1). In Plato's Crito , the Laws of Athens offers many reasons why Socrates should not escape. If he was to escape he would be disobeying in three ways, one to his parents, two to those who have brought him up and three which is his agreement with his city. He should instead honor the laws more than honoring his parents because in theory the city that he is living, has raised shaped him to be who he is. ' We have given you birth, nurtured you, educateD you, we have given you and all other citizens a share of all the good things we could' ( p. 500). Just as a parent would upbring a child and give the child the best opportunities knowing it will not be reciprocated , as does the city. It acts as a servant to its citizens, giving opportunities to its people when they are of the age to vote, thus creating their own life paths. A citizen is not bound to one city, the city allows its citizens to leave if they are dissatisfied with the laws but those who decided to stay must obey the agreement with the city. In Socrates's case he is choosing to honor his agreement with his country and the city he lives, even though he has been wronging accused, by not escaping .
2). The definition according to Aristotle of intermediate is between what exceeds and what falls short, then it is separated into the two categories. Which are intermediate ' with reference to the object ' and intermediate ' relative to us'. An intermediate with reference to the object is '… equidistant from each of its two extremes' ( p. 396). It is referring to actual numbers, for example one would say that ' if ten count is too many and two as few, six is what people take as intermediate with reference to the object' (p. 396). It can be looked at as the middle ground between to many and too few;a mathematical proportion.
Intermediate relative to us should not be taken the same way as the intermediate reference to the object. Instead Aristotle says that ' .. the expert is trying to avoid excess and deficiency' ( p. 396 ). For example what is small in actual weight may be large for another. If you have two people, one a professional athlete and one a non professional athlete, and you were to give them both six pounds of food. The athlete would tell you that six pounds of food is small compared to the non athlete,who looks at six pounds of food as a large amount. Both are human and have a need to consume food, but what makes this an example of 'relative to self ' is that the professional athlete needs more to function then someone who is less active. It all varies on reference to self ( person to person ) there is no mathematical proportions that work well.
3). Mill said ' It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied'. The same can be applied to modern day by saying 'It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied' ( p. 420). The meaning behind this is trying to explain knowledge and wisdom being more fulfilling. If the fool or pig has a different opinion then you, it's because in the grand scheme of things they are only open to knowing their own side. While as Socrates is trying to compare the benefits of opening yourself up to knowing more than just your own truth to gain clarity in whatever situation you may find yourself.
4). If we are to accept cultural relativism we would no longer be able to say that other societies that are unlike our own are morally inferior, that they are less than us. By accepting cultural relativism, we have to accept that morality is not only meant for us but rather that each culture has separate moral codes. For example some cultures have men that are married to more than one woman. The woman can be shared with other guests when they come to stay at that families home. To us this seems morally wrong and not a pleasant gesture, but if we are to accept cultural relativism, than we accept this act as sign of hospitality in a different culture.
5). ' I am thus responsible for myself and for all men, and i am creating a certain image of man as i would have him to be. In fashioning myself i fashion man' (p. 451 ) as said by Sartre . In every choice it reveals what we think a human being should be like. The choices we make are what shape us from the moment we are thrown into existence. The decision to not choose is also a choice, in life we choose what is better for us rather than what is worse, unless it is better for all mankind. In theory man is creating a certain image of what man should be like. Sartre argues that in the grand scheme of existence ,there is no design or blueprint for mankind, as if mankind was to be built like a house. There is no God and no way we have to be. Man is at liberty to create himself and becomes responsible for his own actions. That is why in theory ' In fashioning myself, i fashion man'.
As a believer in God , i at first had a hard time understanding what Sartre is meaning when he says ' In fashioning myself, i fashion man'(p. 452). I understand now that Sartre is emphasizing his theory of existence precedes essence, that man creates himself through what he does. The choices that we make in our world, a world where there are no instructions or fixed values. Reflect who we think man should be like. So in conclusion I agree with Sartre mainly because he puts up a good argument that there is no grand design and in a way we do mold mankind.
6). The Greek Myth of Sisyphus as retold by Richard Taylor is one of meaningless effort. King Sisyphus defied the gods by telling secrets to mortals in the human realm. He was then condemned to an eternity to roll a large boulder up a hill. Once the top of the hill was insight , the large boulder would roll back at him, never reaching the top. He was condemned to repeat this forever. It is not so much the fact that he had to roll the large boulder up the hill over and over again, but rather that after all of his efforts were exhausted and he could physically see the top of the hill. It would become pointless because he would never actually reach the top of the hill doing something he enjoyed. Which was rolling boulders.
Richard Taylor's plight with the story of Sisyphus represents that the meaning of life is meaningless. The meaning of life is more from within us. From the moment you were born, when you willed your first breath into your lungs. You had no distinct purpose. The whole point of living is to is simply to be living according to Taylor. There is no other meaning because the end result for all is death,life is nothing but progression of struggles with attempts to ultimately achieve nothing. The only thing that endures forever from this, is the repetition of the cycle. Which is the cycle of life, everyone ever born must go through the challenges and small victories. Through embracing our struggles, even if we end up accomplishing nothing, just as Sisyphus who enjoyed rolling boulders was condemned to do. This gives us a meaning to life.