PHIL 103 E, Monday, 9-18-17

Plato, "Apology" + "Crito", Essay 1

audio/mpeg PHIL_103_E_Mon_9_18_17.mp3 — 62336 KB


Transcript

00:00
[Music]
00:04
philosophy 103 e September 18 2017 no
00:11
classes Wednesday through Friday because
00:14
of the Jewish High Holy Days so the next
00:19
time we meet will be a week from today
00:21
which will be the 25th and then again on
00:25
the 27th it has it was pointed out to me
00:29
in my first class that a draft of the
00:34
first essay is due on the 27th and since
00:39
the essay is about the apology and the
00:40
cried oh and we haven't talked about the
00:42
cried oh I think would be better for me
00:44
to say a few words about the essay at
00:47
the end of this class so I asked a
00:49
student in the first class to remind me
00:56
to try and save ten minutes at the end
00:59
of class and it was about seven minutes
01:01
before the end of the class and I
01:02
remembered she hadn't and I said you
01:05
didn't remember and she said class ends
01:08
at 11:50 right
01:13
I said no 11:40 because we don't take a
01:17
ten-minute break so it just goes to show
01:19
you how many different ways it is
01:21
possible to commit errors and make
01:23
mistakes and get things wrong so on so
01:26
I'm asking you to remind me at this
01:32
class ends at 1:40 at 1:30 to stop
01:37
whatever I'm doing which may not be easy
01:39
because I would have been working for an
01:41
hour to get to that point maybe possibly
01:43
sometimes it's you know it's just
01:45
getting there anyway to take some time
01:48
to talk about the essay now keep in mind
01:53
you should between now and next Monday
01:56
work on that draft and it's only a draft
01:59
you'll get to work on it again after I
02:00
return the draft to you but but you'll
02:04
get on Monday the 25th you know you will
02:07
talk about some of these things again so
02:10
you'll have two more days before the
02:11
draft is due
02:13
also let me say this now the essays are
02:17
not to be handed to me like the logs but
02:19
to be sent to me as an email attachment
02:23
right now so first point not as an email
02:27
message but as an attachment okay
02:31
and so let me use an actual name here
02:57
we've got oh gee Voltaire okay so this
03:37
is how I want you to name the document
03:38
if you don't name it that way I can
03:40
rename it but the more you do that I
03:43
don't have to correct the less time for
03:46
my clerical duties okay so your last
03:51
name comma first initial essay one draft
03:54
and okay that's how I I want the dot you
04:00
to name the document so that I can save
04:03
it that way in my computer and so what
04:09
will happen is I'll read it in the
04:11
computer and use the review techniques
04:17
in Word where I can write comments in
04:21
between your sentences or even in
04:22
between your words and in the margin
04:26
all over the place the average si gets
04:31
back from me at least a dozen comments
04:35
on it okay
04:37
so whether they're helpful or not you'll
04:39
have to judge for yourself but they're
04:41
meant to be and and then you'll get it
04:47
back to me it's due on the 27th you'll
04:50
get it back to me a week from then and
04:51
then you'll do it again within a week
04:54
and you can see why we only do that for
04:57
the first essay because we'd run out of
04:59
semester time and you probably don't
05:02
want to spend January with this course
05:04
too even though you find it wonderful
05:05
and exciting you might mess mess with
05:09
your skiing trip or something so anyway
05:14
so that will say more about the content
05:19
after we've had some discussion so I've
05:30
now read logs by you on user fro an
05:38
apology to on the about old accusers and
05:44
new accusers so I have a sense of what
05:47
difficulties many of you all of you have
05:52
some difficulties you're having with the
05:55
arguments sometimes with the particular
06:01
arguments that are apart and sometimes
06:05
with the whole and I want to remind you
06:08
that I'm trying to get you to think
06:12
about the outline of the whole dialogue
06:16
how it goes from the beginning to to the
06:18
end and to have some sense of the steps
06:21
involved in that because not just as a
06:24
piece of information that's interesting
06:26
in itself but also as a way of
06:28
understanding the parts when to when you
06:36
have something that's organic that
06:40
means that the parts have a dependency
06:43
on each other they're not independent
06:45
the hole is not just a collection
06:48
it's an inter relationship and when
06:52
that's the case you cannot understand
06:55
the part unless you know something about
06:58
its relationships to the other parts so
07:02
when I ask you to look for the outline
07:08
of the argument in the whole dialog I'm
07:11
doing so not just to make another demand
07:14
on you but so that you can understand
07:16
how some of these arguments you've
07:18
encountered in the parts what their
07:20
significance is in the whole so to put
07:25
put that simply in the apology there are
07:31
charges of two sorts as you know both of
07:39
which are defended against the Socrates
07:44
defends himself against rather briefly a
07:47
little longer for the new accusers in
07:52
the old but each each part each of the
07:58
old and the new divides into two parts
08:00
defense against charges and then another
08:02
question and it's the other question
08:05
that gets to space so if you're gonna
08:11
understand what he's saying about the
08:15
charges themselves you have you have to
08:17
understand why he thinks that the
08:19
charges themselves they're not the most
08:20
important thing but let me start with
08:29
the Euthyphro because it starts a theme
08:32
that is characteristic of Socrates in in
08:37
the apology socrates presents himself as
08:41
a person who seeks the truth one of the
08:47
words he uses that we use to refer to
08:50
such a person and to refer to him as a
08:52
philosopher
08:53
in other words he's not just talking
08:57
about something that he's done once or
08:58
twice or so or many times it's who he is
09:03
to what he does all the time in the
09:07
Euthyphro go back to our first encounter
09:13
with Socrates Socrates initially makes
09:18
two points that should be familiar to
09:20
you that you've heard me talk about
09:21
before one is that he thinks that use
09:29
the fro must know what piety is and he
09:35
thinks that because he's out of respect
09:37
for you so fro on the one hand and the
09:40
fact that use of rose pressing charges
09:41
against his father on the other in other
09:43
words beautif Row is the kind of
09:45
conscientious human being and also
09:48
loving son that he would not expect to
09:51
do something of such importance with
09:54
such great consequence without great
09:57
thought and therefore he must know what
10:00
impiety is he wouldn't accuse his father
10:03
of it unless he knew what it is and
10:09
that's one thought and the other thought
10:11
is that tells us both of these tell us
10:15
who Socrates is he thinks that if he can
10:20
learn from you so fro what piety is he
10:24
will have a defense in his own trial
10:28
where he's been accused of impiety so
10:30
what do you see how that tells us
10:32
something about who Socrates is not it's
10:37
not a real difficult point what is
10:40
Socrates saying that he thinks is
10:43
important that would make a good defense
10:50
what mr. Alfred alright so that's
11:00
already too complicated it's probably
11:02
true but what is it that Socrates thinks
11:04
is is important that you have with
11:08
respect to something like peyote and
11:09
other subjects as well what do you need
11:12
no that's what a piety involves that but
11:16
what is Socrates always trying to get ya
11:18
got it
11:20
what does he seek what the truth and
11:25
what does he it's more than true so
11:28
right answer but more than what does he
11:31
want with respect to the truth no now
11:41
you know you're getting too complicated
11:44
I made a simple point that obviously
11:47
it's not it's it's only simple of you
11:49
maybe it's not so simple Socrates makes
11:54
two points to use or throw one is that
11:57
use of throw must what what what mr.
12:03
Dawkins I didn't hear you repeat what I
12:08
said now we've got that already they're
12:11
being done by the transcription but how
12:15
about answer what I said Oh what does he
12:23
what does he say Euthyphro must must be
12:27
the case with Yousuf Rose what what yes
12:33
he must know what piety is do you hear
12:36
my emphasis know what piety is that's
12:39
first point second point he wants which
12:44
follows from the first one he wants
12:46
Yusuf wrote to teach him so that he can
12:49
know what piety is what is it that
12:54
Socrates thinks is important knowledge
13:00
that's what he's that's what Plato was
13:03
showing you Socrates wanted knowledge
13:06
okay now in the apology we're gonna come
13:12
and come back to the use of frou but I
13:13
just want you to get the feel for this
13:14
one point in the apology he explains his
13:20
life by reference by telling a story
13:25
about an Oracle according to Socrates
13:32
and his friend went to this Oracle I can
13:35
tell you the whole story but what not
13:38
it's simple enough
13:39
what did Socrates take the Oracle to be
13:43
telling him what did Socrates do after
13:54
he heard about the Oracle somes not the
13:59
smartest yes good mr. Dawkins now what
14:03
did he do when he heard that okay
14:12
Voltaire then why
14:22
but notice the problem it's a good
14:25
answer mr. Voltaire but I want this is
14:27
very instructive for all the things you
14:29
write when I ask you a question and you
14:32
give an answer for it to be a good
14:34
answer the connection between the answer
14:37
and the question has to be made explicit
14:38
I asked you what he when he after he
14:42
hears the Oracle what does he do and you
14:44
told me what he does but you didn't show
14:46
me what that's got to do with the Oracle
14:51
since I'm giving mr. Voltaire a hard
14:54
time let's give him a chance to get back
14:55
if he if he thinks of something right
14:57
away otherwise he can do it later your
15:05
name you're not telling me about the
15:13
Oracle you're doing the same thing mr.
15:16
Voltaire did which is good you showed
15:18
that you understand what he was doing
15:20
yes but what does it got to do with the
15:21
Oracle no no you just gave the answer to
15:30
the whole thing and before you even ask
15:32
the question it's as if I was so open
15:36
mouths damn I'm gonna ask you a question
15:37
and then you were to say to me the
15:38
answer is yes how do you know what the
15:41
question is oh but I always want to say
15:45
yes to you you might say oh yeah but in
15:48
this case what I want is a no all right
15:52
let me when Socrates hears the Oracle
15:57
why doesn't he just say whew
16:02
that's a very good answer but what do
16:04
you have in your breath is that
16:06
breakfast or lunch breakfast what is it
16:10
chicken and rice is that the kind of
16:12
breakfast you usually have yeah I know
16:16
this is none of my business and what and
16:18
teeth thank you just in case I wanted to
16:21
know the drink okay we got that take
16:22
care of the the true it's a very good
16:26
answer except that it's not quite right
16:28
because if Socrates didn't believe the
16:31
Oracle that would mean that Socrates
16:33
thinks that the God
16:36
Paulo is a source of untruth and that
16:40
would not be a nice thing to say about
16:43
the guy right maybe it's true I mean I
16:45
don't know but but Socrates claims to be
16:49
pious so I doubt that he would say that
16:55
the or what the Oracle said is untrue
16:58
but it's close to the right answer no he
17:03
didn't I know that's not an unreasonable
17:07
way to describe what he did but look do
17:16
we human beings know the truth do we
17:20
have the truth that we're in possession
17:21
of all the truth we know everything no
17:24
no so what do we have to do to acquire
17:31
the truth what research yeah that's a
17:37
that's a modern word we use what is what
17:40
what is Socrates do but what does he do
17:44
he talks to other people that wouldn't
17:47
be a bad answer even today right in your
17:50
research when scientists do research
17:55
don't they always tell you first what
18:01
the state of the field is on this
18:03
particular subject the research that
18:04
other people have done and so on so the
18:06
first thing they do is talk to other
18:07
people and then when they get through
18:08
with their research they submit it for
18:10
publication publication right they
18:14
submit it to the public or at least that
18:16
part of the public that knows about
18:17
these things and see what the other is
18:20
say so even now although we think that
18:24
experiments and so on observation of
18:27
nature all that stuff even now we
18:29
include talking to other people as a
18:30
significant part and what Socrates is
18:34
showing you is that what he does is talk
18:37
to people and ask them questions
18:40
especially people who claim to know
18:42
something because if somebody if you ask
18:46
somebody a question who says doesn't
18:47
know anything about it
18:50
where does that get you right so
18:52
somebody thinks he knows something you
18:54
ask him a question
18:55
now nasty and erroneous ways I think of
19:01
interpreting Socrates would be to say
19:02
well he asked people questions in order
19:04
to show they don't know anything that's
19:06
nasty isn't it trying to show that
19:08
somebody is full of baloney right I
19:12
cleaned that one up just in the nick of
19:13
time so but but the person might be full
19:18
of baloney right so suppose that
19:20
Socrates asked somebody a question that
19:23
person's already knows something but
19:24
actually he's full of baloney has
19:27
Socrates done it done something nasty no
19:33
if you if you think you know the way to
19:35
get somewhere and you take your your
19:40
idea it includes using the wrong train
19:42
on the subway or something like that and
19:43
somebody corrects you is he hurting you
19:45
or benefiting you he's benefiting you
19:47
right okay now however with directions
19:51
like that people are not usually you
19:53
know upset when you correct them they're
19:55
probably appreciative but with a lot of
19:57
things where our beliefs involve things
20:00
that are important to us our values and
20:02
so on the people questioning them might
20:10
feel nasty to us might not feel like
20:12
they're trying to be helpful
20:14
so what Socrates tells you he did in
20:19
response to the Oracle was to ask people
20:22
questions people who claim to know now
20:29
if he's doing it in response to the
20:31
Oracle he's got to have some negative
20:36
relationship to the Oracle and what I
20:38
mean by that not necessarily that he's
20:41
putting the Oracle down it doesn't have
20:42
to be a negative relation of disbelief
20:44
however but it's there's got to be some
20:46
negative there that is to say something
20:49
that has to be remedied
20:50
that's what action is a for right you
20:54
say what if I say to mr. Dawkins why are
20:58
you eating that chicken and rice which
21:00
by the way smells pretty good it must be
21:02
close to my lunchtime
21:05
what could he tell me he's hungry
21:10
right and if somebody didn't understand
21:12
what that's about you can say well you
21:14
know the human body and you know
21:16
nourishment yeah right okay so but but
21:22
you're taking action in order to deal
21:23
with some problem some negative
21:25
situation if Socrates heard the Oracle
21:31
saying a man you're number one he could
21:35
have just celebrated right but he didn't
21:40
and mr. Dawkins is pretty close to the
21:43
truth when he says that Socrates didn't
21:45
believe it but Socrates would never say
21:47
that he would say justice just as he
21:49
said about Yousuf ro but with more
21:51
justification in his mind about the
21:53
Oracle it must be true the Oracle said
21:57
it it must be true he identifies the God
22:02
with truth period but what's the problem
22:07
then
22:08
if what he or achill tells him is true
22:10
mr. Alfred but why is there even any
22:16
question right what is it that he has to
22:18
see you were telling me that before
22:20
actually Sandra yes how did I get to be
22:27
number one I don't know a damn thing
22:32
it's like telling me that I'm the
22:34
tallest member of the faculty I would
22:37
say what are you serious and I'd have to
22:40
start looking at my colleagues and
22:42
discover whether some of them are
22:43
walking around on stilts or something
22:45
right to make sense of that if I was
22:47
sure that what you were telling me is
22:49
true and yet my experience is so
22:51
contrary now you see how close that is
22:53
that what mr. Dawkins said is it's as if
22:55
he doesn't believe it except that
22:57
because it comes from the Oracle it's
22:59
it's something you might say to a good
23:02
friend even but no friend is a god but
23:04
still there are friends we have
23:05
confidence in so we say sometimes to our
23:08
friends if
23:12
if anybody else had told me that I
23:15
wouldn't have believed it we say right
23:17
but you I believe why because I know you
23:19
don't make up stuff like that we have
23:22
confidence in people his confidence in
23:25
the god is complete
23:28
that's how Plato is presenting him you
23:30
might say oh I don't believe that
23:32
Socrates was really like that maybe
23:33
you're right but I'm talking about how
23:35
Plato presents Socrates in this dialogue
23:39
he's a guy who says the God said it I
23:42
believe it but I don't understand it now
23:51
this being in a position of not
23:55
understanding things is is the human
23:57
condition okay so Socrates is talking
24:03
about something that's not unusual lack
24:06
of understanding you can identify the
24:09
truth with God or you can identify the
24:11
truth with nature or whatever the fact
24:14
is there's certainly a lot of it we
24:19
don't know but Socrates but you're not
24:23
allowed to hedge your bets some of you
24:25
right in your logs Socrates says you
24:28
know I hardly know anything no no that's
24:31
not what he said he said he knows
24:34
nothing and we have to come to terms
24:37
with that but I'm not gonna do that just
24:38
yet so he talks to people in order to
24:44
find out if they know anything and he
24:53
discovers that they don't so this is the
24:57
this is the shocking Socrates tells this
25:00
story as if it's a straightforward easy
25:02
story right the Oracle told him
25:05
something he went out and question
25:06
people and he found out but what he
25:09
found out is not something that we can
25:11
just listen to and say oh yeah right
25:12
okay he found it but it did by the time
25:16
he's finished with these or he's never
25:18
finished but after a while he he claims
25:22
that the situation is that nobody knows
25:24
anything
25:25
no human being knows anything what about
25:29
the God everything so that's the
25:34
situation that's part of the point that
25:36
he's making is now if if the situation
26:03
is human no knowledge then how does a
26:09
human how can a human be be wise as as
26:13
the God says because the God says and
26:17
the God knows everything right that's
26:20
we're talking about Socrates assumptions
26:22
God knows everything says that Socrates
26:26
is wisest so it must be true so how
26:30
could Socrates be wisest if he knows
26:33
nothing right whether humanity is
26:42
certainly part of it but he somehow
26:45
recognizes he knows something this is
26:49
the paradox of what he says he says that
26:52
he knows only one thing that he knows
26:54
nothing now those on a literal level
26:57
those two statements contradict each
26:58
other
26:59
know something knows nothing knows that
27:03
he knows nothing is a self contradictory
27:05
statement however if you take the
27:09
statement is true it means it it goes
27:14
around and around he knows something
27:18
which is that he knows nothing but he
27:21
knows that he knows nothing so the
27:24
difference between Socrates the
27:27
difference between Socrates and other
27:29
human beings and he doesn't say every
27:32
other human being because at a certain
27:33
point he says I understood finally what
27:36
the what the Oracle was saying with
27:38
God was saying to me it wasn't talking
27:40
about Socrates he says it was talking
27:42
about people who like me recognize that
27:45
they know nothing okay now the point
27:54
that I started out making I'm gonna come
27:55
back to that one now but I want to put
27:57
it remind you the context I was saying
28:00
to you the charges he doesn't pay much
28:04
attention to and the explanation for him
28:08
not paying attention to them is that
28:09
these charges are made by people who
28:11
don't understand
28:13
so they're not the charges are not very
28:16
interesting and who are motivated that
28:21
is to say they're making the charges not
28:26
because they care about these things
28:28
education piety whatever but because
28:31
they are part of the group of people who
28:35
found what he was doing to be painful
28:42
and they think wrong so the real issue
28:46
is not the charges but what was it that
28:52
he was doing and is it justifiable or
28:55
not so when he dismisses the charges he
29:02
places a greater charge against himself
29:07
this is what how can you justify what
29:10
you were doing in order for us to
29:16
justify what Socrates was doing we have
29:18
to ask ourselves what the possible
29:22
benefit could be of somebody who goes
29:26
around asking people questions in order
29:31
to determine whether any of them is
29:32
wiser than he since he knows nothing and
29:37
the only way that he could be wisest is
29:39
if it turns out that they know nothing -
29:40
so the outcome of this to use a word
29:45
that mr. Selim II used before or mr.
29:49
merriday law camera which one research
29:52
right the outcome of this research is is
29:57
on the literal level empty zero nobody
30:05
knows anything okay so we have to ask
30:10
ourselves what could the benefit of this
30:12
be if Socrates is trying to meet the
30:16
charges ultimately by saying none of the
30:18
charges don't matter what matter is what
30:20
matters is what I was doing so now he
30:23
describes what he was doing and it looks
30:25
like what he was doing is pointless now
30:28
you found out nobody knows anything what
30:31
use is that all right now let's go back
30:46
to the use of row for a moment he says
30:51
Euthyphro must know what piety is
30:54
otherwise he wouldn't be charging his
30:56
father so he asked you to forward tell
31:01
me because I need to know what ideas so
31:04
years of Rotel ism piety is doing what
31:07
I'm doing and what he's referring to is
31:10
charging his father
31:12
well yeah but how do you know that
31:14
charging your father is piety there's a
31:18
good thing oh well because there are
31:21
stories of Zeus doing the same thing
31:26
Zeus charged his father
31:28
okay so Euthyphro is doing the same kind
31:32
of thing that the stories say that Zeus
31:36
did now Socrates says he doesn't believe
31:43
those stories and that's important
31:47
because if we knew that the stories were
31:51
true even if we didn't understand why
31:54
they are stories of piety we would at
31:57
least have a rule that we could follow
31:59
we'd say okay I don't know why this is a
32:02
good thing but I do know that the
32:05
that God did this so I'm in the same
32:07
situation so I'll do the same thing I
32:09
don't know why it's a good thing to do
32:11
but it's you know I have beliefs that
32:15
the God knows all right so I could
32:17
follow it but if we don't know that the
32:19
stories are true then we cannot use them
32:23
as certain models to follow and they do
32:28
not tell us whether they're true or not
32:31
they do not tell us what piety is why
32:36
not if you have three different
32:42
triangles and you identify them all as
32:45
triangles so you have three examples of
32:49
triangles well why is that not a
32:51
definition of a triangle there Alfred
33:03
you don't want to tell me about
33:05
triangles do you know that that's what
33:15
triangles look like how can you know
33:20
what triangles look like if you don't
33:21
know what a triangle is but you you do
33:30
know what a triangle is don't you but
33:32
the question is do you find out what a
33:34
triangle is by being told that these
33:37
three are triangles so what is a
33:40
triangle yeah the closed is what figure
33:47
means right so but if you say plain that
33:50
would be helpful because it makes a
33:51
two-dimensional but alright three-sided
33:53
figure okay so leave me you wanted to
33:57
say something about this I want to know
34:03
if if we think that this is a triangle
34:08
and this is a trial this is a triangle
34:10
are we right is that true of course
34:14
they're poorly drawn but you know what I
34:15
mean okay so it's true so
34:18
we're right that those are three
34:19
triangles does it does that mean we know
34:22
what a triangle is well what is a
34:29
triangle say it again
34:34
three yeah three-sided plane figure
34:37
right but I didn't say that this is a
34:39
plane a three-sided plane figure if I
34:41
did I would not only be telling you that
34:45
this is a triangle I would be telling
34:46
you what a triangle is right so when I
34:53
tell you what a triangle is now I can
34:55
tell you why each of these is a triangle
34:57
now even when I didn't tell you what a
35:00
triangle is and I said each of those is
35:02
a triangle I was right but I was not
35:04
giving a definition and therefore I was
35:06
not giving knowledge because you need
35:09
the definition in order you need to know
35:11
what a triangle is in order to know that
35:15
those are triangles and for example that
35:25
that isn't so you said no that's not a
35:29
triangle why not you have to be able to
35:32
say because it's got four sides not
35:34
three so it's the definition that tells
35:38
you what the thing is and if you know
35:42
that the definition is right then you
35:43
can know that everything that fits the
35:45
definition is that kind of thing and
35:47
everything that doesn't isn't before
35:49
that you might have belief but not
35:51
knowledge that's the distinction that
35:54
Socrates is making and your beliefs can
35:56
be true even when you don't have
35:57
knowledge if it weren't if that weren't
35:59
the case then human beings and other
36:01
sentient creatures dogs and monkeys and
36:03
everything wouldn't be able to live we
36:05
make up our minds about stuff when mr.
36:08
Dawkins got his lunch and I got my water
36:10
we did not run chemical tests to make
36:13
sure that they were free of impurities
36:16
that could make us sick or even kill us
36:18
but what did we do how do you how do you
36:23
avoid impurities in your food do you run
36:26
chemical tests every time you have a
36:27
meal no because usually the test must
36:29
probably take days so you
36:32
you'd be eating stale food all the time
36:35
so what do you do well if you yes if you
36:42
have reliable people your mother or your
36:45
some store you know person you have
36:48
confidence in but what is it then but
36:50
that just passes the buck so what do
36:52
they do do they run chemical tests does
36:56
your mother run a chemical test every
36:57
time she feeds you what uh-huh
37:07
so oh right okay so you you you get some
37:13
indication of freshness be based on what
37:17
idea what's know what's the idea of
37:21
freshness what what is freshness what if
37:25
we why do we think it's good if it's
37:27
fresh why don't we think it's good if
37:29
it's sits around for clean what does
37:32
clean me know that's the effect what is
37:35
clean mean clean means it doesn't have
37:38
what yeah bacteria because so we have a
37:42
theory of bacteria in mind which wasn't
37:46
always the way people thought about
37:48
these things you know there was a time
37:49
of a hundred and fifty years ago or so
37:51
when people like Pasteur that had made
37:54
the discovery of bacteria that surgeons
37:57
did not wash their hands before surgery
37:59
or after for that matter unless they got
38:01
really messy right and when they were
38:04
told initially that they should wash
38:07
their hands too so their patients didn't
38:09
die and because there were these
38:11
invisible little things they thought it
38:14
was a ridiculous I o funny little things
38:16
that you can't see it sounds like a
38:19
made-up story except it turns out those
38:23
little things do exist right so you've
38:25
got this theory about bacteria and the
38:29
theory includes the idea that it takes
38:32
time for bacteria to grow in most
38:35
bacteria are harmless unless they unless
38:38
it becomes sufficiently you know enough
38:41
of them that they begin to
38:43
be able to do things in your body it's a
38:45
core some bacteria are more harmful than
38:47
others all right so that's your theory
38:50
and does that enable you to know if in
38:55
fact there are deadly bacteria on that
38:57
food that this example is okay because
39:01
mr. Dawkins finished no I was talking
39:04
like this while he was eating it would
39:05
be not nice right do you know do you
39:12
know that there's no deadly bacteria
39:14
when you eat food no you don't know what
39:17
you what you have is a kind of
39:19
probability if it's fresh it's unlikely
39:22
to be harmful to you but we hear stories
39:27
all the time right about restaurants and
39:30
salad bars and so on people have a nice
39:33
salad and then keel over fortunately it
39:38
doesn't happen very often but it does
39:40
happen so so what I'm illustrating is
39:46
that in life we make decisions based on
39:51
beliefs that have some degree of
39:53
probability it's not that the beliefs
39:54
come out of the blue they're based on
39:56
our experience and experience is a good
39:59
guide in life but it is by no means an
40:02
infallible guide right human beings
40:10
think of how unreliable we are we think
40:14
well if you get to know somebody you
40:15
learn whether you can trust them or not
40:17
and that works out pretty well for the
40:19
most part but some people you know seem
40:23
to be trustworthy who are not so we lack
40:27
knowledge now Socrates is arguing for
40:31
seeking knowledge he says it's very
40:33
important but he's not talking about
40:36
knowledge so that you can be sure that
40:39
what you're doing in some case is gonna
40:41
work out the way you want to he's
40:42
arguing for knowledge that it's seeking
40:46
knowledge that will give you an
40:47
understanding of what's good and what's
40:50
not and therefore his discussions are
40:52
always about things like piety justice
40:55
and so on
40:57
how just as you can't know that this is
40:59
a triangle you might believe it you
41:01
might think it but you can't know it
41:02
unless you know what a triangle is
41:03
similarly you cannot know that this is
41:06
unjust where this is just unless you
41:10
know what justice is and Euthyphro
41:14
cannot know whether his act of charging
41:18
his father is an act of piety or not
41:20
unless he knows what piety is so he
41:23
thinks that human beings should spend
41:25
time thinking about these things in
41:30
order to acquire that knowledge in order
41:32
to have truth and knowledge in their
41:35
minds rather than falsehood and belief
41:43
now let's come back to the idea that he
41:48
knows nothing the idea that he knows
41:55
nothing and that other people know
41:57
nothing suggests well if you show
42:03
somebody who thinks that he knows
42:05
something that he's wrong that he
42:08
doesn't know it which is what Socrates
42:10
frequently did right and what a lot of
42:13
people found some people found very
42:15
annoying if you show somebody that he
42:20
doesn't know what he thinks he knows
42:22
you're doing him a benefit because what
42:30
what does he know knows that he doesn't
42:34
know now how is that a benefit
42:43
what's the benefit if you if you think
42:54
you know something you don't have to
42:57
think about it if you're shown that you
42:59
don't know it that gives you the
43:01
opportunity to think about it some more
43:03
now thinking about it some more doesn't
43:04
guarantee you're gonna get knowledge but
43:06
at least it gives you a chance right
43:10
so people who think they know are
43:13
benefited by questioning from Socrates
43:16
or somebody else or from themselves even
43:20
because if they discover that they
43:23
really don't know that there's some
43:24
problems what they think they can try to
43:26
get a better understanding but if you
43:29
think you know you don't you won't try
43:31
to get a better understanding now what's
43:37
the point of saying though that nobody
43:39
knows anything is if nobody knows
43:46
anything does that mean that you cannot
43:50
benefit yourself by thinking more
43:53
because if you think more about it what
43:57
the benefit that you're looking for is
44:00
to get some knowledge get some
44:01
understanding now how can we put those
44:06
two together the idea that we should
44:10
think more and the idea that we can
44:11
never have knowledge because the benefit
44:14
of thinking more is to get knowledge
44:20
tough right however
44:27
if we look at these discussions do we
44:34
actually find Socrates saying that
44:36
everybody knows nothing and that's all
44:39
there is to it who knows more about
44:43
piety Socrates are you surfer oh you're
44:52
not sure
44:55
well there's user fro know what a
44:59
definition of piety would is no Socrates
45:03
teaches him that right the way you know
45:07
that this is a triangle is by
45:09
recognizing what these three have in
45:11
common that makes them triangles right
45:14
it's not their differences the
45:16
difference of shape and size and so on
45:18
it's what they have in common they are
45:21
all three-sided figures right it's
45:23
recited playing figures Euthyphro talks
45:26
about stories that are stories about
45:28
piety but that never say what they all
45:31
have in common that makes them all about
45:33
piety Socrates teaches him that if
45:36
you're going to have knowledge of piety
45:38
you have to know what it is knowing what
45:40
it is means what those stories all have
45:42
in common
45:43
and so Yusef Rowe tries to do that and
45:48
he gives an answer what they all have in
45:51
common which is a definition but turns
45:55
out to be a false definition because
45:59
what follows from his definition which
46:01
is that the gods
46:02
Tidy is what the gods love because it's
46:05
polytheistic religion and the gods are
46:07
constantly fighting with each other and
46:09
disagreeing about things like piety and
46:12
justice and so on that means that you if
46:16
you use that definition that means that
46:18
anything that you do is both pious and
46:20
impious so it's self contradictory it's
46:24
opposed to triangle and not a triangle
46:27
all right
46:29
so by teaching him that Socrates has
46:33
increased his understanding he's looking
46:37
for the things that the various stories
46:39
have in common that makes them stories
46:41
of piety he's increasing his
46:43
understanding and if he's increasing his
46:45
understanding then that tells us that
46:46
Socrates knows more about piety than
46:48
music does same thing is true in the
46:52
apology isn't it so if by comparison
46:59
with Euthyphro and others Socrates
47:02
actually knows more than they do if we
47:06
take the evidence of the dialogues
47:08
you've read what comparison would make
47:13
it true to say that he knows nothing
47:24
it's by comparison with God that's right
47:27
so
47:36
I have to throw this way because it's
47:39
actually dead and I keep using it those
47:59
are those are three categories that
48:02
exhaust quantity you're talking in quant
48:06
terms of quantity the quantity can be
48:10
nothing no quantity or or it could be
48:14
something some quantity or it could be
48:16
all and some is anything from one to
48:21
anything less than all right in in the
48:26
case of numbers if you're doing
48:28
quantification in terms of numbers it's
48:30
kind of hard to talk about all right why
48:35
what yeah there yeah there's there's no
48:39
biggest number right now there are ways
48:44
of talking about all all numbers even
48:49
though you can't count them all and get
48:50
the highest number okay but so these
48:53
these are the concepts that Socrates
48:58
riddle is about it's a riddle
49:00
just as the God gave a riddle Socrates
49:03
is the wisest he says oh I'm the wisest
49:06
I know nothing so that's the riddle but
49:10
what Socrates is showing you when he
49:14
says that he knows nothing is that he
49:16
compares his knowledge to the knowledge
49:20
of the God now let's suppose that he has
49:24
some knowledge which seems to be knots
49:27
not what he says he says he has none but
49:29
what we seem to see from watching him in
49:33
these dialogues is that he has some
49:34
knowledge and that it's more than other
49:37
people there may be other people who
49:38
know more than he does we don't know but
49:39
certainly from the ones we've seen he
49:41
knows more so let's suppose he has some
49:44
knowledge if you compare it to other
49:48
people it's some now
49:50
for example he knows when he doesn't
49:53
know and that's some knowledge that
49:56
other people don't always have because
49:57
they think they know and they're
49:58
mistaken all right but it may be more
50:00
than that
50:03
but what is it that makes it no
50:05
knowledge and the answer I think is when
50:08
he compares it to the God and the reason
50:12
that it's no knowledge compared to the
50:14
God is because when you have some
50:18
knowledge but you lack other knowledge
50:21
you are lacking knowledge of the place
50:24
that the some knowledge you have has in
50:27
the whole because you lack knowledge of
50:30
the whole and therefore your knowledge
50:34
has a certain deficiency to it okay this
50:41
is a difficult concept but I think that
50:43
what Socrates is saying is if we compare
50:46
ourselves to to the gods that is to say
50:48
to the whole truth what we recognize is
50:52
two things one that it is beneficial to
50:57
pursue truths that is we can learn we
51:00
human beings can learn we can get more
51:02
than we've got otherwise there'd be no
51:05
point to it and to that we will never
51:09
finish
51:11
we'll never get knowledge such that we
51:14
can say that's it no more questions that
51:22
is for the God not us so we are always
51:29
in the position as human beings of
51:31
seeking never completely having right
51:37
now in monotheistic religions sometimes
51:40
this takes the form of concepts like
51:43
grace right grace means thanks right
51:46
that you know in order for you to get
51:49
completeness you need God's help human
51:55
beings can never do it on their own okay
51:58
now let's any questions about that I
52:03
mean it's a tricky business so let's
52:11
talk about the credo again what I want
52:23
to emphasize is finding the argument
52:28
finding the organization of ideas in the
52:30
Credo that gets the whole thing what's
52:34
the problem that the cryto poses for us
52:38
for us to think about what is cried Oh
52:42
on what mr. Alvarez yes
52:48
so credo is so on one level it's very
52:50
simple right
52:51
credo has bribed the guard and made
52:55
arrangements in Thessaly for Socrates to
52:58
leave and nobody you know the Athenians
53:00
most most of them were not eager to kill
53:03
Socrates they they would have been happy
53:08
if Socrates had agreed to keep his mouth
53:12
shut for example those I'm talking about
53:15
those who are accusing I'm not talking
53:17
about the ones who loved them would have
53:19
been happy if he'd agreed to keep his
53:20
mouth shut
53:21
what What did he say in the apology
53:23
about this is this by the way is about
53:25
the essay so you know I'm just want to
53:27
alert you What did he say in the apology
53:30
to the idea of you know sometimes we
53:38
have a court case where the defendant is
53:42
asked to promise that he's gonna not do
53:45
that stuff anymore and if he agrees to
53:46
that that's part of the deal okay you
53:48
can go but you're on probation or
53:51
whatever right what would Socrates say
53:54
if the court said to him we're gonna let
53:59
you go Socrates but no more philosophers
54:02
we don't want you going around asking
54:03
people questions okay what would what
54:07
yes mister
54:12
right
54:13
he'd say no why what's what by what
54:22
authority would he continue
54:30
well when sometimes there's always an
54:34
authority involved in our actions the
54:37
authority might just be ourselves you
54:40
know so so somebody asks why you're
54:43
doing it you you might say because I
54:45
want to and I regard my wants as
54:50
authoritative at least to a certain
54:51
extent there may be other high or
54:54
considerations sometimes too but but
54:56
they carry weight they carry Authority
54:58
what I want right so Socrates could be
55:02
saying no I like doing it you tell me
55:05
not to do it I'm gonna do it anyway I
55:07
like it have a good time that's one
55:11
possible Authority but what is what has
55:14
he told us is the authority for his
55:18
asking mr. Coronado yeah he was oh he
55:26
was obeying the commandment of the God
55:28
and doing the work of the God and so
55:33
here we have a law of Athens and he's
55:36
saying that's in contradiction to the
55:39
command or commandments or laws of God
55:42
and so one Authority is higher than the
55:46
other in his judgment therefore he would
55:50
obey the God it's not that he wants to
55:56
ignore Oh see knee and authority and
55:59
laws but not when they contradict the
56:01
God
56:03
so in the Credo and this is what the
56:07
essay is about in the Credo he says not
56:12
he shouldn't he shouldn't break a scene
56:14
in law and therefore he shouldn't leave
56:15
but before we get to that conclusion I
56:19
want I said I want us to get some
56:21
understanding of
56:23
the outline of the cradle so the first
56:27
step was cryto says let's leave and most
56:31
people in that situation would be
56:33
thrilled the same way maybe we would
56:35
have been thrilled if we were told that
56:36
we're the wisest you know even if we had
56:39
some doubts about whether we were wiser
56:41
than other people we would say oh that's
56:43
wonderful
56:44
that should be given such a compliment
56:47
by the priestess at Delphi and now most
56:53
of us would say oh I've been so worried
56:56
I thought I'm gonna be dead in two days
56:58
right now I'm free Thank You cry Oh
57:03
cried oh you've been such a good friend
57:05
all my life this is really wonderful and
57:09
we would go we say oh let her wait let
57:12
me just get my toothbrush I don't know
57:19
if the Greeks use toothbrushes they must
57:22
have used something anyway not a major
57:28
point right okay so here's what he says
57:33
- cried oh that should make immediately
57:36
good sense to you cried oh is rushing
57:40
him saying let's go why because he wants
57:46
to get out of there before anybody you
57:49
know who might stop them notices them
57:54
leaving and he wants to avoid this
57:58
impending doom this death that's gonna
58:01
come to Socrates in a couple of days
58:02
time is important he's in a hurry
58:06
Socrates speaks against that rush by
58:14
saying all my life and much of yours
58:19
cried oh we have talked about these
58:21
things about what's the right thing to
58:25
do to be pious or just right
58:32
and we have come to some answers notice
58:36
how that two differs from what he said
58:39
in the apology where if you know where
58:41
the apology is stressing that he knows
58:42
nothing he's talking in the Credo is if
58:47
they had accomplished something now that
58:49
doesn't mean he now thinks he's a god
58:51
but he says unless we can come up with
58:55
something different now we shouldn't
58:58
change our minds just because we're
59:01
afraid of death and he compares he
59:03
compares them to if they did so they
59:05
would be like children who get afraid in
59:07
the dark they would be like children in
59:16
other words it would make his life's
59:20
work into something silly like a child's
59:23
game which is not to be taken seriously
59:25
because when it comes right down to it
59:28
when he's facing death it amounts to
59:32
nothing right so he's he's making an
59:36
argument to credo as to why they should
59:41
remind themselves what they have agreed
59:45
to in the past that's step one and then
59:48
step two is to apply it to this
59:51
situation he's not assuming the answer
59:55
he's saying let's see what what did we
59:58
agree to about this stuff and let's see
60:01
what it tells us to do in this situation
60:03
so to put it in general terms you've got
60:06
a you know just as we were talking
60:08
before with use of ro about examples
60:11
stories and definitions that help you to
60:14
understand those stories here we're
60:17
talking about a situation that calls for
60:20
action a case and what's our theory our
60:24
theory being what we had agreed to in
60:26
the past
60:27
is the truth to the best of our ability
60:30
to understand these things and so what
60:33
he reminds him they had agreed to in the
60:35
past was this very important distinction
60:38
that I have sort of scribbled here with
60:42
a line like the shows are higher and a
60:44
lower
60:45
that life isn't the most important thing
60:48
the most important thing is how you live
60:50
it
60:51
so it's not a matter of staying alive
60:54
having the greatest number of years it's
60:57
a matter of the not the quantity but we
61:00
could say the quality and well and that
61:03
justice is a good life now let me try to
61:08
clarify what that means these are points
61:13
that are made at great length in a
61:17
dialogue called the Republic and in the
61:20
past for many years I use the Republic
61:23
in this course and then this past couple
61:25
of semesters I decided no let me do
61:27
something more more traditional that is
61:30
to say it's typical for introductions to
61:32
philosophy to use the apology and these
61:36
other dialogues but especially the
61:38
apology because the apology is the
61:40
introduction to Socrates and Socrates is
61:42
the guy who sort of models philosophy
61:45
the life devoted to philosophy so it's a
61:47
good introduction to philosophy even
61:51
though other philosophers might disagree
61:52
with Socrates and so on they do so in
61:59
the Republic Socrates compares two
62:07
different ideas about life with respect
62:11
to justice again the more common one the
62:15
one that would be held by people who
62:18
would be only too happy to escape from
62:21
jail and live somewhere else in exile
62:23
that is probably most people in that one
62:31
in that way of thinking about justice
62:33
the worst thing that could happen to a
62:35
person is injustice that is to say if
62:39
somebody does an injustice to you you
62:42
are harmed
62:45
you somebody injures you bodily or kills
62:50
you or kills a loved one or something
62:53
like that or takes your money or
62:55
whatever these are all in varying
62:57
degrees terrible things to happen to a
62:59
person and Socrates would not disagree
63:01
with that but he doesn't think that
63:04
they're the worst things in the in the
63:07
standard model so to speak it's
63:09
suffering injustice having it done to
63:12
you that is worst in Socrates conception
63:17
having justice done to you is bad but
63:20
not worst the worst thing is doing it
63:26
because doing it makes you unjust and
63:30
being unjust means that your your soul
63:33
your mind whatever you want to call it
63:35
has become bad your life has become bad
63:39
you've become bad it's not just
63:42
something bad happen to you you are bad
63:47
right so so that means that the best
63:54
thing in the best thing is in the model
64:01
where suffering injustice is the worst
64:04
thing the best thing often means doing
64:07
injustice and getting away with it so
64:12
that you become the boss or elected to
64:16
office or wealthy or whatever in other
64:19
words you you achieve your goals whether
64:22
it involves injustice or not you can
64:25
diff it does involve injustice you do it
64:27
and you get away with it
64:28
in Socrates model the best thing is
64:32
doing justice the worst thing is
64:35
suffering is doing injustice and
64:39
suffering injustice is in in between
64:41
it's bad it's not that it's good but
64:44
it's not as bad okay so that's what he
64:48
is reminding cryto of and anybody who
64:51
knows the Republic knows that they're
64:53
referring to this so you don't know the
64:55
Republic I assume so I'm telling you a
64:57
little bit just so you
64:58
at least get the idea I'm not saying the
65:00
ideas will be totally clear
65:02
uncomfortable but I'm trying to give you
65:04
some idea of what he's referring to so
65:07
if there's never a good reason to do
65:11
injustice because that's the worst right
65:14
and something that's not as bad as the
65:17
worst has to be the worst can never be a
65:21
reason doing the worst thing could never
65:23
be smart right if there's because it's
65:26
the worst alternative if there's any
65:27
alternative at all it's better than that
65:32
including dying this is what Socrates is
65:34
saying right so if that's true now he's
65:40
talked about the theory this is the
65:43
theory this is what we've agreed to in
65:45
the past these are our ideas that we
65:48
think are true now the question is will
65:51
we like to take theories and apply them
65:54
to facts right so let's apply it to this
65:56
case to see what it tells us now this is
66:02
a case in which injustice has been done
66:04
to Socrates Socrates thinks oh and cryto
66:10
thinks so right but who has done
66:15
injustice to Socrates
66:26
mr. Alford so in this case who are they
66:42
I know the first part is hope what's the
66:44
second part
66:45
tell me I'm sorry what Campbell right
66:50
sorry go ahead
66:53
yeah the people who voted against them
66:55
in fact in in the apology after the
66:58
death sentence comes in he addresses the
67:02
two sets of judges those who voted for
67:06
him and those who voted against him
67:08
separately
67:10
two to those who voted against him first
67:15
of all to those who voted for him he
67:16
says don't worry we don't know the death
67:20
is a bad thing you're all upset your
67:22
friend Socrates is gonna die but we
67:24
don't know that death is a bad thing but
67:26
to the ones who voted against him he
67:28
says something you are worse off than I
67:33
am right why are they worse worse off
67:38
than he he uses the analogy of a swift
67:44
runner catching somebody the the evil
67:48
that's about to catch that has caught
67:51
has already caught you I'm being pursued
67:54
by a very Swift runner what's the Swift
67:56
runner that's pursuing Socrates where
67:57
does that metaphor me no no something
68:03
bad that's gonna happen to him death yes
68:07
how does it make sense miss Francis
68:10
right to speak of death as fast well is
68:18
there anybody who out runs it get it
68:21
even you know maybe you'll God willing
68:24
you'll live to 110 and be healthy the
68:26
whole time actually my people the Jewish
68:29
people use the number 120
68:31
and of course in the Bible there were
68:34
people who the 700 or so but we're not
68:37
sure how they were counting but in any
68:39
case if you live a hundred years or
68:43
seven hundred years the fact is we're
68:46
immortal right we die if you think of
68:49
death as being caught by a runner what
68:52
that means is that that runner catches
68:54
us all and therefore is faster than all
68:56
of us and in that sense its death is
69:00
fast doesn't necessarily mean it's gonna
69:01
happen to you soon but eventually you'll
69:04
be caught okay enough of that
69:05
unpleasantness what what faster runner
69:11
has caught the people who voted against
69:13
him you know it was Campbell what bad
69:16
thing has caught them what was I asking
69:19
you before who is in this story who is
69:23
what he and Socrates agreed their theory
69:29
now we're gonna apply it to this case
69:30
we're looking for who is what unjust
69:34
right who has done something unjust
69:36
so the answer is his his the judges
69:41
voted against him right now what Swift
69:44
runner has caught them well what's the
69:47
evil that they that's caught them in
69:50
justice right not that injustice has
69:53
been done to them but in justice that
69:55
they have done now why call that a swift
70:00
runner why is that even swifter than
70:02
death because death takes a while you
70:04
know 10 years 20 years 100 years
70:06
whatever it is it takes a while to catch
70:08
you how long does it take injustice to
70:13
catch you the answer is its
70:16
instantaneous do you see why the moment
70:23
you make a bad choice it has already
70:28
corrupted your mind to some degree it
70:31
may not have turned you into some
70:33
disgusting awful thing but it but it's
70:35
made you worse not better immediately
70:41
and so there remember I was telling you
70:45
this is in the Republic it's in the
70:46
apology right there when he addresses
70:49
the the jurors okay so now he he says
70:54
okay those jurors those judges they were
70:58
unjust to me but when if I were to
71:03
escape as you suggest cryto I will be
71:08
injuring not those judges but what what
71:14
the laws yes and that's why he has a
71:17
make-believe dialog between himself and
71:20
the laws as if the laws were people
71:23
because he he wants he wants to
71:25
dramatize this idea of injury the laws
71:28
say to him look Socrates you your
71:33
parents wouldn't have been able to get
71:35
married have a baby give it an education
71:39
so that you became smarty pants
71:42
philosopher right without us you know
71:48
it's it's a it's like the African
71:50
expression what does it take to raise a
71:52
baby a village and a village has laws
71:56
and laws are not just you know we're not
71:58
just talking about written down speeding
72:01
written laws like the speed limit and
72:03
that kind of thing but customs the way
72:05
that people live everything including
72:08
the religion and all their beliefs and
72:11
values and so on this is the environment
72:14
in which people are raised and if people
72:17
have great accomplishments they owe them
72:20
at least in part to the village the
72:23
community in which they were raised
72:25
right and now is Socrates saying that
72:30
the laws are perfect you wouldn't think
72:33
so this is the guy who keeps saying we
72:35
have to ask questions so that's the way
72:38
that's the answer to the essay on the
72:43
one hand we have Socrates saying that if
72:46
you told me that if you passed a law
72:48
that said no more philosophy I would
72:49
break that law on the other hand we have
72:51
Socrates saying I would rather die the
72:55
break that breaks the law because
72:57
breaking the law would be committing
72:58
injustice and that wouldn't make my life
73:02
a bad life and I would hurt my soul and
73:09
I'd rather die then do that okay so how
73:14
do you put those two together well
73:16
laws laws need two things to be good
73:21
they need to be just yes they need to be
73:24
good laws but they also need to be
73:27
obeyed you can have wonderful laws that
73:30
people ignore and they're not worth a
73:32
damn
73:33
right you have a speed limit a the speed
73:37
limit here is 30 yeah but everybody's
73:38
driving 50 yeah we don't pay any
73:40
attention speed limit what kind of law
73:41
is that right I just use speed limit as
73:46
an example because it's so obvious so
73:47
clear you know so how do you make laws
73:53
better if you assume that the laws can
73:56
be improved not necessarily every law
73:58
all the time has to be changed but we
74:00
have to yeah how do you make them better
74:06
no no but how do you how do you get
74:08
better punishments whatever it is about
74:10
the law and and we change our minds
74:12
about punishments don't we right now the
74:14
country well at least in until this the
74:17
presidential election there was a big
74:18
movement that apparently was supported
74:20
by both Republicans and Democrats that
74:22
we were putting too many people in jail
74:23
for too long for for very minor offenses
74:26
and we were doing more harm than good
74:28
to them and to us the rest of us right
74:31
so so you know we change your minds
74:35
about things like that we sweet we learn
74:36
from experience but what we have to do
74:39
in order to improve the laws is the same
74:41
thing we have to do to improve our
74:43
understanding of anything we have to
74:45
think and we have to talk to each other
74:50
isn't that what Socrates did you ask
74:54
people what they think and question it
74:57
okay that's why he won't give that up
75:00
it's not just and you don't have good
75:03
laws if you have a law against
75:07
questioning the law
75:08
cause you have to question laws and obey
75:14
them isn't that also what dr. King said
75:19
isn't that what nonviolent resistance
75:22
was all about
75:24
we respect law even though we don't by
75:28
the way dr. King and letter from
75:30
Birmingham jail which was written to
75:33
white ministers who said they were
75:38
supporters of what dr. King and others
75:40
if it wasn't just dr. King there are
75:42
lots of people in different groups and
75:44
they didn't all get along and everything
75:45
but a lot of people were working for
75:47
these changes these white ministers
75:52
claimed to support these changes but
75:56
they also said that dr. King is a common
76:00
criticism made at the time you're going
76:02
too fast
76:03
so dr. King's letter from Birmingham
76:05
jail is about how you know when you're
76:11
standing when you're standing on
76:12
somebody else's foot like on the subway
76:14
of it but by accident somebody steps on
76:16
somebody's foot who's in a hurry for the
76:18
situation to change the guy whose foot
76:22
is on the bottom right right so you know
76:24
we waited a long time it's hurting you
76:27
know so dr. King's expresses it much
76:30
more nicely than that but that's the
76:32
sort of point he makes but in the course
76:37
of it he says we believe in law and
76:41
obedience to law except where law is
76:44
unjust and he said he defines an unjust
76:47
law and it's very similar to the kind of
76:50
thing that's that Plato and Socrates are
76:53
saying here an unjust law he says is
76:55
anything that diminishes human beings
77:01
makes them worse as human beings and
77:05
these segregation laws against use of
77:11
public facilities and so on were
77:16
obviously degrading and harmful to
77:19
people
77:20
okay so
77:30
he won't break the laws because the he
77:36
got the way we might express it now is
77:38
why saying he got due process the laws
77:43
were not at fault for what happened to
77:45
him what was at fault was the the judges
77:48
the jurors if it happened in this
77:52
country Socrates had a good attorney
77:56
there'd be an appeal that wasn't part of
77:59
their system so the laws were not
78:02
defective and by breaking the laws he
78:06
would be injuring them that's his
78:11
argument that's what the essays about
78:13
I've actually finished ten minutes
78:17
before so let me let me go back a little
78:23
bit anybody have any questions you want
78:24
to ask now about the essay as soon as
78:31
you get home you're gonna have questions
78:32
but you won't have me anymore so see if
78:36
you can think of one now there's a
78:40
question this stuff is all in the
78:43
syllabus but I'm happy to answer it now
78:45
it's two pages but it's two pages
78:48
single-spaced which is the equivalent of
78:52
four pages double-spaced obviously by
78:55
simple arithmetic two pages
78:57
single-spaced ya know first of all I
79:02
don't want you to quote Plato or me or
79:08
anybody else I am glad you reminded me
79:13
of this kind of stuff some of you may be
79:19
tempted to use sources from the internet
79:23
or whatever and I can tell you it's a
79:25
big mistake first of all it's not
79:27
allowed I don't allow it
79:28
I don't even allow you to quote Plato as
79:29
I just said I do not want you to quote
79:31
Plato if you think that Plato has said
79:34
something that is right on target
79:37
exactly what you want to say at that
79:39
point in your essay then translate what
79:42
he says into your own words that
79:43
that doesn't mean that all your words
79:45
have to be different from his words I
79:46
mean some of the words might be the same
79:47
like justice and law an a and person or
79:51
whatever right it's the same language
79:53
but put it in your own words express it
79:55
in your own way and if you want to show
79:59
that it's that this is supported you can
80:01
just put it in parenthesis you can give
80:04
the Stephanus number you know about the
80:05
Stephanus numbers did I tell you about
80:09
the Stephanus numbers in the margins of
80:11
most editions of Plato's works so you
80:16
could show where this statement is made
80:18
but you don't give me the statement you
80:21
just give me the reference in case I
80:22
want to look and check but you put it in
80:25
your own words don't use anything from
80:28
the internet and I'm telling because
80:30
I'll give you an F and then you'll have
80:33
to come in and cry in my office if you
80:34
want me to let you do it over again you
80:37
won't have to cry but you at least have
80:38
to admit it and I'm telling you I I
80:40
always can tell because you know
80:44
professional authors don't write the way
80:46
you write it's not that you're terrible
80:48
authors or terrible writers but you just
80:51
don't write like that okay so don't do
80:54
it for your sake an essay that is that
81:00
is very confused but it's trying to
81:02
understand these things is worth a lot
81:04
more than right okay so no I don't care
81:10
about it being Staunton a standard style
81:12
so what why is everybody in a hurry you
81:14
think you're gonna get free time or
81:16
something here I'm not gonna let you go
81:18
before twenty two even I mean you think
81:21
you've been bored up till now wait
81:23
waiting to hear this next five minutes
81:27
of course anybody can leave any time you
81:29
want to that's your business
81:33
okay well any other questions about the
81:36
about the essay let me because if you
81:39
don't have any more questions about the
81:40
essay for now I'm gonna go back to
81:42
something I was talking about before in
81:49
the summary that I gave of the apology
81:52
today I didn't say much about the
81:55
charges
81:56
but in the logs that I read there there
82:01
was a lot of misunderstanding or very or
82:06
limited understanding and one comes to
82:09
mind that I want to clarify for you
82:15
number of people said to me something
82:17
like this Socrates said he couldn't be
82:21
the only one who's corrupting all the
82:24
youth because you know how could he get
82:27
around how many people could he corrupt
82:29
and so on so there must be other people
82:30
corrupting to use there is a point at
82:34
which Socrates says he can't be the only
82:36
one but that's not his defense if you
82:40
defend again take speeding as an example
82:42
if you say well other people's speed too
82:44
that's not gonna get you off is it it
82:47
just means they should get get a ticket
82:49
and pay a fine to what Socrates presents
82:54
here is an argument which I'm gonna
82:58
write a word on the board is is an
83:07
imputation an argument it makes an
83:14
imputation is an argument that says that
83:18
the the person making it's an art it's a
83:24
refutation of somebody else's argument
83:26
based on the idea that what the other
83:27
person is doing shows that he doesn't
83:32
care about what he's saying at all but
83:34
he has another motive that's what
83:36
Socrates shows about mellitus Meletus
83:42
says that socrates is corrupting the
83:44
youth Socrates says well who improves
83:47
the youth mellitus takes him a while
83:50
like Euthyphro to understand how to
83:52
answer that question but eventually he
83:55
says everybody but you all the good
83:58
citizens of Athens improve the youth you
84:01
gerdes only want to corrupt them now
84:03
Socrates says that that answer shows
84:07
that Meletus has given no thought
84:09
whatsoever
84:10
to the idea to the problem of improving
84:13
the use and since he's given no thought
84:16
to it making charges about it has to
84:20
have some other motive the motive can't
84:23
be his educational concerns cuz he
84:25
doesn't have any he hasn't paid any
84:28
attention to education whatsoever now
84:30
how does that show how does answering
84:33
that oil athenians improve the youth
84:34
showed that he hasn't thought about it
84:37
well he makes the analogy with horse
84:41
training right did we talk about this
84:43
before
84:43
no okay suddenly I had a deja vu feeling
84:48
but it was for my first class not this
84:49
one whoo all right forget about horses
84:56
let's talk about dogs my son and
84:59
daughter-in-law dogs sit they get
85:05
strangers dogs and I know they pay up 25
85:07
bucks for the weekend or something to
85:08
take care of dogs they enjoy doing it so
85:11
yesterday when I visited my son my
85:16
daughter law wasn't there
85:17
she's visiting her friends he had a
85:19
poodle named Bobo he he met me at the
85:25
trains at the subway station and I took
85:28
whoa bo on the leash because I was
85:30
brought some stuff for him he carried
85:32
the stuff and Bobo didn't know anything
85:35
about walking with somebody on a leash
85:38
Bobo was an adorable poodle about 30
85:40
pounds and supposedly a standard poodle
85:42
was very small for a standard poodle and
85:44
she was very sweet and nice and
85:46
everything she wanted to lick me all the
85:48
time but but she didn't know how to walk
85:51
well she's always going here going there
85:53
I say come on Bobo you don't know
85:55
anything about walking you know yeah I
85:57
didn't get mad at her but I had to keep
85:59
her under control so
86:04
when when people have problems training
86:07
dogs what do they do yeah you get a dog
86:13
trainer cuz draw dog trainers know how
86:15
to train them and they know how to do it
86:17
in a nice way you don't have to be cruel
86:19
but you do have to be firm sometimes and
86:23
you use positive reinforcement right you
86:25
give them a little cookie or something
86:27
when they do things right
86:29
it works with humans too you know so by
86:36
saying that everybody improves the use
86:39
except Socrates what user fro what
86:43
mellitus is showing he doesn't recognize
86:47
is that in order to make something
86:50
better you have to know what's better
86:53
and how to get it in other words it's
86:56
the same point you always want to make
86:59
about Socrates Socrates emphasizes
87:01
knowledge in this seeking of knowledge
87:04
when he talks about his life with the
87:06
God told him to do seek knowledge that's
87:09
Socrates so Meletus has shown
87:13
that's not his idea these law abiding
87:17
Athenian citizens might might be good
87:20
people in many ways but it hardly makes
87:23
sense to say those who don't think about
87:25
these things at all are better influence
87:27
than those who do know about it so
87:31
that's the odd impute out in other words
87:33
by showing that Meletus hasn't thought
87:37
about improving the youth which is a
87:41
phrase that means we expressed by using
87:44
the word education he hasn't thought
87:49
about it at all it shows that his
87:51
charges are without any basis that's how
87:54
those that particular charge gets
87:56
refuted so what I want you to do look
87:59
when I tell you to write logs I tell you
88:00
I don't expect you to understand this
88:03
stuff but of course you'll never
88:04
understand it if you're not trying at
88:07
least a little bit initially to find the
88:09
argument how do the ideas reach a
88:13
conclusion and then where does that
88:15
argument fit in the hole
88:17
dialogue that's what I want you to be
88:18
looking for all right so now one last
88:21
thing no class Wednesday we meet again
88:24
on Monday and your draft is due on the
88:27
Wednesday after that okay