Post by acurtiss on Jun 28, 2015 8:47:07 GMT
1. Why was Socrates sentenced to death?
Upon reading “How Socrates Died” written by Plato and edited by David Lane, Socrates was sentenced to death by the ingestion of poison. This sentence was handed down after a trial in which Socrates elected to defend himself against charges of impiety- “that he did not believe in the gods recognized by the State and the other, that he corrupted Athenian youth with his teachings”. (P.2) Although Socrates was able to explain his point of view and rationale to his friend Crito regarding what could be interpreted as pious or impious behavior, even to the point of presenting Crito with valid retorts against Socrates’ statements in “The Crito”, he is much less willing to defend these same points when he is called upon as a defendant. Socrates elects not to acknowledge his guilt or present a case for his innocence and as such, leaves the decision in the hands of his accusers. As to the claim that he corrupted the minds of young Athenians, Socrates attempts to present evidence that the information that he is providing to the Athenian youth is simply reflective of the real workings of the world and of man, both positive and negative.
Although the charges above can categorically be utilized why Socrates was found guilty, they do not really answer why he was on trial initially. This is more a matter of Socrates’ ability to mentally outmaneuver other presumed great thinkers of his time. At the time of Socrates, men were held in high regard if they were perceived to be great thinkers, even if self-educated. The fact that Socrates was such an able-bodied debater of other men’s trains of thought created dissent against him and ultimately led to his execution.
Source: (The Life of Socrates, 2012), How Socrates Died Walnut: MSAC Philosophy group, 2015 print
2. Why is there a conflict (for some) between science and religion?
According to the reading material provided in “The Great Mystery- Matter Versus Spirit” written by Andrea Diem-Lane and David Christopher Lane, there is a conflict between science and religion for several reasons. Among the reasons provided in are “linguistic confusion”- differences of opinion as to what matter is, can be classified as and what it is made of or contains, belief in a higher power or being, a desire to be more than a physical manifestation of matter in a being, general feelings that science attempts to undermine religious beliefs, beliefs that religious faith has been or someday will be disproven, longing for purpose and a higher calling. Additionally, although both have historical basis, science is accepted as factual whereas religious consideration is seen as based in faith, the unknowable and unexplainable. Science has been and continues to be used in attempting to resolve previously unknown phenomena and to prove or disprove hypotheses. While science is precise in its approach it is an always advancing practice, things are considered, evaluated, proven and disproven in the course of that advancement. As religious beliefs are based more on teachings that have been disseminated throughout thousands of years than on that which can be proven or unproven as is the norm in science, religious beliefs are based more on intellectual consideration (hope) than on that of experimentation. Furthermore it can be argued that religious beliefs can be disproven but there is not a means of experimenting the theories behind them.
Source: Lane, David. The Great Mystery, Matter vs. Spirit. Walnut: MSAC Philosophy Group; 2014
Upon reading “How Socrates Died” written by Plato and edited by David Lane, Socrates was sentenced to death by the ingestion of poison. This sentence was handed down after a trial in which Socrates elected to defend himself against charges of impiety- “that he did not believe in the gods recognized by the State and the other, that he corrupted Athenian youth with his teachings”. (P.2) Although Socrates was able to explain his point of view and rationale to his friend Crito regarding what could be interpreted as pious or impious behavior, even to the point of presenting Crito with valid retorts against Socrates’ statements in “The Crito”, he is much less willing to defend these same points when he is called upon as a defendant. Socrates elects not to acknowledge his guilt or present a case for his innocence and as such, leaves the decision in the hands of his accusers. As to the claim that he corrupted the minds of young Athenians, Socrates attempts to present evidence that the information that he is providing to the Athenian youth is simply reflective of the real workings of the world and of man, both positive and negative.
Although the charges above can categorically be utilized why Socrates was found guilty, they do not really answer why he was on trial initially. This is more a matter of Socrates’ ability to mentally outmaneuver other presumed great thinkers of his time. At the time of Socrates, men were held in high regard if they were perceived to be great thinkers, even if self-educated. The fact that Socrates was such an able-bodied debater of other men’s trains of thought created dissent against him and ultimately led to his execution.
Source: (The Life of Socrates, 2012), How Socrates Died Walnut: MSAC Philosophy group, 2015 print
2. Why is there a conflict (for some) between science and religion?
According to the reading material provided in “The Great Mystery- Matter Versus Spirit” written by Andrea Diem-Lane and David Christopher Lane, there is a conflict between science and religion for several reasons. Among the reasons provided in are “linguistic confusion”- differences of opinion as to what matter is, can be classified as and what it is made of or contains, belief in a higher power or being, a desire to be more than a physical manifestation of matter in a being, general feelings that science attempts to undermine religious beliefs, beliefs that religious faith has been or someday will be disproven, longing for purpose and a higher calling. Additionally, although both have historical basis, science is accepted as factual whereas religious consideration is seen as based in faith, the unknowable and unexplainable. Science has been and continues to be used in attempting to resolve previously unknown phenomena and to prove or disprove hypotheses. While science is precise in its approach it is an always advancing practice, things are considered, evaluated, proven and disproven in the course of that advancement. As religious beliefs are based more on teachings that have been disseminated throughout thousands of years than on that which can be proven or unproven as is the norm in science, religious beliefs are based more on intellectual consideration (hope) than on that of experimentation. Furthermore it can be argued that religious beliefs can be disproven but there is not a means of experimenting the theories behind them.
Source: Lane, David. The Great Mystery, Matter vs. Spirit. Walnut: MSAC Philosophy Group; 2014