During the class discussion I found the further explanation of Plato's views on philosophy rather interesting. Specifically I found the idea that philosophy was reality, but reality was different from fact intriguing. This lead me to the question, can reality really exist, the way we see it today, without fact though? I also found Plato's preference of philosophy over everything else interesting. It was interesting that poetry was viewed as nothing more than emotional fiction, and even rhetoric was viewed as considerably less worthy than philosophy because of the emotional appeals included. The apparent resentment of emotion led me to wonder, why was Plato so against emotion, and is emotion really that bad? The idea of a table not really being a table but rather there being a true form of a table that is unseen and that the table we see is only a representation was also interesting, if only to get one thinking about what constitutes reality.
For the response to a classmates blog I chose Travis Porter, mostly because he was the only blog I was able to find with a post. I agree that the reading was a little more confusing than it necessarily needed to be but I never found myself lost either, and to properly explain stasis theory it may have been necessary to go into that depth. I also thought he had a good point about being able to defend either side of an argument if the occasion to do so arose. Finally, I also agree that the abortion was a good example of when stasis theory does not work because the two sides are not actually arguing the same topic.
No comments:
Post a Comment