You can only have so much blind faith, and the idea that your entire life isn’t real, is such a radical concept that would be too hard to swallow without experiencing it for your own. Another similarity between The Allegory of the Cave and The Matrix, would be the need for a mentor. In the Allegory we have Socrates, who urges one to discover and learn freely, see things not as they are but for their possibilities. I see Morpheus as that kind of pedagogical teacher, he pushes Neo towards self understanding using the same kind of method as Socrates. Not telling the student the answers, but letting their minds ponder and
However, it does not take long to realise that Berkley appears to have not been careful with his choice of words and has committed various conflations leading to fallacies of ambiguity. It is my view that these fallacies play a large role in undermining the success of the Master Argument. In order to analyse the strength of what Berkeley saw as his most convincing argument against the existence of mind independent objects I intend to look specifically at Bertrand Russell’s discussion of the Master Argument in his evaluation of idealism in his book The Problems of Philosophy. I will then look into the nominalist interpretation of the Master Argument in order to see if Russell’s allegations can be sidestepped once we discern the assumptions that Berkeley arguably based the Master Argument on. The Master Argument was originally known as the inconceivability argument until Andre Gallois referred to it as the former in his 1974 article as a nod to the prominence that Berkeley gives it within his attack on materialism.
Descartes then begins questioning most of his, and in essence, our, beliefs. He explores our many senses and reiterates that what the senses have taught us throughout our lives is not necessarily the truth. According to Descartes’ we have become so prone to believing everything taught to us by the manner in which we sense things and by our experiences that this has become our truth. This truth that has been created for us “from or through,” our senses often deceives us and forces us into believing in false truths. He uses three examples or ideas that question the existence of truth and of all that he has learnt.
This question is not easy to answer, and is in fact, quite complex. Many sides are presented throughout the text of The Apology, most notably in the cross-examination with Meletus, and as well as Socrates’ explanation of the Oracle of Delphi. One must explore both sides in order to come to a conclusion over whether Socrates was impious or not. There are many indications which lead to the invalidity of the charges of impiety against Socrates. The charge that the Athenians placed on Socrates was that he “disbelieved in the gods”, or was an atheist.
This is not a justified argument due to the fact that theists do not try to definitely prove the existence of God. Several different approaches are used to provide a very strong argument for the
As intellectual beings we seek to know the reality of how things appear to be versus how they really are. Historically the question, “what is real?” has been the subject of much philosophical conjecture. In comparing the synopsis from the movie The Matrix, Plato’s The Republic (The Allegory of the Cave), and Descartes, Meditation 1, I find both similarities and differences. While all three deal with the concept of false realities, both the Matrix and The Allegory of the Cave explore more the concept of two worlds, one world that has been created (an illusion) by outside sources, and the real word which is eventually revealed thus destroying the reality of those involved. While in contrast, in Meditation 1 Descartes takes a more introspective approach by analyzing reality with systematic doubt.
Reverse Outline: Paragraph 1: Introduction -Plato believed relying on ones senses to view the world was far more inferior than the ideal world which he believed was a more spiritual realm. Paragraph 2: -How Plato thought people lived their lives, he thought we didn’t use all of our senses. Paragraph 3: -How one would feel as he freed his mind to knew controversial ideas Paragraph 4: -What the enlightened one wanted to share his new ideas what would people think of him. Paragraph 5: Conclusion -Plato says that men need to seek knowledge beyond their senses. Post Draft Analysis: 1.
Richard Beauchesne November 5th, 2012 Ms. Tourout HZT 4U1 Matrix and Philosophy Part A: The Matrix & Rene Descartes The Matrix is an interesting movie because it examplifies the very basic questions of philosophy. The existence of human beings, the reality of the world we live in, and the questions of the human and mind as one. The philosophy in The Matrix has very common theories with the well known philosopher Rene Descartes. The Matrix is a re-telling of Descartes' dream of the evil demon who came to trick him into believing that everything he senses and thinks is not real. He believes in what he sees and feels while dreaming, but can not trust his senses to tell him that he is not still dreaming.
He does, however, agree to the idea that rhetoric is a form of persuasion in which it is broken down into three modes: ethos - the speaker, pathos – the audience, and logos – the speech. He insinuates the idea of one’s failing of unjust is equal to the idea of failing as a speaker, and believes rhetoricians must know how to argument in both ways to be a strong persuader. Socrates and Gorgias believe that human’s have a natural need to instruct and deceive disciplines, while Aristotle defines humans as good-natured whom have no need to convince others through persuasion. Aristotle also disagrees to Socrates’ definition that rhetoric is to soul as cookery is to body. Instead, he views rhetoric as the method of creating the truth without deception and creating truth with people’s own view.
To him objects in this world are not eternal, and so the beliefs about objects cannot always be correct and cannot always have truth. Now according to Aristotle, he took great issue with Plato’s theory of forms. He says that Plato’s talk of participating is metaphorical and meaningless, and he says that Plato was mistaken in that the form circularity, the reverse doesn’t hold true. He believed that the reverse does in deed hold true, and that if there were not individual circular things, there would be no such thing was the form circularity. Aristotle’s views are that forms are universal, something that more than one individual can be.