DOCSLIB.ORG

SOCRATES in the CLASSROOM Rationales and Effects of Philosophizing with Children Ann S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SOCRATES in the CLASSROOM Rationales and Effects of Philosophizing with Children Ann S SOCRATES IN THE CLASSROOM Rationales and Effects of Philosophizing with Children Ann S. Pihlgren Socrates in the Classroom Rationales and Effects of Philosophizing with Children Ann S. Pihlgren Stockholm University ©Ann S. Pihlgren, Stockholm 2008 Cover: Björn S. Eriksson ISSN 1104-1625-146 ISBN (978-91-7155-598-4) Printed in Sweden by Elanders Sverige AB Distributor: Stockholm University, Department of Education To Kjell with love and gratitude. Contents Contents ........................................................................................................ vii Preface ............................................................................................................ 1 1 Introduction ............................................................................................ 3 1.1 Philosophizing and teaching ethics ..................................................................... 4 1.2 Some guidance for the reader ............................................................................ 5 1.3 Considerations ................................................................................................... 8 2 Research Goals and Design .................................................................. 9 2.1 Classroom interaction ......................................................................................... 9 2.2 Studying Socratic interaction ............................................................................ 10 2.3 Research questions .......................................................................................... 10 2.4 Research design and data collection ................................................................ 11 2.4.1 The literature review .............................................................................. 11 2.4.2 The seminar study ................................................................................. 12 2.5 Ethical considerations....................................................................................... 18 2.6 Validity and reliability ........................................................................................ 19 SECTION I Literature on Socratic Interlocution Review and Analysis .......... 23 3 Catching the Spirit of Socratic Dialogue .............................................. 25 4 Dialogues as Maieutike ........................................................................ 27 4.1 The allegory of Socrates ................................................................................... 27 4.1.1 Socrates and the voice of Plato ............................................................. 28 4.2 Dialogues as elenchus, maieutike and aporia .................................................. 30 4.2.1 Socratic ignorance and knowledge ........................................................ 30 4.2.2 Events in Socrates’ interlocutions .......................................................... 31 4.2.3 Teaching by elenchus ............................................................................ 31 4.2.4 Dialogic “rules” of conduct ..................................................................... 32 4.2.5 The role of Socrates’ questioner ............................................................ 33 4.2.6 Socrates: the gadfly, the midwife and the stingray ................................. 34 4.3 Socratic dialogue in Platonic pedagogy ............................................................ 35 4.4 Perplexity and virtues in Aristotelian pedagogy ................................................ 35 4.4.1 Aristotle’s habits, virtues and practical wisdom ...................................... 36 5 Progressive Education and Dialogue as Education in Democracy ..... 38 5.1 Progressive education ...................................................................................... 38 5.2 Freinet and dialogue in community meetings ................................................... 39 5.3 John Dewey and dialogues as recitations ......................................................... 40 5.3.1 Deliberative democracy ......................................................................... 41 6 Dialogue as Folkbildning-Swedish Popular Education ........................ 42 6.1 Bildning ............................................................................................................ 42 6.2 Swedish popular education .............................................................................. 44 6.2.1 The ideas of Hans Larsson, Ellen Key, and Oscar Olsson ..................... 45 6.3 The methods of dialogue as study circle ........................................................... 46 6.3.1 The circle leader .................................................................................... 47 6.3.2 The goals and functions of the circle ...................................................... 47 6.4 The methods of dialogues as discussions ........................................................ 48 6.4.1 “Rules” and steps of the discussion ....................................................... 49 7 Dialogue as Das Sokratische Gespräch .............................................. 50 7.1 Leonard Nelson and das Sokratische Gespräch ............................................... 50 7.2 The methods of das Sokratische Gespräch ...................................................... 51 7.2.1 The role of the teacher ........................................................................... 51 7.2.2 Demands on the student ........................................................................ 51 7.2.3 The steps of das Sokratische Gespräch ................................................ 52 8 Dialogues as Great Conversation ........................................................ 53 8.1 Mortimer J. Adler and Robert M. Hutchins ........................................................ 53 8.2 Dialogues as shared inquiry ............................................................................. 56 8.2.1 The methodology of shared inquiry ........................................................ 57 8.2.2 “Rules” in shared inquiry ........................................................................ 58 8.2.3 The steps of shared inquiry .................................................................... 58 8.3 Dialogues as Paideia seminars ........................................................................ 59 8.3.1 The goals and methodology of the Paideia seminar .............................. 60 8.3.2 The steps of the Paideia seminar........................................................... 61 8.3.3 “Rules” of the Paideia seminar ............................................................... 62 8.3.4 The role of the facilitator in the Paideia seminar .................................... 62 8.3.5 Assessing the outcomes of the Paideia seminar .................................... 63 9 Dialogue as Sokratiska samtal ............................................................ 64 9.1 Lars Lindström and Sokratiska samtal .............................................................. 64 9.1.1 The role of the facilitator in Sokratiska samtal ........................................ 64 9.2 Identificatory reading ........................................................................................ 65 9.3 The context of Sokratiska samtal ...................................................................... 66 9.3.1 “Rules” and dialogical virtues ................................................................. 67 10 Dialogue with Children ......................................................................... 69 10.1 Should children be exposed to Socratic dialogue? ...................................... 69 10.1.1 Are children too immature to philosophize? ........................................... 69 10.1.2 Is the Socratic method dangerous to society? ....................................... 71 10.2 Gareth B Matthews philosophizing with children ......................................... 71 10.3 P4C and PWC ............................................................................................. 72 10.3.1 The methods of P4C and PWC .............................................................. 73 10.3.2 The steps of P4C and PWC ................................................................... 73 10.4 Philosophizing with children in the earlier presented traditions .................... 74 11 Results of the Literature Review .......................................................... 75 11.1 The major goals of the presented traditions ................................................ 75 11.1.1 Sorting out the “Socratic” traditions ........................................................ 76 11.2 Abilities trained in the Socratic seminar ....................................................... 78 11.2.1 Intellectual character .............................................................................. 79 11.2.2 Moral character ...................................................................................... 79 11.3 The context of the seminar .......................................................................... 80 11.3.1 The methodology of the seminar............................................................ 80 11.3.2 The role of the facilitator ........................................................................ 82 11.4 Critical events and possible breakdowns .................................................... 83 SECTION II The Seminar Study ..................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Socratic Dialogue: Teaching Patients to Become Their Own Cognitive Therapist
    National Crime Victims Center > Socratic Method > Socratic Dialogue Print This Page Socratic Dialogue: Teaching Patients to Become Their Own Cognitive Therapist “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Socrates (469 BC – 399 BC) Socratic dialogue is a foundational skill used by CPT therapists to help patients examine their lives, challenge maladaptive thoughts, address stuckpoints, and develop critical thinking skills. Socratic dialogue is derived from the work of the Greek philosopher, Socrates, who developed what is now called the Socratic method of teaching. In traditional education, the teacher is presumed to know more than the student, and the role of the teacher is to transmit the teacher’s knowledge to the student. In contrast, Socrates believed that the role of the teacher should not be to tell students what the “truth” is but to help them discover the truth themselves through a collaborative process of asking questions. By asking a series of questions designed to get the student to identify logical contradictions in their positions and/or evidence that does not support their thoughts, the Socratic method is designed to help the student discover the “truth” for themselves as opposed to being told what the “truth” is by the teacher. Socrates also thought this teaching method was superior because it teaches students the skill of critical thinking, a skill they can use throughout their lives. Another advantage of this method is that students are more likely to value knowledge if they discover it themselves than if someone tells them about it. In CPT, the purpose of Socratic questioning by the therapist is to prompt the patient to examine the accuracy of maladaptive thoughts that are causing psychological distress.
    [Show full text]
  • The Poverty of Socratic Questioning: Asking and Answering in the Meno
    University of Cincinnati University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications Faculty Articles and Other Publications College of Law Faculty Scholarship 1994 The oP verty of Socratic Questioning: Asking and Answering In The eM no Thomas D. Eisele University of Cincinnati College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs Part of the Legal Education Commons Recommended Citation Eisele, Thomas D., "The oP verty of Socratic Questioning: Asking and Answering In The eM no" (1994). Faculty Articles and Other Publications. Paper 36. http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs/36 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law Faculty Scholarship at University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Articles and Other Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE POVERTY OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONING: ASKING AND ANSWERING IN THE MEND Thomas D. Eisele* I understand [philosophy 1 as a willingness to think not about some­ thing other than what ordinary human beings think about, but rather to learn to think undistractedly about things that ordinary human beings cannot help thinking about, or anyway cannot help having occur to them, sometimes in fantasy, sometimes asa flash across a landscape; such things, for example, as whether we can know the world as it is in itself, or whether others really know the nature of one's own experiences, or whether good and bad are relative, or whether we might not now be dreaming that we are awake, or whether modern tyrannies and weapons and spaces and speeds and art are continuous with the past of the human race or discontinuous, and hence whether the learning of the human race is not irrelevant to the problems it has brought before itself.
    [Show full text]
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues
    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • In Dialogue with the Greeks 1St Edition Kindle
    IN DIALOGUE WITH THE GREEKS 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Rush Rhees | 9781351964586 | | | | | In Dialogue with the Greeks 1st edition PDF Book Become an author Sign up as a reader Sign in. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Worlds Apart. This article needs additional citations for verification. Consequentialism Deontology Virtue. Ancient Philosophy. Notify us with 7 days of receiving, and we will offer a full refund without reservation! Kenklies, Karsten Minor wear and tears to head and foot of spine and some slight wear to spine edges. More information about this seller Contact this seller 8. Nabu Press, All Plato's writing, except for The Apology and the Letters, is in dialogue form. Social gadfly Socratic dialogue Socratic intellectualism Socratic irony Socratic method Socratic paradox Socratic questioning. Subjects; Plato. More information about this seller Contact this seller 1. I [69], , [1] o Vol. Plato wrote approximately 30 dialogues, in most of which Socrates is the main character. The translations of Meno, Laches and Euthydemus are included here for the first time. First Edition Thus. Wright, M. First Edition in this Format. Recco, Gregory and Eric Sanday eds. Socratic dialogue remained a popular format for expressing arguments and drawing literary portraits of those who espouse them. In some dialogues Plato's main character is not Socrates but someone from outside of Athens. Plato's Laws : Force and Truth in Politics. It is also said to be the longest day of the year, allowing for the densely packed twelve chapters. Details: Collation: Complete with all pages; 2 volumes o Vol. Cooper in Plato, Complete Works.
    [Show full text]
  • Agorapicbk-17.Pdf
    Excavations of the Athenian Agora Picture Book No. 17 Prepared by Mabel L. Lang Dedicated to Eugene Vanderpool o American School of Classical Studies at Athens ISBN 87661-617-1 Produced by the Meriden Gravure Company Meriden, Connecticut COVER: Bone figure of Socrates TITLE PAGE: Hemlock SOCRATES IN THE AGORA AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 1978 ‘Everything combines to make our knowledge of Socrates himself a subject of Socratic irony. The only thing we know definitely about him is that we know nothing.’ -L. Brunschvicg As FAR AS we know Socrates himselfwrote nothing, yet not only were his life and words given dramatic attention in his own time in the Clouds of Ar- istophanes, but they have also become the subject of many others’ writing in the centuries since his death. Fourth-century B.C. writers who had first-hand knowledge of him composed either dialogues in which he was the dominant figure (Plato and Aeschines) or memories of his teaching and activities (Xe- nophon). Later authors down even to the present day have written numerous biographies based on these early sources and considering this most protean of philosophers from every possible point of view except perhaps the topograph- ical one which is attempted here. Instead of putting Socrates in the context of 5th-century B.C. philosophy, politics, ethics or rhetoric, we shall look to find him in the material world and physical surroundings of his favorite stamping- grounds, the Athenian Agora. Just as ‘agora’ in its original sense meant ‘gathering place’ but came in time to mean ‘market place’, so the agora itself was originally a gathering place I.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Project for Education in the Early Socratic Dialogues
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1996 Plato's project for education in the early Socratic dialogues. Heather Lynne Reid University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Reid, Heather Lynne, "Plato's project for education in the early Socratic dialogues." (1996). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 2285. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/2285 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PLATO'S PROJECT FOR EDUCATION IN THE EARLY SOCRATIC DIALOGUES A Dissertation Presented by HEATHER LYNNE REID Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 1996 Department of Philosophy © Copyright by Heather Lynne Reid 1996 All Rights Reserved PLATO'S PROJECT FOR EDUCATION IN THE EARLY SOCRATIC DIALOGUES A Dissertation Presented by HEATHER LYNNE REID Approved as to style and content by: ca Gareth B. Matthews, Chair Robert Ackerman, Member J^n Robison, Department Head philosophy ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation director Gareth B. Matthews for his special balance of support and criticism throughout this project, as well as Bruce Aune and Marios Philippides for their comments on early stages of the manuscript. I also wish to thank the Department of Philosophy of the University of Southern California for providing library privileges and research support necessary to the completion of this dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Maynard Hutchins, 1899-1977
    The Yale Law Journal Volume 86, Number 8, July 1977 Robert Maynard Hutchins, 1899-1977 Herbert Brownellt Robert Maynard Hutchins, who died at Santa Barbara, California, on May 15, 1977, was Dean of the Yale Law School in 1928-29. He had served as Secretary of Yale University from 1923 to 1927. Upon his graduation from the Yale Law School in 1925, he joined the Law School's faculty as a Lecturer, a position he held from 1925 to 1927. He was Acting Dean of the Law School during the academic year 1927-28. Dean Hutchins was thirty years old when he left the Law School to become President and later Chancellor of the University of Chicago. Dean Hutchins' active leadership in the field of legal education during this brief span of years was notable for the innovations he sponsored in the Law School's curriculum and in particular for the establishment of the Institute of Human Relations. His erudition, his inquisitive mind, and his theories of proper relationships among law, economics, political science, and psychology left an indelible im- print upon the Yale Law School of his time. His initiatives, more- over, led to fruitful interdisciplinary research programs that have had lasting effects upon legal education in this country. The main endeavors of Dean Hutchins' career, and his publicly known achievements, came in later years while he was a founder, Chief Executive Officer, and President of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, based in California. But many of the in- gredients of his brilliant intellectual success first came to light during his deanship at the Yale Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Unrestrained Growth in Facilities for Athletes: Where Is the Outrage?
    Unrestrained Growth in Facilities for Athletes: Where is the Outrage? September 17, 2008 By Frank G. Splitt "It requires no tabulation of statistics to prove that the young athlete who gives himself up for months, to training under a professional coach for a grueling contest, staged to focus the attention of thousands of people, and upon which many thousands of dollars will be staked, will find no time or energy for serious intellectual effort. The compromises that have to be made to keep such a student in the college and to pass them through to a degree give an air of insincerity to the whole university-college regime." 1 —Henry Smith Pritchett, Former MIT President (1900-1906) and President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1906-1930). Sol Gittleman, a former provost at Tufts University, wrote to me with reference to Brad Wolverton’s recent article, “Rise in Fancy Academic Centers for Athletes Raises Questions of Fairness,”2 saying: "This would be a joke, if it weren't for articles that state how public universities are losing out in hiring to the well-heeled privates. So, while faculty flee to the private sector, the public universities build these Xanadus for athletes. Have we lost our minds? Where are the presidents?” Re: Dr. Gittleman’s first question: Have we lost our minds?—Based on the sad state of affairs in America’s system of higher education, it would certainly seem so, but there is no way to prove it as yet. However, taking a queue from Henry Pritchett, it requires no tabulation of statistics to prove that America’s system of higher education has been reeling under the negative impact of over commercialized college sports.
    [Show full text]
  • Kenneth Hamilton
    Kenneth Hamilton THE FALSE GLITTER OF THE GOLDEN MEAN A cYNICAL OPINION holds that the great thinkers of the past had but one thing in common-their thoughts were wrong. It may be more nearly true to say that all great thinkers tend to encourage wrong thinking in us. For we are inclined to take over the phrases they have made famous, imagining that we have been given magic formulae to solve our problems without having to do any thinking ourselves. A case in point is Aristotle's doctrine of the Mean. This doctrine has a certain cogency in the context of classical ethics: that, and no more than that. Yet today it is often lifted out of its context and put forward as a general principle both simple and authoritative. The Good (it is urged) stands in a middle place; and therefore any~ thing which can be shown to occupy a middle place must be a Good Thing. Obviously, Aristotle cannot be blamed for later distortions of his doctrine. And the doctrine of the Mean was not entirely his invention. Tracing virtue to a "middle way" between extremes was almost a habit of the Greeks, as we learn from Plato, who tells us of the inscription "Nothing in excess" in the temple at Delphi. Nevertheless, Aristotle's account of the Mean in the Nichomachean Ethics is de­ cisive in the history of this particular tradition. The person who "loves well the Golden Mean" (the phrase is from Horace) may not have the Ethics directly in mind, but the argument of that treatise will lie at the back of what he believes.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PHILOSOPHY of GENERAL EDUCATION and ITS CONTRADICTIONS: the INFLUENCE of HUTCHINS Anne H. Stevens in February 1999, Universi
    THE PHILOSOPHY OF GENERAL EDUCATION AND ITS CONTRADICTIONS: THE INFLUENCE OF HUTCHINS Anne H. Stevens In February 1999, University of Chicago president Hugo Sonnen- schein held a meeting to discuss his proposals for changes in un- dergraduate enrollment and course requirements. Hundreds of faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates assembled in pro- test. An alumni organization declared a boycott on contributions until the changes were rescinded. The most frequently cited com- plaint of the protesters was the proposed reduction of the “com- mon core” curriculum. The other major complaint was the proposed increase in the size of the undergraduate population from 3,800 to 4,500 students. Protesters argued that a reduction in re- quired courses would alter the unique character of a Chicago edu- cation: “such changes may spell a dumbing down of undergraduate education, critics say” (Grossman & Jones, 1999). At the meet- ing, a protestor reportedly yelled out, “Long live Hutchins! (Grossman, 1999). Robert Maynard Hutchins, president of the University from 1929–1950, is credited with establishing Chicago’s celebrated core curriculum. In Chicago lore, the name Hutchins symbolizes a “golden age” when requirements were strin- gent, administrators benevolent, and students diligent. Before the proposed changes, the required courses at Chicago amounted to one half of the undergraduate degree. Sonnenschein’s plan, even- tually accepted, would have reduced requirements from twenty- one to eighteen quarter credits by eliminating a one-quarter art or music requirement and by combining the two-quarter calculus re- quirement with the six quarter physical and biological sciences requirement. Even with these reductions, a degree from Chicago would still have involved as much or more general education courses than most schools in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Robert Maynard Hutchins Papers 1884-2000
    University of Chicago Library Guide to the Robert Maynard Hutchins Papers 1884-2000 © 2014 University of Chicago Library Table of Contents Descriptive Summary 4 Information on Use 4 Access 4 Restrictions on Use 4 Citation 4 Biographical Note 5 Scope Note 7 Related Resources 9 Subject Headings 10 INVENTORY 11 Series I: Personal 11 Subseries 1: General 11 Subseries 2: Biographical 13 Series II: Correspondence 15 Series III: Subject Files 208 Series IV: Yale University 212 Series V: University of Chicago 213 Subseries 1: General 213 Subseries 2: Publicity 218 Series VI: Encyclopædia Britannica 228 Subseries 1: General 228 Subseries 2: Correspondence 235 Subseries 3: Board of Editors 241 Subseries 4: Content Development 244 Series VII: Commission on Freedom of the Press 252 Series VIII: Committee to Frame a World Constitution 254 Series IX: Ford Foundation, Fund for the Republic, and Center for Study of Democratic256 Institutions Subseries 1: Administrative 256 Subseries 2: Programs and Events 261 Series X: Writings 267 Subseries 1: General 269 Subseries 2: Books 270 Subseries 3: Articles 275 Sub-subseries 1: Articles 275 Sub-subseries 2: Correspondence 294 Subseries 4: Speeches 297 Subseries 5: Engagements 339 Series XI: Honors and Awards 421 Series XII: Audiovisual 424 Series XIII: Books 436 Series XIV: Oversize 439 Series XV: Restricted 440 Subseries 1: Financial and Personnel Information 441 Subseries 2: Student Information 441 Descriptive Summary Identifier ICU.SPCL.HUTCHINSRM Title Hutchins, Robert Maynard. Papers Date 1884-2000 Size 238.5 linear feet (465 boxes) Repository Special Collections Research Center University of Chicago Library 1100 East 57th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637 U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Acquainting Yourself with Ethics a Tour of the Ethics Hall of Fame
    1 Acquainting Yourself with Ethics A Tour of the Ethics Hall of Fame They honestly consider they are doing the right thing. E.W. Elkington, 1907, on New Guinea Cannibals Or are you a clear thinker examining what is good and useful for society and spending your life in building what is useful and destroying what is harmful? Kahlil Gibran, Mirrors of the Soul Good laws lead to the making of better ones; bad laws bring about worse. As soon as any man says of the affairs of the State, “What does it matter to me?” the State may be given up for lost. Rousseau The present moral crisis is due among other things to the demand for a moral code which is intellectually respectable. R. Niebuhr 1 2ETHICS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE:IN SEARCH OF THE TRUTH What You Will Learn from This Chapter To understand the foundation of ethics, you should learn the virtue of knowledge and reasoning, the sources of intellect, the nature of truth, the nature of reality, the nature of morality, the nature of goodness, the relationship between actions and consequences, determinism and intentionalism, and the image of the ethical person. You will also learn the reasoning process, Plato’s divided line, the definition of morality and ethics, the grammar of goodness, the principle of summum bonum, and the utilitarianism measure. Key Terms and Definitions Reasoning is a pure method of thinking by which proper conclusions are reached through abstract thought processes. The Divided Line is Plato’s theory of knowledge. It characterizes four levels of knowledge.
    [Show full text]