Life Philosophy: Socrates The most interesting and influential thinker in the fifth century was Socrates, whose dedication to careful reasoning, the whole enterprise. Wanted by genuine knowledge and not just a victory over the opponent, Socrates employed the same logical tricks developed by the sophist for a new purpose, the search for truth. If he is willing to do everything in doubt and his determination to nothing less than an adequate account of the nature of things for him the first clear exponent of critical philosophy. Although it was known during his own time and debate skills instruction, Socrates is not written, so we depend on the students (especially Xenophon and Plato) for a detailed knowledge of methods and results. The problem is that Plato was a philosopher who often injected his own theories into the dialogues to the world, as discussions between Socrates and other famous figures of the day. However, it is usually assumed that at least the early dialogues of Plato a (fairly) accurate representation of Socrates himself. The Life Testing Because of his political associations with the previous regime, the Athenian democracy put Socrates on trial charged with undermining state religion and damage to young people. The speech in his defense, such as Plato, the Apologhma (Apology), provides us with many memories of the central features of Socrates approach to philosophy and its relation to practical life. Ironic modesty: Explaining his mission as a philosopher, Socrates reports oracular message telling him that "no one is wiser than you." (Apology 21a) and then proceeds through a series of ironic descriptions of his efforts to refute the oracle to discuss with notable Athenians who should certainly wiser. In each case, however, Socrates concludes that he is a kind of wisdom that each of them, an open awareness of his own ignorance. Questions Habit: The goal of Socratic interrogation is therefore to help people to a real self-knowledge, even if often a negative. In her cross-examination of Meletus shows, Socrates means to the methods of the sophist inside out, using logical nit-picking at (in place) illusions about reality. If the method rarely succeeds with interlocutors, it can effectively be internalized as a dialectical way of reasoning in an attempt to understand everything. Dedication to the truth: Even after he was found guilty by the jury, Socrates declines to abandon his search for truth in all areas. Refuses to accept exile from Athens or a commitment to remain silent as his sentence, he argues that the public debate on important matters of life and the land is a necessary part of every human life precious. "The unexamined life is not worth it." (Apology 38a) Socrates would rather die than give philosophy, and the jury seems happy to grant him this wish. Reason objective: Even if the jury sentenced him to death, Socrates calmly addressed her last words, speculation about the future. Forgoing any certainty about the fate of a man after death, it expresses a faith in the power of reason; he has shown (although the jury has not). Who will win remains unclear. Plato's dramatic picture of a man ready for death rather than abandoning his commitment to philosophical research has Socrates as a model for all future philosophers. Maybe some of us are presented with the same choice between philosophy and death, but we all face daily choices between conformism and the practice of devotion to truth and reason. How we choose whether we, like Socrates, deserve our life philosophy. Socrates? argument proceeds from the declaration of a perfectly general moral principle to its application in his particular case: ? One should never wrong to do (in response to the evil committed by another). ? But it is always wrong to disobey the state. For example, one never disobeys the state. And since the avoidance of the sentence of death by the Athenian jury would disobedience action in the state, follows Socrates should not escape. What is the meaning of life? Who are we? Is human life just a dream, which we never really awake, as some great thinkers claim? Are we immersed in our feelings, our loves and hates, our ideas of good, bad, beautiful and ugly? Are we not to know these ideas and feelings? Is the reality we know a reality that we by nature? Is the reality and meaning of life is a creation of men, such as music or love or colors (science tells us that there are no such things as music, harmony or colors in the world PHYSIC. Just traveling molecules: "There are not beyond us, hot or cold, but only different velocities of molecules, and there are no sounds, calling, harmonies, but differences in the pressure of the air, there are no colors, or light, just electro-magnetic waves, "said H. von Foerster.). Are we - and all living beings - just "survival machines, blindly programmed to the selfish molecules known as genes", as Richard Dawkins states? Do we not know the images to us by nature? Is there any meaning to life in a universe of billions of stars that ignore us? Is there any meaning to life in a universe whose size and nature overcome insight? Listen to the words of Pascal, in the seventeenth century: "When I was the short duration of my life, swallowed up in the eternity that lies before and after, when I use the small space I fill, and I see, engulfed in the infinite immensity of spaces which I am ignorant and which know me not, I rest scared and surprised, because there is no reason why I have here there. Why not then? Who me? By whose order and direction have this place and time have been attributed to me? " Love and cruelty in our lives Love gives meaning to our lives - like friendship, or art or faith in God. These are factors that true happiness, inner peace, a sense of harmony, in which meaning to our existence. But there is the other side. There is the cruelty of life, pain, and evil, not to mention death. They are the hidden tigers, ambushed and ready to attack the imprudent use of an image in the Buddhist scriptures. Between the pendulums there are two opposing sides; the positive one which is happiness and meaning, and the negative which our lives lived. And when we meditate on all that we achieve a diverse set of thoughts and disagree about the meaning and purpose of life. Exploring My World from an impartial view-Life Philosophy If a case for a sufficiently long period can be anything, I could go to the mountains of Colorado and naturally occurring computers, cameras and mobile phones. As we have seen that the inorganic devices are much less complex than ?simple? bio-bacteria. Most people will find my statement as "silly" at best. Why? Whether organic or inorganic, the complexity and the design are clear. For this concept to a simple level I have with the clock on my wrist (mine is digital). I the system of interconnected silicon chips, wires, and LED displays? Actually the current technological standards, is a simple tool. But it is a question that has been developed by a group of designers, from the hands to a team of mechanical engineers, and then in the production of a team of specialists in automation? Then I took a minute to get on the wrist under my clock. I feel comfortable with its apparent simplicity. I looked closer to the skin and hair follicles. I saw them. I thought that the nerve just said that my brain to synthesize the touch screen. Then I just focused and more concerned about the microscopic composition of each of my cells. I look at the city complex cellular functions, and is regarded as the miracle of my brain that I could think such a thing. I thought of the veins near the surface of my skin. I thought about my heart pumps oxygenated blood through the veins of my wrist and hand in life. I thought about my lungs, when inflated, deflated and processes, the oxygen to my heart. Then I flexed my hand. I thought of the wonderful efforts to communicate in a mille-second. I have an idea - my brain processed the subconscious and instruction in an order for my body - my nervous system task given the fact that on my wrist - my wrist working perfectly. I never really thought about what happened? How can a system of systems, as they gradually and randomly in time? It goes on and on ... My digestion - How did that gradually over millions of years? Without electricity, how would my earliest ancestor yet? My part in two parts reproductive system - Come on, how have the chance over millions of years through natural selection and genetic mutation? How to get new and better genetic traits, without the means to develop in the first place? I was finally about these things! Yes, all this, I have a new thesis for my eyes to life ... We have our prejudices. Dump our assumptions. Just meditate on this material with an independent spirit. Did the stuff out, "metaphysical" implications? Sure. But why should give us logical that the deterrence examination of the evidence? Where we have the idea that science and technology or other means is in a natural vacuum? This is not real science. True science is the observation of the data, a hypothesis and test the hypothesis that by various means. Philosophical principles have no place in real science. If the science shows what is happening beyond the boundaries of known physics, science, we should praise for his impartial contribution to philosophical and metaphysical thought.