The Only True Wisdom Is In Knowing You Know Nothing Essay

The Only True Wisdom Is In Knowing You Know Nothing - Essay Example C) The charges brought against Socrates were of impiety and corrupting the youth of Athens. Socrates did not fear death, and drank his poison eagerly because he thought of death as something to examine, just as life. D) The allegory of the cave suggests that most people are seeing not reality but shadows of reality, much as one who is chained in a cave for their entire life. Socrates used this allegory to explain that intellectual pursuits, like stepping out of a cave and into the sunlight, eventually lead to more clear understanding of the world. I agree that there is more to perceive in the world than most people are aware of, but I disagree that it negates the validity of the â€Å"shadows† which we can all perceive. 2 A) We cannot prove the existence of anything outside of our own minds. All of our knowledge of things outside of ourselves comes to us through our senses, but only our minds can be trusted to exist. B) Descartes doubts the existence of anything beyond his own mind, because he cannot prove conclusively that anything else exists. If it is possible for the existence of an object perceived to be disproved, then it may not exist. However, the fact that you can be deceived means that your mind must exist. He famously summed this argument: â€Å"Cogito, ergo sum.† ... In the example of the wax, imagination explains the perception of change and for the possibility of other changes which we can't imagine. Intellect explains the understanding of the wax as something distinct, the same thing whether it is solid or liquid. 3 A) The stakes are very high; You have a lot to lose if you make the wrong decision. According to James, believing in God is beneficial to people, and as the decision cannot be made rationally on the basis of evidence it is incumbent upon us to leave the decision to our â€Å"passionate nature†. As that nature encourages us to strive for beneficial states, it is prudent to believe in God. I disagree with James' assertion because the stakes are only high within the context of some religions, and because one can enact a different decision at any time. B) The first objection Aquinas notes is the existence of evil. If God is omnibenevolent, then why does evil exist in the world? He counters this by saying that God's goodness is s o great that he causes goodness to come out of evil. Aquinas' second stated objection is that everything which we can see and understand can be accounted for by other first principles, so there is no need to believe in the existence of God. His response is that nature as well as human reason were both ultimately caused by God, as â€Å"Prime Mover†. C) A ship owner is aware that his ship needs repairs, but sets sail anyway. The ship sinks mid-ocean, and all aboard die. According to Clifford, the ship owner is morally responsible for the deaths of his crew because he made the decision to set sail based on faulty evidence. Clifford says â€Å"It is wrong in all cases to believe on insufficient evidence; and where it is presumption to