Part 1: Socrates
The story of the oracle tells of a situation that arose in Athens where Socrates was rumored to be the wisest of the men that were alive at the time and in the city of Athens in particular. To him, Socrates thought others to be wiser. He especially considered men in Athens of high regard such as statesmen, poets and artisans to be wiser than he was. Specifically, such men considered themselves wise, and the society accepted this fact for truth since they were policy makers and the creative minds in the society.
The controversy began by Socrates friend’s visit to the Oracle of Delphi where Chaerephon asked the Oracle who the wisest man was. The Oracle answered that it was Socrates. This revelation made Socrates take a decision to correct the claims of the Oracle to be false and state that he was not wise. He spoke to statesmen, poets and the likes only to realize that indeed the Oracle was right to name him as the wisest. This realization was informed by the fact that it was only Socrates who was indeed aware of his own ignorance. To explain this better, whereas the ‘wise men’ thought themselves wise but were not wise at all. Socrates knew he wasn’t wise at all, and this fact made him the wiser among them.
Therefore, Socrates in the end realized that the fact that well known wise men thought themselves wise due to their status in life when they were not made them fools compared to himself given that he considered himself unwise being of lower status in society when he was the wiser of them. This realization served to spark his activism that earned him the name ‘gadfly of Athens’.
Socrates styled himself as a ‘gadfly’ thus, as a gadfly stings the horse into action Socrates was considered to sting various Athenians into rebellion by criticizing the government of the day for the injustices that it advanced on Athenians. Socrates influenced Athenians in having doubts about the government system at the time that majorly was inclined on a democratic form of rule.
His main offence to the city was that he was a moral and social critic which was more concerned about change from the status quo of immorality within his region. He questioned the collective notion that ‘might make right’ that was a common trend in Greece at the time. This effort made him rub shoulders with authorities in attempts to improve Athenians’ sense of justice. His run-ins with the authorities may have been the main reason behind his execution.
Any philosopher dedicated to his or her life should take a decisive stand such as the one Socrates took by defending philosophical values that they believe in. Criticizing the regime for wrong doing not only serves to inspire the process of democratization, but also serves to support civic and fundamental human rights which humanity in general is striving to ensure given the various injustices that have been and continues to be done on disadvantaged persons in different circumstances all over the world. Therefore, it is my opinion that a philosopher should be the voice of the people and not simply tow line with the legislation if they do not agree with their philosophical values and beliefs.
Part 2: Logic
The major difference between Inductive and Deductive reasoning is that the former is particularly concerned with an analysis of issues from specific observations and hence drawing general conclusions thereafter. It is commonly referred to as the bottom-up approach that is used in solving puzzles or in investigating phenomena to come up with general conclusions. For instance, specifics such as a statement that says, ‘I left at eight yesterday and got to school on time’ could be generalized as ‘leaving home at eight will always ensure that I arrive to school on time.’ Hence, top-down approach reasoning.
On the other hand, deductive reasoning is the opposite of Inductive reasoning using a top-down approach in the analysis of issues to come up with conclusions. For example, the following statement ‘every day, I leave for school at eight o’clock. Every day, the bus ride to school takes 45 minutes, and I arrive on time always’. Therefore, ‘if I leave for school at eight o’clock today, I will be on time.
The common factor between the two forms of reasoning is that they both lead to conclusive generalizations and are both methods employed by scientists to develop conclusions, generalizations and theories.
The subject matter of philosophy, science and art may differ on the premise that they reflect, express and transform various aspects of argumentation. Philosophy for instance reflects reality in its relation to man depicting man in his spiritual world. The same can be said of art hence unifying art and philosophy. On the other hand, science explains the interaction between individuals and the world which is also a concern of philosophy uniting the two on this premise.
Therefore, the question as to whether philosophy should be treated as a logically argued endeavor such as science or whether it should employ an artistic form like a normal way of life is neither here nor there given that philosophy is particularly concerned with facts, on the one hand, and also with the way of life of people on the other. Thus, philosophers should incorporate both elements of arts and sciences in their philosophical works as it only serves to make them valuable and comprehensive.
Crossman, Ashley. Deduuctive Reasoning Versus Inductive Reasoning. 2014. Web. 6 Febuary 2014. <http://sociology.about.com/od/Research/a/Deductive-Reasoning-Versus-Inductive-Reasoning.htm>.
Quintom, Anthony. The Ethics of Philosophical Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Smith, W. The Apology of Socrates . Taylor Walton & Marberly, 1852.
Spirkin, A. Philosophy and Art. n.d. Web. 6 February 2014. <http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/spirkin/works/dialectical-materialism/ch01-s05.html>.
Waterfeld, Robin. Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myth. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2009.