PHILOSOPHY - The Good Life: Plato [HD]
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 сен 2015
- Chris Surprenant (University of New Orleans) discusses the account of human well-being and the good life presented by Socrates in Plato's dialogues. He explains why Socrates closely connects his account of the good life with justice, a concept understood not just as a political arrangement but also as a state of a well-ordered individual's soul.
Help us caption & translate this video!
amara.org/v/HDGN/
![PHILOSOPHY - Epistemology: Paradoxes of Perception #1 (Argument from Illusion) [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bs2pTBkJCxQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![PHILOSOPHY - Epistemology: Paradoxes of Perception #1 (Argument from Illusion) [HD]](/img/tr.png)
![What is ‘The Socratic Method’? [Illustrated]](/img/1.gif)
help im being forced to watch this
me too
same
me to kid 😞
@fade proof yep 😔
@fade proof what
Plato was a great genius! I wish I could have been there to meet him.
Wow, I understood that so much better than I ever have in school. Thank you for creating such a great visual!
It really does help. Do you know how they do these visual aids?
It is as if Socrates has never died, for his ideas are always contemporary, or of common interpretation everywhere.
True! 👍
+MrUtak This specific idea doesn't take into consideration personalities or change, so it will always be relevant.
Have you seen the movie, divergent?
If whe had not died we might not have the same social ideas and philosophical ideals
+SociallyWired No, but I'm intrigued by its philosophy
Isn't it the point to be for ever by being reasonable?
Excellent. Always appreciative of this channel.
I have read the Republic by Plato and I must say this video is incredibly well made on the topic of justice.
As a graduate in philosophy, communications, and critical thinking, this brings me back!
As a kid, I was amazed at Plato and Socrates!
Loved how the video put forth the information.
Excellent presentation.
Great visuals, great content
Very well executed...nice work!
Well produced, but doesn't discuss Plato's theory of "the good"
Exactly!
Unless they are absolutely identical and he didn’t need to. He should’ve just put Socrates name on the title lol
Hahaha yeah
yah
The discussion is from Plato's The Republic. These are Plato's ideas, just spoken through Socrates in the books.
I've been tackling similar themes in my content. It's refreshing to see others who are just as passionate about these topics.
so helpful!! thank you
The world needs Plato now more than ever. People almost expect their government to be corrupt. They've forgotten that government can be a force for good and leaders can be role models. I wish we'd stop the endless debates over the size of our government and focus more on the size of our government's and society's character.
Plato and Socrates were skeptical about democrcacy. The truth is that democracy is a joke, especially in todays world where everyone is so selfish and cares only about himself. Today's democracy is like trying to be peaceful in the middle of a war. How will democracy work when everyone is selfish? Everyone cares about himself. How to earn money get a job and live a good life himself. Rousseau's work is useful for this topic. Also Anthony Down's book on democracy can help you understand the flaws of democracy.
I love this channel ❤
the thing i really like about this video is that it captures the subtlety of the Republic. Was the Republic written in response to Plato's experience of the post Periclean era - the reign of the tyrants? Its not just a 'philosophical' kind of Kantian thing for Plato - its lived experience. It matters. And the questions he was asking in his day are no less relevant to us in our search for the balance of responsibilities between the individual and state - between the Sophist politicians and their superficial desire for personal gain through 'making the weaker argument the stronger'' versus keeping it real - doing the work and trying to get to some deeper understanding of our motivations.
no
Where can I buy Mr. Magical Hand's one single pen which can change color, ink type and brush stroke?
Actually in middle and later works of Plato. He conveys his own philosophy and Socrates was just a mere character in it
What if, in examining life, you realize you are trapped in a Kafkaesque condition?
Examining one's life has only one purpose: to show you your need for salvation. Jesus Christ is the answer. Without God, you are logically incapable of attaching any real meaning to life. Yet, we perceive the reality of meaning and purpose directly. I guess there are some FACTS hard coded into us by our designer...
Then you examine, what can you do to improve it? whether it's finding simple comforts , religion or other type of spitiruality, or completely escaping the situation and rebuilding your life, you're likely to improve your life.
Very nice video
Thanks!
Great interpretation :)
To be good has always implied control. It is a grade school lesson. Kids hit each other, steal, exclude, bully, & are pleasure seeking. To be good you teach them that pleasures should be found only in those things that are kind, helpful, & loving. Reigning in that other horse that is centered on desire is what this seeks to teach. In a way, we do teach this in schools. There does need to be greater reinforcements later so that this learning is not lost. Religious studies help.
Does anyone know the philosopher that stated "you should challenge a thought for its merits. (morality) if you can't do so, then you can't prove its merit.
reigning in passions = letting go of attachment/not being sinful;ensuring the stability of the state = being compassionate,moral seems like plato had pretty much the same ideas as the religions of the world
You can't contemplate your life if you're dead but you can still contemplate it while living a solitary life in exile. Why did Socrates choose execution over exile?
Personally I would rather skip the middle-man and instead of working for money to buy things, simply allow me to do a job and receive what I require as compensation. Our current monetary system is killing me because I find myself falling into the category of living to serve no other purpose but to work to pay bills. Death could come for me in fifty years or tomorrow and it would make no difference.
Isnt it sad actually
I hope you free yourself from this and become self sufficient
Absolute Freedom is simply Anarchy. Socrates is on to something here.
Of course absolute freedom is Anarchy. now the real question would be: Would that necessarily be a bad thing ?
Bertrand Lecerf If you value Civilization, yes, it would be bad.
007VitaminD I think it would be bad, as well, but not for the same reason.
If everyone suddenly had absolute freedom, no one would be truly free, because the freedom of others would hinder our own.
For exemple, if everyone had absolute freedom, anyone would be free to commit murder. But if everyone is free to commit murder, then I am not free to live, or rather, that freedom could be taken from me at any moment by some random murderer.
In a way, it almost means that the more freedom we have, the less freedom we have.
So, I guess what I'm saying is: Is there even such a thing as "Absolute Freedom" ?
+Bertrand Lecerf Fascinating. But regarding that murder example, if you're the average person walking about it doesn't take much for a random murder to kill you. Just less likely depending where you live and such variables.
+Bertrand Lecerf i I thought freedom is the right to do anything good - for as long as you dont do no harm you are excising freedom?
This is good
Socrates' *
I have a question...
What are the difference between Plato’s and Socrates belief about good life?
Within the Paradox,,, right action is perceived by observers rather than the players for the most part as moral yet when Amoral action is required for remedy of a wrong action the value judgment changes by application within the moral judgment of the man,,, so,, when is it wrong to kill may be the question rather than saying,,, it is wrong to kill in every situation,,, see...
Don't know if it's because I saw Lord of the Rings, but I'd end that challenge short with Glaucon and tell him to destroy the ring. Ultimately there's no way to EVER keep it from falling into the wrong hands. Even the right hands can become the wrong ones themselves. Would you want to know the origins of immense suffering was choice of holding onto something, even if you never used it? If the stability of the whole is what's important then let's not build a flaw in the Death Star.
Isn't there a contradiction in believing both that everyone should do what their are best at and that everyone should examine, and better, their lives? He's stating that, essentially, reds should always do red stuff because they are best at it; what if a red comes to be good at blue stuff through self-reflection? Is he still red? Should he do blue stuff? Should the 9-5 worker doing his job stay there simply because it his best job? Or is Socrates trying to say that examining ones' life, and philosophy, is obsolete in a perfectly run society?
Discuss.
+Mimzy Spire I think a good way to avoid this problem is by saying that through examination of ourselves we get to know what things we can excel at. So I think that a red is not always stuck to be a red when he realises that he would be a pretty good green too. I think the problem arises when a red wants to be a blue, by blue I mean something hes not good at, and thereby does not live according to his nature and creates a less than ideal society thereby. But who are we to say a red what he has to do?
I don't think philosophy would be obsolete in a perfectly run society, because only through philosophy we can know what things we excel at. And only you yourself know what you are best at and can't be decided for you by someone else.
+Mimzy Spire For Socrates, the examined life is persisting in examining your ideas, values, character, and behavior to insure that you are always improving your understanding and to be sure you are living out the best of your understanding.
+MrJoeRedford Good counter-point. In that scenario, the role of philosophy is to discover what one's true color is, or at least, what colors one has aptitude for, similar to the novel and movie Divergent. This is a good explanation for how a person can be destined to do one thing yet still use philosophy to better their knowledge of that thing and advance the technology used doing that thing, making sure every color advances, even as only people with aptitude do it (I.E., even if other doctrines do not mix, new technology can be made)
Additionally, it could mean that a red would study green, blue, and other colors, but use that knowledge to advance the red, causing a society of well-versed but specialized people.
+Mimzy Spire I think it should also be noted that while one has a true colour, that few people, even the one in question, doesn't inherently know what it is. With this in mind, it is quite difficult, if not impossible, to tell people to act according to their nature (at least without philosophy), because one cannot chase something that isn't clearly defined.
Or, in other words, I feel that the "red people do red things" analogy doesn't accurately illustrate the complexity of how to realize that you are red, how to hone your "redness", and to act or operate in accordance to your color.
I also suspect that this is part of why people would want to be other colors; they don't know their own color yet, and suspect that one color is their own.
+SHOGUN 6 Yep. that's along my thinking, too. Interesting think to think about, though. Sounds like Philosophy and Psychology need to mesh in order to create a perfect job aptitude/color test.
my question is possibly lawlessness being used for the community for example: off grid living is a non community lifestyle- a self sustaining farm in the wilderness away from ppl- however the society wants this freedom so the farmer starts teaching classes on free living- off grid- now the government says that they have to tap into the electric grid instead to keep the community thriving. who then is right? the lawless one or that teaches how to be free of community bondage/ electric slavery for the good of the whole or the the ones that are happy not producing a farm and eating potatoe chips in their cubicles?
Ok I'm a little confused why does Mr. Surpenant continue to refer to Socrates as if he wrote the Republic or created the analogy of the Chariot? I was taught that Plato was the one that compared the soul to the horses?????
I'm wondering this too
because its socrates who says those things in those works, si i guess its just a convention
Because Plato wrote the Socratic dialogs. Socrates never wrote a Word. Thus, the Republic is the thoughts of Socrates in the words of Plato.
Tattaly rad dude. Bogaaaasssss.
What is the exact quote by Plato concerning the good life? Can anyone quote it?
bro i have to do a text on the good life as well and i can't see what he says either
THE OLD Athens was classic & Plato was a Pioneer!
what software did you use for the animation?
+The Dude Videoscribe by Sparkol.
+proper lad what software did you use to type that comment?
What software did you use to think about this question ?
the software of the mind
Please even explain 3 apple theory
In our society, as in ancient Athens, justice is decided by the strong. Might = Right.
Na punta nalang ako sa channel nya dahil sa Google classroom 😭😭
Nice
Great series ha ha
Being Zero Escape trash I saw the thumbnail fast and thought it was K until I looked closer...
Dr Peter Kreeft gives us Socrates in such a living style, it does seem as if Socrates lived and died just a few years past.
Republic and Ring of Gyges @ 2:03
Nice.
69
Not sure if S answer was relevant or persuasive. But fascinating that such questions were even asked by the Ancient Greece. Marvel on how things haven’t changed.
Is S is the enemy I know as a Christian then things have changed you haven’t realized. He has become more exposed and identifiable as time has passed while becoming even more camouflaged and dangerous as we don’t seek God as priorities thinking all that other stuff was long time ago and doesn’t effect us today. The really considered Good individual believes this in number not seeing the flaw. Disaster happens in their life eventually and they blame God because the enemy fooled them he doesn’t exist and temped and led them to remove God instead gradually and methodically until destruction that with God wouldn’t have.
5:20 Anarchism, Spontaneous Order and Voluntarism disagrees with that statement.
Ancap?
sounds familiar with Sigmund Freud idea
EGO
SUPEREGO
ID
Watched all of it 5:39
Well, Socrates misses one point. Is the state as a whole more valuable than the life of a single individual? Is the whole greater than the sum of its parts? Yet again, I think Socrates was taking the extreme case of individuals committing murder in the name of freedom. I can't decide if Socrates makes a valid point or not.
+Antoine Saroufim "Is the whole greater than any one of its parts?" might be a better 2nd question, the answer to which were "Yes, and it exists of a different plane of manifestation: don't confuse the two". There is a synergy between the whole and its parts: the whole affects the parts and the parts affect the whole. Furthermore, the whole does not value itself: it is the parts going to make it up which do so, and people who would murder in affirmation of a status quo serve more to divide the whole than to confirm it of its parts, ie. they contradict themselves in doing so. [Plato, using Socrates' good name for mouthpiece, wants to justify a rule by philosopher-kings, with himself as one, perhaps the chief one, among them, and lording it over others is more or less accepted without question. The circular arguement that freedom is not good, lawfullness is excellent, I shall have the freedom to determine the laws does not provide a well argued foundation for an egalitarian society constituted of individuals. Plato simply does not care about individuals other than himself and those he who would have surrounding, and agreeing, with him.]
+Antoine Saroufim Actually, Plato has addressed the chance of the parts to be more valuable than the sum. And he set a good example to identify the difference. Think of a body. Now cut its hand. The hand cannot survive on its own, whereas the body can still live without one (or two) hands. So, in order to survive and stay human (he literally said not become a beast, where beasts are considered merely wild animals), one must live his life in a human society with laws and regulations. Thus, all those things in the video above must happen.
Socrates's Apology by Plato is not an apology in the anglosaxon meaning. An Apology, derived from Greek, is the strong and vehement defence of an idea, not the display of shame or remorse for it. There is no "My bad" as you depict it in the video in any part of Plato's words.
and also why is it justifiable to kill Socrates for being a nuisance to the public - was his life less precious due to his personality and thoughts? was the judge a utilitarian thinker???
What’s utilitarian bro?
Individual freedom leads to social freedom thus to the good life for all.,, when the individuals recognize the same rights as all others and their value in the application by the ones it" effects or the action one is effected by from others... Harm no other being the Moral high ground in life,,, we find Peace among the population by "Market forces" or use of rights by all equally... independently recognized and applied for the interest of all involved in the action of liability or benefit... "Fair use" of others rights brings a fair use of ones own rights... by just us,,, so Freedom is Just us and just us must be served hot as hell and cold as ice... find Peace,,, out...
Plato Imply's,,, one must be Moral within self to make a just deliberation for the adjudication of a Law or a "Just action" from self evaluation of cause and effect of that cause by just means or deception... No Justus no peace becomes truth..
what if id rather live a lawless life and i find it a good life. I draw satisfaction from adversity. It may not progress man but the idea of man is just a thought anyway because we are mere products of evolution.
Plato was th one who compared the soul to a two horse chariot, not socrates
Plato, we're on the brink. The guardians are failing. I fear like Rome or Constantinople our society will soon burn. When the loudest voices become the most appeased anarchy ensues.
We have allowed our enemy into our gates
I would say to Socrates that if a Society gave me a reason to buy in to it, then I would not simply abide by it; I would also defend it, cherish it, and act to see it thrive.
The way I see it (and I admit, I definitely have a modern bias and an independent streak), the march of a society leaving *any* individual by the wayside is a failure. Most people want to be a cooperative part of the group, we're social creatures like that; and I figure that society can give just a little to accommodate them. And it would be better off for it.
I disagree with the good life idea
really? in the name of plato he is adverting something else.
Which would you prefer, Plato or Jesus?
I am just returned from one of my long absences, having been at my other home for five weeks past. Having more leisure there than here for reading, I amused myself with reading seriously Plato’s Republic. I am wrong however in calling it amusement, for it was the heaviest task-work I ever went through. I had occasionally before taken up some of his other works, but scarcely ever had patience to go through a whole dialogue. While wading thro’ the whimsies, the puerilities [childishness], and unintelligible jargon of this work, I laid it down often to ask myself how it could have been that the world should have so long consented to give reputation to such nonsense as this? … bringing Plato to the test of reason, take from him his sophisms [arguments used to deceive], futilities, and incomprehensibilities, and what remains? … Yet this which should have consigned him to early oblivion really procured him immortality of fame and reverence.
Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, July 5, 1814
Plato all the way. I dont think Jefferson understood Plato, that nonsense he writes about him shows it.
Fuck, I might be Socrates reincarnation I question my life everyday and why I work so damn much.
Da da daa.
It's so ironic that his civic duties to question everything, made society unhappy and in order to keep the mass/country/city happy, he has to commit suicide.
actually all one would need is a solution to Socrates problem. namely, police actions that would be detrimental to societies well being, while always and only valuing the individual!
They should teach this stuff in schools in place of religion.
+hilbert54 My thoughts exactly! In fact, if kids learn philosophy, it improves their learning capabilities: www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jul/10/philosophy-for-children-pupils-maths-literacy
+hilbert54 I think for secular movements in Europe getting this stuff to be taught in schools ought to be a goal.
***** Indeed. It has the ability to reduce bullying for one.
hilbert54 Just exactly which public schools actually teach what it means to be religious?
I have no idea. I don't know that they do. If they did I guess that would be teaching philosophy rather than religion. But just exactly why are you asking me?
Happiness is as much the result of self control as it is an exercise of freedom. Being Human then becomes one with an all natural God.
This wasn't about Plato but Socrates.
It is Plato he just uses the wrong name... it was Plato's Republic, it was Plato's Chariot
Sócrates became a character in Platos writings, this is why the confusion amigo
I'm not understanding the connection between Socrates' lack of gusto for individual freedom and the analogy of the horse. Why isn't it possible to just explain that without using reason to guide the spiritedness horse and the appetite horse, the chariot is misdirected just like one's soul, without digressing into a bunch of racist/classist/casteist language about individuals fulfilling their role? If reason leads one to a good life and a healthy soul, wouldn't it follow that rational inquiry that leads one to fulfill a role that they are better at than the one assigned to them (i.e. use individual freedom), for the benefit of themselves and their society, is that rational inquiry not valid? Like... how is the bit about individual freedom even relevant to the question of what is a good life?
(I know I wrote a novel but I am actually genuinely interested in answers because Plato was smart enough I would be floored if he didn't have one)
Have you read the dialogue? Usually people get it ALL wrong. The dialogue isn't about politics, its about the soul.
Everything is a metaphor to man and his soul, which he is to govern as a ruler governs a state. Plato wants to make the point that if you let the parts of the soul do only what they are meant to do you will end up living in harmony with yourself, so to speak. If you let the irrational parts of the soul go subversive, the equilibrium falls apart. The irrational part of the sould must be subdued with reason and courage. Doing this will lead you through a good life, a life with a view on the Good.
Thats the true point.
Dont dare defy dangerous deadly Dios defenses.
God gave the Law to the Israelites, and wisdom to the Greeks.
And Christ fulfilled them both.
Plato was Illuminated by the evil one
@Plant Lives Matter looks like somebody is falling behind in education and also has no manners; get lost
@Plant Lives Matter my response was also simple, wasn't it??? I play FAIR
@Plant Lives Matter Who cares about your views??? Name me some names who care about your views... The only Truth in existence is Christ Jesus, the living word of the living God which is the Bible. If you gonna speak about Truth, I do not want to see nor read your views; if you don't provide scriptures which supports "your views" then you got NOTHING. Good luck with them names...
I Am African American
It's Okay
You Draw Like A Well Grown Man.
Whenever I hear the term “Social Justice” I turn off the video and look for one without an Agenda.
That's why you can never understand both sides of the argument
@@reallydoe2052 It’s not an argument, it’s propaganda.
@@cassconner6023 explain your position buddy
@@reallydoe2052 Social Justice is a Leftist Marxist propaganda term and I don’t support anything that has to do with Communism/Socialism.
@@cassconner6023 so I ask your opinion and that's what you say
I would like to debate you. When you mentioned lawlessness, i do not think you understood the term correctly.
We are currently in a lawless state, pretty much the entire world, except that of North Korea. The police are on the street to prevent, stop, and investigate crimes, which are very high, if you are here with us on planet earth. When we have a collective of people working towards not himself and his ego, but for his city (nation, peoples). We gain our higher purpose.
Well of course individual freedom is more important than societal well being. I mean one of the reason the United States is the most prosperous country on earth is because it's founders and framers believed individual freedom exceeds the importance of collective well being. As well as trying to fix society as a whole all at once is just impossible to do without going fascist dicatorory. Also we can look at it from an economics perspective: what happens when individuals are not coerced in a trade and each party has complete control of their own assets? Both parties win and new technologies and medicines and inventions are made. As well as art created and debate cultivated. Freedom matters, absolutely.
SUSan lol
a little too collectivist for my taste and collectivist ideology has a tendency to not examine the merits of its own existence.
And when you say social construct are you referring to the concept that you will not infringe on the rights of your neighbor or are you saying that you have some sort of imaginary allegiance to an uncaring and self-serving government. You are the one with the childish attitude real men stand on their own two feet. Go move to a communist country you stupid son of a bitch.
+joe jarden you clearly have an IQ barely nudging 85 so I'm trying to get out of this argument because arguing with fools is well foolish. charity is a voluntary Act. When government forces you to pay for other people the money will disappear down a black hole never to be seen again. that is why the banking Elite like the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers are all Fabian socialist. you're not on my level please stop bothering me with these preschool concepts of political philosophy.
dolphwong well, foolish
Yes. Many of the greatest innovations are created from these rigid personalities in all aspects of life....however he suggest they do off themselves.
Woke
Can't stand Socrates.
PLATO on the other hand, is completely awesome! Socrates was nothing but an agitater- a political subversive. No wonder they executed him, he undermined constantly the foundations of the Greek ideals, gods & society he lived in. There is a word, Sedition, that describes such activity.
Many of our modern day cultural and political elites should be forced to drink hemlock as well, for being as much; and psychopathic on top of it.
It's no wonder Greece's Golden Age began to fade right after Socrates injected his poison into the Greek mind. It took a hundred years or so...but you can definitely see it.
Ah.. the man totally cool with slavery’s thoughts on individual expression