is not confused by his own economic activity when he tries to understand the workings of markets. But students of  morality are often biased by their own moral commitments. Morality is so contested and so important to people that it is often difficult to set aside one¶s humanity and study morality in a clinically detached way. St. Thomas Aquinas have influenced Kholberg's thinking in his theorizing on the Stage 7 cosmic orientation that states "In the state of mind, we metaphorically term Stage 7, we identify ourselves with the cosmic or infinite perspective itself, we value life from its standpoint...We send the unity of the whole and ourselves as part of that unity." In our everyday dealings with the world around us, many times we have adopted "modes of  operation," such that most, if not all our views or ways which we solve our personal problems or  theorize about how to solve the world's problems fit into a particular worldview. This worldview acts as a general template aiming to keep our various ideas or views consistent with one another. In the world of developmental psychology, we have three or four different worldviews, two of them being the most popular, the "mechanistic" which symbolizes the human individual as a robot; the individual is passive and his development is entirely contingent upon external forces otherwise known as the "nurture" approach. The "organismic" worldview symbolizes the individual as a living plant. The organism is active, where bioligical development of brain structures enable the individual to grow cognitively. Development is thus entirely contingent upon internal factors, otherwise known as the "nature" approach. Until today, Kohlberg's influence still holds true today, even though many of his modern "followers" are seeking to re-interpret or re-new his model. I suppose it is no different than the other great names of psychology like Freud, where the consequence of not obeying our  conscience is guilt and who believe that moral development is the product of aspects of the super-ego as guilt-shame avoidance. Aristotle and Aquinas concluded from experience that we have two basic sets of such drives, a view to which Sigmund Freud also finally came, at least if  his notion of the ³death wish´ is interpreted in the better way advocated by many of his disciples. One of these sets of drives are those that move us to seek what gives us physical pleasure, for  example our pleasure in food and sex; and another that moves us to seek power over our  environment or other persons who raise difficulties for us in attaining our goals. The pleasure drive is Freud¶s libido and the power drives his aggression that he called a ³death wish´ only because he first observed it in its morbid form of aggression turned against the self. The cardinal virtue that controls the pleasure drive is moderation (temperance) and the one that controls the power drive is courage (fortitude). Lastly, it was once said that a building block of human morality visible in chimpanzees is the desire for peace and harmony within the group. Celebrations break out when long-simmering power struggles are resolved. We think this desire is related to the in-group foundation: groupliving creatures prefer (have an innate tendency to value) harmony within the cooperative groups upon which they depend both for material sustenance and inter-group defense. We find this desire in ourselves: we are a part of the community of morality researchers that has long been divided on the question of moral innateness. This makes us uncomfortable, for we truly like and value the many members of our community, and we have tried, to show how all are right about something, all have something to contribute.

y

Reaction on Niccolò Machiavelli

Machiavelli has been called the brilliant creator of modern political science by some, and a cynical beast by others; he is considered the originator of the idea of a political pragmatism that says "the end justifies the means." "I would rather be in hell and converse with great minds than live in paradise with that dull rabble." In his life's writings, Niccolo Machiavelli, sought out the strength of the human character, and wrote according to his own rules; trying to better the political philosophy of his time. Machiavelli, a fiercely independent Renaissance man, advocated the prosperity of Italian politics, and wanted Italy to rise above the rest of the world. Machiavelli's writings dealt with many issues that had not been attacked in his time, and utilized his distinct brand of political philosophy to try and change the politics and government that shaped his era. If we analyze their systems of thought through the distorting, reductive lens of conventional modern connotations, seemingly self-interested tactics of Machiavelli; as a consequence, we fail to delve deeper into the complexity of these works. This dismissive approach needs to be unlearned and replaced with a more detailed examination of how these figures redefine the notions of good and evil as the foundations of their philosophy and political theory, respectively. Over the course of  describing ethical theories and the ways in which they transvalue, the moral standards of their times and attempt to show that vice can legitimately constitute virtue. Moreover, Machiavelli¶s concept of good actions and moral behavior is tied to social and political action and a sense of necessity. ³Wrongdoing´ for Machiavelli should be a term in quotations, since it so-called evil actions are justified and made good by the positive outcomes his actions produce. Having analyzed the ethical theory of Machiavelli, including his view of the self, free will, and violence, and the anti-Christian sentiments featured therein, as well as Machiavelli's ethical transvaluation and versions of consequentialism, I think we can see that there is a relation between transvaluation and consequentialism: consequentialism itself is a form of transvaluation. In Machiavelli, a transvaluation involves the redefinition of moral valuation away from the ³intrinsic´, deontological notion of an action¶s value. Instead of looking at the actions themselves, they look at whatever causally follows it to determine whether an action is right or wrong. Thus, Machiavelli evaluates good in terms of consequences for others. Comparing to the Romans, the parallels in modern times are straightforward: managers must make every effort to become acquainted with what matters to business associates by engaging in meaningful interactions with as many employees as possible. By communicating with staff members, managers can minimize problems that in the long run threaten to undermine the competitive position of any company like high employee turnover, actual or perceived inequalities that lead to underperformance, less than ideal communication flow among departments, suboptimal use of intellectual capital, and lawsuits that could have been avoided. Leaving aside the caricatures of Machiavelli¶s philosophy one finds that there are passionate advocates and detractors, ideological antipodes, in about every aspect of Machiavelli¶s political thought, who nonetheless acknowledge the vitality of his writings. Unquestionably, his work entitled "The Prince" is truly relevant to actuaries. As the profession redefines itself, actuaries will unavoidably become more exposed to ideas on leadership. The current tendency to stretch the concept to fit anybody¶s desires and views makes the study of serious intellectual works such as ³The Prince´ all the more germane to our understanding of the subject. In the final instance, agreement or disagreement with Machiavelli¶s thoughts is not important; what matters is exposure to ideas that have shaped our culture, and a desire to examine them critically.