Marist College Sigma Sigma Sigma (Spring Recruitment 2014.)
Intro to Philosophy: Plato, the Symposium (part 2)
In this lecture/discussion session from my Fall 2013 Introduction to Philosophy class at Marist College, we continue our study of Plato's Symposium, turning our ...
I have a background in classics, and an interesting angle of approach to
the study of the ancients is the compare/contrast thing. They are a lot
like us in many ways, but radically different (even "weird") in others.
It's good to understand the important differences between their worldview
and ours, while pointing out the similarities, and this comes across very
clearly in this lecture. They were like us, yet they weren't.
The similarities make them comprehensible, but the differences are what
make them interesting and "new" even after all these years.
:-)
Hey I'm 5'8 120lbs, I play left back for my team and I'm trying to gain
mass and get faster, how many days a week do you think I should be in the
gym? Thanks
Hey man I understand what you're saying about their being no reason to get
bigger but to join a gym you have to be 18 or older and I don't have anyone
to go with me since my mom is always busy.... Help?
Im pretty sure i heard you say you try and hit legs twice a week, maybe im
tweakin tho lol but assuming you did say that how do you go about it. Do
you treat it as just two normal leg days or do you split them up by muscle
groups? Thanks in advance if you get a chance to reply to this
I do a heavy leg day on Monday which is usually the day after my game. This is lower reps, higher weight and focused around squats, deadlifts, leg press. Then I do a lighter weight, higher rep day (I call it my Hypertrophy day) on Thursdays. This is focused around isolation exercises like Lunges, machine hamstring curls, leg extensions, calves etc.
In this lecture from my Spring 2013 Introduction to Philosophy class at Marist College, we begin to study Plato's classic dialogue, the Meno. I discuss the main ...
We are very fortunate to have a teacher who is kalos kai agathos who
engages his students in dialectic and thought even on a chalkboard. Today,
pedagogy seems to have lost out to death by powerpoint.
+Sheryl Byrd Well, to be fair, there's a lot of push by administrators in some places to have their profs use powerpoint -- it's easy to load into the course management system, to track, etc.
I suppose the overt topic is virtue, but really is it not about how we
learn and define concepts? Or knowledge? There is more talk about how we
can know virtue then virtue itself. It seems to me to be more about the
nature of philosophical inquiry and how we acquire knowledge after Meno and
Soc decide that virtue is a kind of knowledge. At the end Soc explains how
we could know virtue even though he is not satisfied with his god
explanation, and we are left wanting a definition of virtue.
Thanks for all your videos! Inspiring me to make some myself about the things I learn, hopefully to recall the information better and also maybe pass something on.
+Tadpole McSqueeze Yes, there are - as I say in the video lectures - multiple questions/issues examined in this dialogue. You can say the same for most dialogues. . .
I go to Florida State University and I enjoy Dr. Sadler's lectures more
than the lectures of any of my professors. You sir can really teach some
philosophy.
I have a quick question. I'm writing a paper for my Ancient Philosophy
class on the virtue is knowledge problem. I have to give the premises that
lead to that conclusion, as I have and then I have to criticize the
argument by means of finding something wrong with one of the premises and
not criticize the conclusion as that will hinder my grade, which I have yet
to do. From what I read out of the Meno, I see Socrates believes knowledge
to have to be inherently good in order that his conclusion work. I came to
this conclusion because he argues that when someone does something and uses
their knowledge in conjunction, good things can conclude. Is it worth
arguing this premise or am I overlooking something else that makes that
premise a rather good one and should be looking for a flaw in another?
I would be arguing that knowledge isn't always good and if virtue is
excellence then we would have a problem with this premise.
This at least doesn't seem to necessarily be hard. I think you're perhaps making it more so for yourself.Like you pointed out, there's more than one sort of knowledge. Why not some knowledge that can lead astray, and some that doesn't? Nothing in the texts seems to rule that out.I think you're also forgetting that there isn't one common "understanding of what virtue meant to the Greeks" -- that's precisely why it was a matter of discussion, debate, and investigation.Good luck with the paper!
+Gregory B. Sadler Socrates is making this especially hard on me. Seeing that there are different types of knowledge, episteme, nous, etc., and him thinking knowledge is certainly good, but people could use that knowledge and ultimately do something bad, couldn't we say virtue couldn't be knowledge if virtue truly is excellence because there is no budging from the understanding of what virtue meant to the Greeks, and for knowledge to lead to something good or bad would say that virtue couldn't be total excellence if it was, in fact, knowledge?
+Bradley Leathers Socrates certainly does consider knowledge a good. He also seems to think virtue is a kind of knowledge -- not the only kind of knowledge, though. So, pointing out that knowledge (which is a good) can sometimes be wrongly used, or lead to things that aren't good needn't necessary have anything to say about the kind of knowledge virtue would presumably be.