Background
for Teachers
1. Socrates (469-399 BC), the first of the great Greek philosophers,
believed that an unexamined life, a life without goals or
purpose, was not worth living. He walked the streets of
Athens questioning the citizens about their ideas concerning life,
its purpose, and what these citizens thought was important for living
a good life. Young people often gathered around Socrates and were
amused when he questioned prominent Athenians who found it difficult
to respond to Socrates’ questions.
A person who lives without goals or purpose is like a boat drifting
with the current without anyone steering it. To live without goals
or purpose is to live without thinking or planning ahead. Indeed
Aristotle ((384-322-BC) expressed a similar thought in his belief
that an unplanned life is not worth examining, for an unplanned
life is one where we do not know what we are trying to achieve.
This
leads to a discussion of ends and means.
Having a goal, a purpose, is to have an end,
a target that we want to achieve. How we are to go about achieving
that end is the means. Here are some examples
of good ends to have:
A. You seek to acquire a new car; the means you will employ is
to work hard and save your money. To work for a new car is a good
end but you cannot achieve it by stealing that car—that
would be unacceptable. The principle here is:
the end (good) does not justify using a bad means,
that is, you cannot steal or cheat to achieve your good end.
B. A higher end or goal would be your desire to graduate with
good grades so that you can go to college. Your means can only
be hard work and commitment to your studies. Cheating on exams
or assignments would not be acceptable means for achieving your
end, for this would be demonstrating a lack of respect for your
own abilities which will remain unchallenged, as well as a lack
of respect for your teacher
and for your parents’ expectations of you.
Another
key notion: The life goals or ends that are most worthy
and uplifting are those that are the most difficult but lead to
the greater achievement when acquired. For example, seeking
to become a lawyer or a good teacher is more difficult and a higher
goal than a more easily attained goal of acquiring a new car.
2.
Plato (427-384 BC) defined the human soul as having three levels
or parts:
Rational, Spirited and Appetite. These levels
correspond to the three engines of the body: mind (reason),
heart (emotion), and stomach (desire). Plato uses the
image of a charioteer who has the task of having to control his
two horses: the charioteer is the mind or reason which must control
the horses (emotion and desire) who are seeking to go in different
directions. When we follow the direction our reason tells us is
the correct course to follow, we will not be led astray by our
emotions or desires. Reason will lead us to act responsibly, to
do what we know is right, rather than be led by feelings that
can have us go against what we know is right.
3. Aristotle (384-322 BC), a student of Plato who became a teacher
in Plato’s Academy, believed that to live a good moral life,
a life of “virtue” as he called it, one had to act
according to the “Golden Mean”. By
this he meant that we should follow the middle road between excess
and defect, that is, between going too far (excess) in our actions
or by not doing enough (defect). Here are examples:
| Excess
(vice)
Foolhardy
Gluttony
Exaggeration
Wasteful
Boastful
|
Golden
Mean (virtue)
Courage
Moderation
Honesty
Generosity
Modesty |
Defect
(vice)
Cowardice
Starvation
Untruthful
Stingy
Very shy
|
To
have knowledge of what is right will lead us to live a life of
virtue by observing the Golden Mean; to do otherwise is to live
a life that demonstrates ignorance of what responsible and knowledgeable
persons ought to do.
4.
Thrasymachus, a contemporary of Socrates is recognized for his
statement that “might makes right”,
a position known as Relativism. It means that
there are no standards for determining right and wrong, that each
individual can decide what is okay for him to act. For example,
politicians can do whatever they wish in order to keep their office;
a powerful developer can buy favors that will allow him to obtain
zoning changes he wants; a car salesman can hide the defects of
a vehicle in order to make a sale to someone less knowledgeable
of vehicles. If Relativism was a ruling moral standard
in society, chaos would exist in a community where order would
be impossible when everyone was following what he or she judged
was right for them without regard for any moral standards.
|
