- Reconstruct and analyze Socrates’s argument against the charge that he corrupted the youth of Athens.
- Reconstruct and analyze Socrates’s argument that we should not fear death.
- Reconstruct and analyze the arguments for and against escape in the Crito.
- Write a Socratic dialogue on a term relevant to the course. (Remember what a Socratic dialogue is! It’s not just a conversation! It’s a progressive clarification of the meaning of a term or a concept, the goal of which is to generate a good intensional definition!) Here are some possibilities; remember you only need one, and it need not be one of these – these are just examples! Virtue, good, right, guilt, innocence, lie, steal, cheat, defraud, responsibility, help, altruism (there are lots of other possibilities).
- Is Socrates’s approach to ethics that of a mystic, a rationalist, or an empiricist? Defend your answer using appropriate textual evidence. Be sure to discuss why the question matters. (Hint: what he says in the Crito shows that he is not an empiricist about ethics, but you’ll have to look for evidence for his views in all four of the dialogues, I think.)
- Many in ancient Athens held that “the beautiful is the true, and the true is the beautiful.” Explain and discuss this claim. Make sure that you explain Socrates’s position on this. Why would anyone believe that the two are connected? How might they be connected? Is it the case that only the truth is persuasive, and that what is persuasive is true? Why does this question matter?
- Socrates held that knowledge is tied to good intensional definitions and rejected extensional definitions as useless, so that, for example, if we have a good intensional definition of a term like “courage” then we can say that we know what courage is. Socrates also believed that we need this kind of knowledge if we want certainty about our moral decisions. Is he correct?
s regarding environmental issues as a threat but this do by a referent object in a specific social, political, linguistic structure. (Stritzel, 2007) The vague conceptualisation of the specific referent object as mentioned by the Copenhagen School – need the post-structural position created by the second generation of securitisation scholars where they stress the importance of the role the audience play along with setting the socio-political environment. (Salter, 2008) The purpose of this essay was to assess critically the strengths and weaknesses of the securitisation theory. After discussing the concept of the securitisation theory as conceptualised by the Copenhagen School, the essay went on to discuss how the theory was developed by second generation of securitization scholars by focusing on “what conditions the social content and meaning of security produced threats.” (Balzacq, 2010) The essay then went on to discuss the stance the Aberystwyth School had on the voice of the audience and finally, the idea of environmental securitisation was discussed. It can be argued that security may not be a negative practice, which as discussed above involves the use of hard power but instead the emancipation from the “relative objectivism” affecting both traditional stance on security and the Copenhagen School work. Therefore, it can be said that the concept of security can be revised to provide a unified position on security. In regard to the securitisation of environmental degradation, environmental issues can be tackled rather than those issues being exploited politically. This essay has provided a range of strength and weaknesses to the Securitisation theory.>GET ANSWER