Plato asserts that the philosopher is not only the sole possesor of knowledge, he is also the most virtuous of men.
Plato also offers a more intuitive explanation for why the philosopher is virtuous. Since all of him strives toward truth, his other desires are weakened. He has no real drive toward money, honor, pleasure, and so on.
reasonvemotion wrote:Plato asserts that the philosopher is not only the sole possesor of knowledge, he is also the most virtuous of men.
Plato also offers a more intuitive explanation for why the philosopher is virtuous. Since all of him strives toward truth, his other desires are weakened. He has no real drive toward money, honor, pleasure, and so on.
Despite being a poor philosopher, sometime he gets something right for all the wrong reasons
all the best, rantal
Yes, we do. Why not serve it up on a plate? That would be better than this "What have I got in my pocket?" game you seem to be playing, dude.
What is your idea of a philosopher, and how does it conflict with being recognised as a philosopher?
This question is really about what it is to be a philosipher; if you thin that is just a matter of conceptual analysis and potificating on the same then the man in my original post is indeed one. I am a suprised and a little disapointed that no one here, with the exception perhaps of Bill, seems, like me, to consider that a philosipher must be more than that
Are you saying that one has to live a simple existence, be in it but apart from the "world" to avoid the contamination success/recognition may bring and impair one's ability to be a seeker of truth.