Presentation on theme: "Introduction to Philosophy PAPER. The Paper Reading: “The Apology.” Thesis: “The purpose of this paper is to summarize and critically evaluate Socrates’"— Presentation transcript:
The Paper Reading: “The Apology.” Thesis: “The purpose of this paper is to summarize and critically evaluate Socrates’ Horse Trainer Analogy and Unintentional Argument.” Issue: Do Socrates’ two arguments refute the corruption charges against him? Label the 4 sections Introduction Summary Argument Conclusion
Writing the Introduction 5 points 125 words or less. Content Thesis Summary Statement Position Statement Argument Statement Minimal Background
Writing the Summary 45 points Objective: summarize the text Clearly Concisely Accurately In your own words.
Writing the Summary Outline Charges A doer of evil who corrupts the youth Does not believe in the gods of the state but has his own divinities The Corrupter of the Youth Socrates will prove Meletus is A doer of evil Pretending to be earnest Is eager to bring men to trial Questioning Meletus Meletus claims to think a great deal about the youth Socrates asks Meletus to tell the judges who improves the youth Every Athenian, except the sole corrupter Socrates, improves the youth
Writing the Summary Socrates’ Horse Trainer Analogy One is able to do the horses good The trainer does the horses good Others injure the horses This is true of horses and any animals The youth would be happy with one corrupter and everyone else improving them Meletus shows he has never thought about the young.
Writing the Summary The Unintentional Argument Meletus Agrees It is better to live among good citizens than bad The good do their neighbors good, the evil do evil No one would rather be injured than benefited No on likes to be injured Meletus accused Socrates of intentionally corrupting the youth. Meletus admitted the good do good and the evil do evil Socrates knows that if he corrupts a man he has to live with, he is likely to be harmed Socrates either does not corrupt or corrupts unintentionally. Either way Meletus is lying If his offense is unintentional, Meletus should have corrected him Meletus has no care about the matter.
Writing the Argument 45 Points Position Statement Does the HTA (Horse Trainer Analogy) succeed as an analogy? Does the HTA refute the original charge? Does the HTA refute the modified charge? Does the UA succeed as an argument? Does the UA refute the original charge? Does the UA refute the modified charge?
Writing the Argument Assessing the HTA Form of an Argument from Analogy Premise 1: X has properties P, Q, and R. Premise 2: Y has properties P, Q, and R. Premise 3: X has property Z as well. Conclusion: Y has property Z. Assessment The number of properties X & Y have in common. The relevance of the shared properties to Z. Whether X & Y have relevant dissimilarities.
Writing the Argument Does the HTA respond to the charge? Original Charge: Socrates corrupts the youth. Modified Charge: Socrates is the sole corrupter of the youth.
Writing the Argument Assessing the UA Assessing the premises Key premise: “if he corrupts a man he has to live with, it is very likely he will be harmed by him.” Assessing the premises using an argument from example. Historical examples for/against Assessing the premises using an argument from analogy Dog analogy Assessing the reasoning Do the premises support the conclusion? Overall Assessment (premises & reasoning)
Writing the Argument Does the UA respond to the charge? Original Charge: Socrates corrupts the youth. Modified Charge: Socrates is an intentional corrupter of the youth.
Writing the Conclusion 5 points 125 words or less. Content Thesis Summary Statement Position Statement Argument Statement Final Relevant Remark