That is the danger of self-teaching oneself of philosophy. One tends to garble everything up and develop his own 'brand' of philosophy. It cannot be such a wrong thing, on the contrary, since no two philosophers can completely agree with each other. Whatsmore, even students and masters have parted ways upon minor disagreements. Think Plato and Aristotle, Freud and Jung, you know what I am talking about. Even with time, a particular interpretation can morph, perhaps as an afterthought or in keeping with the flavour of the era.
The scope of the field of philosophy itself has evolved over time. If before it used to encompass everything under the sun and beyond, mathematics, grammar and sciences included, it is now agreed that it covers knowledge, life and existence. Since the journey of life does not come with a preset map, I guess that it could be sailed anyway we like as long as we live and let live. Let everybody navigate his own route.
I always thought Plato was just a scribe to Socrates train of thoughts. Socrates never wrote any books but engaged in public discourses in the marketplace (agora). Plato helped to disseminate Socratic teachings to the world.
But then, I realise that there are some subtle differences in their approaches in their attempts to explore the meaning of life. Socrates believed that discussion out in the open with any Tom, Dick and Harry would bring out wisdom. Knowledge has no boundaries, and not everyone knows everything. Hence, everyone can bring something to the table; a sailor on the understanding of the high seas, a weaver on mastery of designs, a surgeon the grasp of the functions of the body and so on.
In 'The Apology' Socrates compared himself to an annoying gadfly that constantly irritates the horse. He prods others to think, introspect and find the answers to life questions that lay in front from us. He was a master teacher who could needle out responses. He is quoted to have said that his actions are, "as upon a great noble horse which was somewhat sluggish because of its size and needed to be stirred up by a kind of gadfly."
Plato, in 'The Republic', as seen in the Cave allegory, thinks that people are like the prisoners who see the world through shadows on the wall look at reality through their own lenses. They are so convinced of their perception of the world that they are unconvinced when a knowledgeable person tries to convince them of the colourful three-dimensional world out there. People need leaders to pave the path for them; preferably, leaders should be philosophers.
When we look around us, Platonic teachings seem to hold many truths. People find it easier to just follow preset rules without thinking. Using the brain is a very strenuous exercise. Following a set protocol decided by the powers that be absolves them from liabilities and wild accusations. They are protected. At the same time, they forget that, through this means, they can be manipulated by self-serving leaders. Some professions demand such obedience. The country wants a soldier to carry out his assignments without having a second thought. When his superior commands him to kill the bandits, his job is shoot, not introspect. But then, does this rhetoric also apply to the promise of a good after-life or better placing in the karmic ladder by an intangible force in the celestial space?
The scope of the field of philosophy itself has evolved over time. If before it used to encompass everything under the sun and beyond, mathematics, grammar and sciences included, it is now agreed that it covers knowledge, life and existence. Since the journey of life does not come with a preset map, I guess that it could be sailed anyway we like as long as we live and let live. Let everybody navigate his own route.I always thought Plato was just a scribe to Socrates train of thoughts. Socrates never wrote any books but engaged in public discourses in the marketplace (agora). Plato helped to disseminate Socratic teachings to the world.
But then, I realise that there are some subtle differences in their approaches in their attempts to explore the meaning of life. Socrates believed that discussion out in the open with any Tom, Dick and Harry would bring out wisdom. Knowledge has no boundaries, and not everyone knows everything. Hence, everyone can bring something to the table; a sailor on the understanding of the high seas, a weaver on mastery of designs, a surgeon the grasp of the functions of the body and so on.
In 'The Apology' Socrates compared himself to an annoying gadfly that constantly irritates the horse. He prods others to think, introspect and find the answers to life questions that lay in front from us. He was a master teacher who could needle out responses. He is quoted to have said that his actions are, "as upon a great noble horse which was somewhat sluggish because of its size and needed to be stirred up by a kind of gadfly."
 |
| Maya |
Plato, in 'The Republic', as seen in the Cave allegory, thinks that people are like the prisoners who see the world through shadows on the wall look at reality through their own lenses. They are so convinced of their perception of the world that they are unconvinced when a knowledgeable person tries to convince them of the colourful three-dimensional world out there. People need leaders to pave the path for them; preferably, leaders should be philosophers.
When we look around us, Platonic teachings seem to hold many truths. People find it easier to just follow preset rules without thinking. Using the brain is a very strenuous exercise. Following a set protocol decided by the powers that be absolves them from liabilities and wild accusations. They are protected. At the same time, they forget that, through this means, they can be manipulated by self-serving leaders. Some professions demand such obedience. The country wants a soldier to carry out his assignments without having a second thought. When his superior commands him to kill the bandits, his job is shoot, not introspect. But then, does this rhetoric also apply to the promise of a good after-life or better placing in the karmic ladder by an intangible force in the celestial space?
Comments
Post a Comment