Paper Topics | Fall 2020 | Paper 4
Due Thursday, December 10, 5:00 p.m., in your conference leader’s Eliot Hall mailbox.
Target length: 1,800-2.000 words
1. The Euthyphro describes a conversation that presumably takes place immediately prior to the trial of Socrates and that seems to provide a pretty typical example of how Socrates conducted himself as a philosopher. In what ways does the Euthyphro provide evidence either to support or to undermine the case against Socrates as presented in the trial itself? Based primarily on your reading of the Euthyphro, was Socrates justly condemned?
2. Socrates promises the jury, in the Apology (29d-30b) that he will not cease to practice philosophy, whatever they do to him: his ultimate allegiance is not to the state, but to “the god”. Yet, in the Crito (50c-53b) Socrates presents an extended argument that a citizen of Athens must comply with the (tragically misguided) dictates of state, rather than flee elsewhere and continue to pursue philosophy. Prima facie, it seems Socrates cannot have it both ways: when the two are in conflict, either he must serve the god, as in the Apology, or the state, as in the Crito. Explore this paradox, carefully setting out each component by examining the relevant texts. Then search for a unifying philosophical explanation of these two aspects of Socrates’ character and self-described mission. (You may also find the tension impossible to resolve. If so, what is the significance of Socrates’ shift in stance between the two dialogues?)
3. Alternatively, set out another Socratic paradox, of your own discovery, within the Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, in like manner. Articulate two “moments” in these dialogues that seem to harbor a tension in Socrates’ beliefs, behavior, or values, then use that tension to reach a deeper understanding of Socrates in your essay.
4. The speeches made in Plato’s Symposium abound in binary and hierarchical schemas (Common vs Heavenly Love, heterosexual vs homosexual love, physical vs spiritual, comedy vs tragedy, male vs female, etc.). Analyze the presentation of binaries in one of the speeches preceding Diotima’s speech then consider how Diotima’s speech might reinforce, resolve, subvert, or complicate the binary schemas presented in the preceding speech.
5. Compare and contrast Plato’s theory of the tripartite soul (as laid out in Republic 4) with Thucydides’ view of human nature, focusing on two (only two) speeches of the following: Pericles, Cleon, Alcibiades, or Nicias. How are the ideas of justice and self-interest similar and different?
6. Aristotle opens his Metaphysics by observing that:
All people by nature desire to know. An indication of this is the delight we take in our senses; for even apart from their usefulness they are loved for themselves; and above all others the sense of sight. For not only with a view to action, but even when we are not going to do anything, we prefer sight to almost everything else. The reason is that this, most of all the senses, makes us know and brings to light many differences between things.
Basing your answer solely on Book V of the Republic, how might Plato respond to his most famous pupil?
In your essay, trace Plato’s argument(s) that knowledge and belief are distinct. Include in your discussion an analysis of the Socrates’ claim (478e-479b) that without appeal to the forms, every object can equally be said to both have and lack every quality. In light of those arguments, consider Socrates’ seemingly audacious claim that “until philosophers rule as kings… cities will have no rest from evils” (473c8-473d3).