Academic > Philosophy > Download, free read

Socrates, Pleasure, and Value by George Rudebusch download in ePub, pdf, iPad

At the beginning he did not know. Socrates argues against one but accepts the other. But their feeling as much pleasure does not make them as good. But there are different accounts of what should be considered as pleasure.

The proper explanation, Socrates suggests, is that all my desiring for things I take to be extrinsically desirable is conditional. In fact Socrates denies that there is any qualitative difference between immediate and long-term pleasure. Nonetheless, like the stimulation theory, it may seem too narrow. Again, both Meno and the uncomprehending reader are better off than if they had been treated to a spoken or written exposition, respectively. But the goddess Athena comes down from the sky to persuade him to stop and hold down his spirit.

Plato believed that much further

Socrates would agree with Aristotle that it follows that what a man chooses incorrectly is not desired by him. The drinking of foul-tasting medicine, which is not desired for its own sake, is opposed to the health for the sake of which we drink. But such a hedonism does not seem to allow for a single standard of pleasure. Then the teacher further examines the student.

Enough people predictably act on the basis of such desires that the English language has such words as self-willed, obstinate, stubborn, and pertinacious. This analysis allows for Socrates to find both virtue and pleasure to be the good, thus solving the textual puzzle and showing the power of Socratic argument in leading human beings toward the good. To see how crucial this commensurability claim is, consider the following cases. Problems with the Long-term I Short-term Distinction The Gosling and Taylor account escapes from the dilemma facing the traditional interpretations. This view is usually, and rightly, judged to be too narrow to capture the wide range of experiences human beings find pleasure in.

It is clear how this criticism applies to an aphoristic style, which announces a one-sentence answer but does not show the reasoning behind the answer. This thesis follows from the following premises. To see why he did not settle for exposition, a distinction needs to be made and a picture drawn. There are two cases to consider. Polus believes that if rhetoric enables a man to do what seems best to him, then it enables him to do what he desires.

It is plausible to maintain that cases where an object becomes intrinsically desirable are not unusual. In theProtagoras, Plato has Socrates appeal to hedonism in order to assert his characteristic identification of virtue and knowledge.

My solution to this problem is to interpret and defend a Socratic account of pleasure. Plato believed that much further questioning is necessary even after the right one-sentence answer has been exposed. Such cases fail to test the distinction to see if it destroys the incommensurability that Socrates needs. One solution to this dilemma is to deny that the Gorgias attacks hedonism in general. Such insistence will not refute Callicles as a desire-satisfaction theorist.

My solution to this problem

This is because they all share what we might call a straightforward expository pattern of writing. But if the same questions are put to him on many occasions and in different ways, you can see that in the end he will have a knowledge on the subject as accurate as anybody's. This commits the prudential hedonist only to the claim that there are some decisive aspects of a brave life in which it is more pleasant than a cowardly life. For it allows us to restore to Polus a modified version of his two Protagorean claims. If he had argued that courage is indeed the whole of virtue, as is justice, piety, temperance, and wisdom, that is, that those five words stand for a single thing as Socrates suggests at Prt.