For this discussion you should touch upon two out of the first three works we read (i.e. Apology, Phaedo, De Anima). The questions are only suggestions intended to stimulate discussion. But you certainly can feel free to answer some of them directly. The post should be about one page, which is to say between 300 and no more than 400 words: 1. Are there any parts or aspects of the texts that you find particularly interesting? Why? 2. Do you think Socrates’s activities were worthwhile? Why or why not? Do you think the state was right to come after him? 3. Do you see anyway in which the texts are relevant to philosophy of human person? 4. Throughout these dialogues there are three different positions on the fate of the soul, which are defended at different points and by different interlocutors: agnosticism (Apology), mortality (Phaedo i.e. harmony argument), immortality (Apology and Phaedo i.e. recollection argument). Do you find ant of them compelling? Why or why not? What’s your own inclination? 5. What is Socrates’s view of pleasure (hedonê)? How does it pertain to philosophy? 6. What role do the senses (aisthêsis) play in knowledge acquisition? Why does Socrates denigrate them? Do you think he’s right to prioritize intellect and reason so much? 7. What is the soul? How does it relate to the body? 6. How does Aristotle’s psychology in De Anima differ from Plato’s in Phaedo? How is the psychic hierarchy relevant? How does hylomorphism differ from psychosomatic dualism? Which one do you find more compelling? Why? Does Aristotle hold out any hope for personal immortality? Explain.
