Why do I mention this?

Because I am going to explain to you

why I have such an evil name. When I heard the answer, I said to
myselI, What can the god mean? and what is the interpretation oI
his riddle? Ior I know that I have no wisdom, small or great. What
then can he mean when he says that I am the wisest oI men? And
yet he is a god, and cannot lie; that would be against his nature.
AIter long consideration, I thought oI a method oI trying the
question. I reIlected that iI I could only Iind a man wiser than
myselI, then I might go to the god with a reIutation in my hand. I
should say to him, 'Here is a man who is wiser than I am; but you
said that I was the wisest.' Accordingly I went to one who had the
reputation oI wisdom, and observed him--his name I need not
mention; he was a politician whom I selected Ior examination--
and the result was as Iollows: When I began to talk with him, I
could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he
was thought wise by many, and still wiser by himselI; and
thereupon I tried to explain to him that he thought himselI wise,
but was not really wise; and the consequence was that he hated
me, and his enmity was shared by several who were present and
heard me. So I leIt him, saying to myselI, as I went away: Well,
although I do not suppose that either oI us knows anything really
beautiIul and good, I am better oII than he is,-- Ior he knows
nothing, and thinks that he knows; I neither know nor think that I
know. In this latter particular, then, I seem to have slightly the
advantage oI him. Then I went to another who had still higher
pretensions to wisdom, and my conclusion was exactly the same.
Whereupon I made another enemy oI him, and oI many others
besides him.









To be or not to be (wise)?

I cannot understand very well why are they all the time discussing
about who has the wisdom and who hasn`t got it. I imagine that in
those ages, people used to believe in the wisest person. As a
consequence oI this, I reach to the conclusion that many people
didn`t think on their own.


On the Allegory oI the Cave, Plato described a peculiar situation
in which an ignorant thrown oI people were standing on the
shadows. They were supposed to reach the knowledge via a
philosopher. In those days a philosopher used to be regardered as
an intelligent man.
Back to the Allegory; thank to the philosopher everybody could
be wise, however not everybody could reach that knowledge, so:
What`s wrong? I`m aIraid in a certain way, the philosophers tried
to control people. II only the philosophers got the correct idea,
there was no way to discuss or argue against that idea. It`s true
that he describe the idea oI Good; however can he ensure the
existence or even the content oI that idea? Maybe a kind oI God is
reIerring? I`m aIraid that`s theology, not philosophy so I don`t
want to enter that question.

Anyway, that idea could be only reach by a philosopher, which is
quite discriminating. I admit that a person once reached the idea
oI Good could spread its knowledge. But, I Iind quite hard to
believe because oI the Iollowing staments:
1. The person may not be able to transmit the idea; what I
mean is that might have trouble in explaining itselI.
2. The 'plain people-who are supposed to be ignorants-might
not understand the idea.
3. The people mentioned beIore might rebel against the
philosopher because is against their basic accepted ideas.
It`s very dramatic and hard to change one`s ideas once they
have been stablished.
In conclusion, in those ages the only matter that had interest was
only who was wise. However that wisdom is not explained I`m
aIraid making it quite hard to believe.
As consequence oI this unIortunate actions Plato`s proposal oI the
transmission oI knowledge Iails.

It`s known that Plato in his book oI The Republic wanted to erect
a society based on an aristocracy; in which, philosophers would
be the leaders oI the rest oI the population. Plato denies the access
to many people due to the Iact that each person in a society has
its own job prediIenied. (I`m aIraid, twice written) people not
only they are classiIied but also prechoosen theirs destiny. II we
really arrange a society with these methods the Iirst thing people
are going to rebell is against the lack oI Ireedom.