Subtitle: Intellectualism ethical or practical pusillanimity?
Marco: "I am still doubtful. Because we can not rely on reason, instead of believing in fairy tales or be content with the parables? We could not reach conclusions more stringent, scientific?".
Nabla: "Socrates He has taught us that the logical-discursive is limited in scope ethical. Plato before he accepted the teaching of maestro, then he believed that the only reason you could know anything, and he missed. Aristotle It continued on this path. Much of the philosophy occidentale è la riproposizione degli stessi problemi che però non cedono mai alla force reason. Someone had pointed the way many centuries ago: theories are not worth anything within ethical, serving as the human, we have to look at behavior. Instead, today, the philosopher He takes refuge in an abstract thought and comforting and philosophy It becomes a pure mental gymnastics. On books school, It even says that to Socrates
era un ethical intellectualism".
Marco: "Scusa if those disruption, but that means this conceptual definition?".
Nabla: "The ethical intellectualism is the belief that morality coincides with the knowledge. In other words, it is believed that the knowledge of truth and fine spinga automaticamente ad act in accordance with such. A uomo che conosce il vero fine, can not act kindly. L’ethics can therefore be fully formulated through reason. In the wake of this belief, Plato is party to the search di una definizione rigorosa dei concetti di fine, justice and other chimeras unattainable by thought alone. The question is whether it is permissible to attribute this ideology Socrates. The phrase that is often referred to brand Socrates of ethical intellectualism It is "nobody does male voluntarily ". However, This expression means only that people act more often in an unconscious: It is like saying "Father forgive them for they do not sound". They are like puppets, not knowing themselves, vengono guidati nelle loro azioni da una force nascosta ed irrazionale, of which I am aware. for this reason, Socrates He incited the Athenians to devote to knowledge of the soul. La credenza che l’Io sia solo good è un’invenzione di Plato. Unlike, Socrates He has put in evidence the own paradox morale, as a result of the conflict between the ego and the ego that ethical search himself. There are two roads that 'uomo must go, but paradoxically they are intertwined in an eternal conflict: "Go as it is at the heart it gave. The law is obeyed. It must defend itself ".
Only those who think a soul good in itself may feel that it is enough reason. Instead, He said several times that 'soul not good, but it should be made good: "I do not go around doing nothing but trying to persuade you, and younger and older, which is not of the bodies, you have to take care, neither wealth nor no other thing before and with greater commitment of not 'soul so that it becomes good as possible ... "
Socrates He never says "reasoned on goodness dell’soulʱ??, but devote yourself to the care of it: It is an extremely pragmatic message, non theoretic.
With sua death and the insistence on refusing to accept the salvation, he has played the last "joke" to the Athenians and to world whole. His message is not political, but it is facing single uomo and the single woman, to those who want to liberate, who has the courage to pass through the narrow gate.
"O my fellow citizens in Athens, I love you and you are obliged; but rather to obey it gave that to you, and until he has breath, and as long as I have ability,, I shall never cease to philosophize and warn […] You who you are Athenian, citizen of the greatest city, Are not you ashamed to give thought to the riches ammassarne many as possible, and your soul, so that it becomes as much as possible good, do not you give care?ʱ??
He is the demon who calls us always to Delphi, a knowledge ourselves, but at the same time It makes us feel the weight of this ethical choice. The philosophy It is a perennial tension, It is itself irony, paradox. Socrates same is the oracle: who wants live He must go to him. Nevertheless, who goes by he is also drawn to his ethical duties. The contrast is apparently irreconcilable, It also pays with death, but is the only risky way ahead to be able to say "I lived", I'm a uomo.
The extraordinary thing is that the wealth Message Socratic is not limited in this. He also taught us something much more important: that we have a divine spark inside. Contradiction dialectic between the ego ethical and the staff can be dissolved in wisdom. And the answer to paradox It Comes From It Gave. Only the divine drop can help us heal the rift between the moral and the ego, between the artificiality of the logos and the life itself: "Is it not written in your law,: I said: you are gods?". (Giovanni 10,11)
Groped to close Socrates in the definitions intellectualist is madness. He never settled on a ethical intellectualism. It used the philosophy just to know himself, You not have done dominate, He has dominated: He has transformed the thinking life, He spoke with the action. The professors in universities today, They have never placed this goal or have taken refuge only in abstract intellectual pursuits?